Australian pol: Fighting terrorism is not a fight against Islam

Perhaps the war against terror should not be defined as a war against Islam, but not for the purpose supporting "moderate Muslims", but rather to neutralize Islamofacism's most potent tool: the gullible non-Muslim idiots who insist that concerns about jihad idiology is merely "racism".

Terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, except for...

Violent Jihad. Fighting (killing and being killed to make Allah's religion supreme...and capture "much booty"). Note that young non-Muslim female sex-slaves may be captured and raped in war. These captives are considered “booty” or “spoils of war.”

48:19 And much booty that they will capture. Allah is ever Mighty, Wise.
48:20 Allah promiseth you much booty that ye will capture, and hath given you this in advance, and hath withheld men's hands from you, that it may be a token for the believers, and that He may guide you on a right path.

There are at least 164 verses of jihad.
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Themes/jihad_passages.html

Further references and discussion of Jihad in the Hadith and Sira can be found here.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/JenniferKing50710.htm

and here http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jihad (Lots of nasty stuff there).

Extra rewards for jihad/fighting/killing in the name of Allah 2:149, 2:215, 2:244-245, 3:163, 3:169, 3:195, 4:57, 4:69, 4:74, 4:97, 9:20, 9:81, 37:40-49*, 48:19, 48:28-29, 61:2-4, 61:9-12. *Note that 37:40-47 says the true pure slaves of Allah will be rewarded with (among other things) lovely-eyed virgins of modest gaze.

Rewards for sheltering those who fight for Allah (8:74).

[Shakir 47:4] “So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.”

59:4 YUSUFALI: That is because they resisted Allah and His Messenger: and if any one resists Allah, verily Allah is severe in Punishment.

59:13 SHAKIR: You are certainly greater in being feared in their hearts than Allah; that is because they are a people who do not understand

59:2 YUSUFALI: It is He Who got out the Unbelievers among the People of the Book from their homes at the first gathering (of the forces). Little did ye think that they would get out: And they thought that their fortresses would defend them from Allah! But the (Wrath of) Allah came to them from quarters from which they little expected (it), and cast terror into their hearts, so that they destroyed their dwellings by their own hands and the hands of the Believers, take warning, then, O ye with eyes (to see)!

3:151 YUSUFALI: Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority: their abode will be the Fire: And evil is the home of the wrong-doers!

33:26 YUSUFALI: And those of the People of the Book who aided them - Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror into their hearts. (So that) some ye slew, and some ye made prisoners.

[Shakir 8:12] “When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.”

[Pickthal 8:57] If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember.

Ishaq:326: If you come upon them (infidels), deal so forcibly as to terrify those who would follow, that they may be warned. Make a severe example of them by terrorizing Allah’s enemies.

[Yusufali 8:60] “Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.”

8:61 says if they are peaceful then do not fight them. However, disbelief is the worst crime, and is considered aggression against Allah (keep fighting until they desist in their disbelief, 8:39, 2:193; peace does not exist until all disbelief is removed). The only ways to offer peace if you are a non-Muslim is to convert, or be a dhimmi or slave, or to be party to a peace treaty. Otherwise, you’ll be killed (if you are not ransomed). Also, keep in mind 9:5, 9:29, and 9:33.

[Pickthal 8:65] “O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a hundred (steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk without intelligence.”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220: Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).

(Sahih Muslim, Book 004, Number 1062, 1063, 1066, 1067) Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 87, Number 127: Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, "I have been given the keys of eloquent speech and given victory with awe (cast into the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping last night, the keys of the treasures of the earth were brought to me till they were put in my hand." Abu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle left (this world) and now you people are carrying those treasures from place to place.

Sahih Muslim, Book 20, Number 4678:
It has been reported on the authority of Jabir that a man said: Messenger of God, where shall I be if I am killed? He replied: In Paradise. The man threw away the dates he had in his hand and fought until he was killed (i.e. he did not wait until he could finish the dates).

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 73:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Abi Aufa: Allah's Apostle said, "Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 50: Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet said, "A single endeavor (of fighting) in Allah's Cause in the forenoon or in the afternoon is better than the world and whatever is in it."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25: Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle was asked, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, "To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's Cause." The questioner again asked, "What is the next (in goodness)?" He replied, "To perform Hajj (Pilgrim age to Mecca) 'Mubrur, (which is accepted by Allah and is performed with the intention of seeking Allah's pleasure only and not to show off and without committing a sin and in accordance with the traditions of the Prophet)."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44: Narrated Abu Huraira: A man came to Allah's Apostle and said, "Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward)." He replied, "I do not find such a deed." Then he added, "Can you, while the Muslim fighter is in the battle-field, enter your mosque to perform prayers without cease and fast and never break your fast?" The man said, "But who can do that?" Abu- Huraira added, "The Mujahid (i.e. Muslim fighter) is rewarded even for the footsteps of his horse while it wanders bout (for grazing) tied in a long rope."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 45: Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: Somebody asked, "O Allah's Apostle! Who is the best among the people?" Allah's Apostle replied "A believer who strives his utmost in Allah's Cause with his life and property." They asked, "Who is next?" He replied, "A believer who stays in one of the mountain paths worshipping Allah and leaving the people secure from his mischief."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 63: Narrated Al-Bara: A man whose face was covered with an iron mask (i.e. clad in armor) came to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shall I fight or embrace Islam first? "The Prophet said, "Embrace Islam first and then fight." So he embraced Islam, and was martyred. Allah's Apostle said, A Little work, but a great reward. "(He did very little (after embracing Islam), but he will be rewarded in abundance)."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 83, Number 50: Narrated Abu Juhaifa: I asked 'Ali "Do you have anything Divine literature besides what is in the Qur'an?" Or, as Uyaina once said, "Apart from what the people have?" 'Ali said, "By Him Who made the grain split (germinate) and created the soul, we have nothing except what is in the Quran and the ability (gift) of understanding Allah's Book which He may endow a man, with and what is written in this sheet of paper." I asked, "What is on this paper?" He replied, "The legal regulations of Diya (Blood-money) and the (ransom for) releasing of the captives, and the judgment that no Muslim should be killed in Qisas (equality in punishment) for killing a Kafir (disbeliever)."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 51: Narrated 'Umar bin Al-Khattab: Allah's Apostle said, "The reward of deeds depends upon the intention and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended. So whoever emigrated for Allah and His Apostle, then his emigration was for Allah and His Apostle. And whoever emigrated for worldly benefits or for a woman to marry, his emigration was for what he emigrated for."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 35: Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "The person who participates in (Holy battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostles, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise (if he is killed in the battle as a martyr). Had I not found it difficult for my followers, then I would not remain behind any sariya going for Jihad and I would have loved to be martyred in Allah's cause and then made alive, and then martyred and then made alive, and then again martyred in His cause."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386: Narrated Jubair bin Haiya: 'Umar sent the Muslims to the great countries to fight the pagans. When Al-Hurmuzan embraced Islam, 'Umar said to him. "I would like to consult you regarding these countries which I intend to invade." …the Lord of the Heavens and the Earths, Elevated is His Remembrance and Majestic is His Highness, sent to us from among ourselves a Prophet whose father and mother are known to us. Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master." […].

Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 33 (see 30-35): It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24: Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity [zakat], so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah."

Tabari VI:138. Those present at the oath of Aqabah had sworn an allegiance to Muhammad. It was a pledge of war against all men. Allah had permitted fighting.

Ishaq, 204: ‘Men, do you know what you are pledging yourselves to in swearing allegiance to this man?’ ‘Yes. In swearing allegiance to him we are pledging to wage war against all mankind.’

Ishaq:530 "Get out of his way, you infidel unbelievers. Every good thing goes with the Apostle. I believe in his word. We will Fight you about its interpretations as we have fought you about its revelation with strokes that will remove heads and make enemies of friends."

Tabari IX:42: We have been dealt a situation from which there is no escape. You have seen what Muhammad has done. Arabs have submitted to him and we do not have the strength to fight. You know that no herd is safe from him. And no one even dares go outside for fear of being terrorized.

Ishaq:572 “Muhammad is the man, an Apostle of my Lord. Evil was the state of our enemy so they lost the day. Fortunes change and we came upon them like lions from the thickets. The armies of Allah came openly, flying at them in rage, so they could not get away. We destroyed them and forced them to surrender. In the former days there was no battle like this; their blood flowed freely. We slew them and left them in the dust. Those who escaped were choked with terror. A multitude of them were slain. This is Allah’s war in which those who do not accept Islam will have no helper. War destroyed the tribe and fate the clan.”

Ishaq:489 "Do the bastards think that we are not their equal in fighting? We are men who believe there is no shame in killing. We don't turn from piercing lances. We smite the heads of the haughty with blows that quash the zeal of the unyielding [non-Muslims]. We're heroes, protecting our war banner. We are a noble force, as fierce as wolves. We preserve our honor and protect our property by smashing heads."

Tabari IX:69 "Arabs are the most noble people in lineage, the most prominent, and the best in deeds. We were the first to respond to the call of the Prophet. We are Allah's helpers and the viziers of His Messenger. We Fight people until they believe in Allah. He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for one who disbelieves, we will Fight him forever in the Cause of Allah. Killing him is a small matter to us."

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 46. “I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, ‘Allah guarantees that He will admit the Muslim fighter into Paradise if he is killed, otherwise He will return him to his home safely with rewards and booty.’”The unbelieving infidels should not think that they can bypass Islam; surely they cannot escape. Koran 8:59 (see all of 8:57-59)

Believers must kill and be killed for Allah (9:111). Exhort the believers to fight the unbelievers (8:59-70).

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 369: This describes the killing of Ka’b.

Ishaq:368 “Ka’b’s body was left prostrate [humbled in submission]. After his fall, all of the Nadir Jews were brought low. Sword in hand we cut him down. By Muhammad’s order we were sent secretly by night. Brother killing brother. We lured him to his death with guile [cunning or deviousness]. Traveling by night, bold as lions, we went into his home. We made him taste death with our deadly swords. We sought victory for the religion of the Prophet.”
Tabari VII:97/Ishaq:368 “We carried Ka’b’s head and brought it to Muhammad during the night. We saluted him as he stood praying and told him that we had slain Allah’s enemy. When he came out to us we cast Ashraf’s head before his feet. The Prophet praised Allah that the poet had been assassinated and complimented us on the good work we had done in Allah’s Cause. Our attack upon Allah’s enemy cast terror among the Jews, and there was no Jew in Medina who did not fear for his life.’”
Tabari VII:97 “The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, ‘Kill any Jew who falls under your power.’”
Ishaq:369 “Thereupon Mas’ud leapt upon Sunayna, one of the Jewish merchants with whom his family had social and commercial relations and killed him. The Muslim’s brother complained, saying, ‘Why did you kill him? You have much fat in you belly from his charity.’ Mas’ud answered, ‘By Allah, had Muhammad ordered me to murder you, my brother, I would have cut off your head.’ Wherein the brother said, ‘Any religion that can bring you to this is indeed wonderful!’ And he accepted Islam.”

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 259: Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle sent us in a mission (i.e. am army-unit) and said, "If you find so-and-so and so-and-so, burn both of them with fire." When we intended to depart, Allah's Apostle said, "I have ordered you to burn so-and-so and so-and-so, and it is none but Allah Who punishes with fire, so, if you find them, kill them."

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 260: Narrated Ikrima: Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' "

Sahih Bukhari:Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57: Narrated 'Ikrima: Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Ishaq:550 “The reason that Allah’s Messenger ordered Abdullash Bin Sarh slain was because he had become a Muslim and used to write down Qur’an Revelation. Then he apostatized (rejected Islam) after becoming suspicious of some verses which prophet changed after his suggestions.”

Ishaq:551 The Messenger ordered Miqyas’ assassination because he became a renegade by rejecting Islam.”

Bukhari, 5-59-632 Once Muadh paid a visit to Abu Musa and saw a chained man. Muadh asked, "What is this?" Abu Musa said, "(He was) a Jew who embraced Islam and has now turned apostate." Muadh said, "I will surely chop off his neck!"

Prophets, martyrs, saints, etc., are best company and favoured by Allah (4:69). Also, this verse refutes apologists’ claims that martyrs aren’t rewarded or aren’t special. The favoured list does not include ordinary Muslims.

Must not turn away from fighting the unbelievers, otherwise go to hell (8:15-16). Must fight, or receive a painful doom from Allah (9:39). Believers must wage war for Allah, whether they like it or not (2:216). Believers are bound by divine contract to slay or be slain for Allah (9:111). Fight the unbelievers using your weapons (heavy or light) or your wealth (9:41), your wealth and your lives (61:11). Fight for Allah against the unbelievers (4:76). Fight them, and Allah will kill/punish them with your hands (8:17, 9:14). Muslims, slay yourselves in Allah’s cause, and be rewarded in Paradise (4:66-67).

Do not call for peace when you have the upper hand (47:35).

Do not take captives until you have first made a wide slaughter in the land (8:67).

Act hard against the unbelievers but be merciful to other believers (48:29).

Koran, 33:60 “If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease [adulterers and lechers], and the alarmists [those who stir sedition against Islam] in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbours in it but a little while. 33:61 Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter. 33:62 That was the way of Allah in the case of those who passed away of old; thou wilt not find for the way of Allah aught of power to change.”

Allah and his messengers will conquer (58:12).

58:21 Allah hath decreed: Lo! I verily shall conquer, I and My messengers. Lo! Allah is Strong, Almighty.

Ishaq:471 "We are steadfast trusting Him. We have a Prophet by whom we will conquer all men."

Ultimate goal: defeat/kill/convert/subjugate all unbelievers until all religion is for Allah 2:193, 8:39. (Note see commentary at al-islam site on 2:193—it says “if they desist” means if they stop polytheism and disbelief, and convert to Islam; and “the evil-doers” are disbelievers).
2:193 Tafsir al-Jalalayn.
Fight them till there is no sedition, no idolatry, and the religion, all worship, is for God, alone and none are worshipped apart from Him; then if they desist, from idolatry, do not aggress against them. This is indicated by the following words, there shall be no enmity, no aggression through slaying or otherwise, save against evildoers. Those that desist, however, are not evildoers and should not be shown any enmity.
8:39 (tafsir)
And fight them until sedition, idolatry, is, exists, no more and religion is all for God, alone, none other being worshipped; then if they desist, from unbelief, surely God sees what they do, and will requite them for it.

This totalitarian mission is a Muslim duty to be carried out during the lifetime. Allah’s ultimate punishment of the disbelievers is in addition to the worldly punishment that they must receive. Muslims who fail to fight for Allah will be sent to hell (see below). Allah sent Mohammad to conquer all other religions (9:33, 48:28, 61:9).

48:28 “He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religion [in the whole world--Ibn Kathir]. And Allah sufficeth as a Witness.”

For a discussion of these verses of imperialism, all revealed in the context of battle or the threat of battle, see http://answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/ultimate_goal.htm

One wonders if Downer uttered these words in order to soothe the feelings of those who found the prevous comments of Prime Minister Howard, and of Paul Costello, too firm (they were firm, but not firm enough). There is no need to curry favor with those whose immutable holy text contains Quran 9.29, or indeed all of Sura 9, received as the last in time, and therefore the mout authoritative Sura, nor a book which contains Quran 8.12, or 33.61, or 47.41 or 5.51, or 9.30, or 3.110. And of course there are hundreds of Hadith to quote, and the details of Muhammad's life.

Are the poltical leaders of the Western world going to continue to tip-toe around these texts? Are they going, by remaining silent about them, to let Muslims think that they never need address them, or that it is sufficient to reply that some texts of other religions are disturbing. To that transparent bit of Tu-Quoque one has to answer: 1) any passages that are to be found, say, in Leviticus, in which bloody battles are described, have no relevance and no authority today; they are historical or pseudo-historical descriptions and not considered to be models or tenets which have been faithfully followed. There is nothing like Jihad (in its truthful main meaning, not in that dragged up by apologists, relying in the main on a single "unauthentic" Hadith not even to be found in the collections of Al-Bukhari and Muslim).

In not taking every occasion to ask Muslims to explain not only these texts, but the entire worldview that requires loyalty to the umma al-islamiyya alone, and not to take the occasion to quoute all of the many statements by Muslims expressing such solidarity, and denying the possibility of true (as opposed to feigned) loyalty to the Infidel nation-state, and to Infidels in that state, in not raising the issue of how one can be fully loyal to a Complete System, that is far more than what we in the modern world mean when we use the word "religion" -- a religio-political system, in which the rituals of worship (the Five Pillars) do not begin to exhaust the duties of Believers in the task of spreading Islam everywhere because, Muhammamd has told them, in the war-manual against Infidels that is what so much of the Qur'an and Hadith together offer, "Islam is to dominate and is not to be dominated."

Does Alexander Downer know those texts? Has he thoroughly studied the history of Islam, and not with apologists, who have managed to infiltrate in so many places (from the down-market aarmstrongs, to the espositos and, at only a slightly higher level, the olivier-roys of Europe). The scholarly work exists, the testimony of people born into Islam exists, the clear meaning of the texts can be found on Muslim websites, in Muslim literature and propaganda. Start with the texts, as offered in Spencer's books, and with those texts, a history of the treatment of non-Muslims (several books by Bat Ye'or), and then the history of Jihad as a doctrine, set out by the most celebrated Muslim commentators and scholars, collected in "The Legacy of Jihad," in which place can also be found a selection of Western scholars --= the real, pre-espositio, pre-MESA-Nostra thing -- on Jihad in practice as well as in theory.

To make a distinction between "Islam" and the "war on terror" that appears to make a disconnect between what prompts Muslims all over either to participate, or to support, the "terror" which is conducted by others. Nothing new here; it is not always and everywhere a collective requirement to pariticpate in aggressive Jihad. It depends on the circumstances. But even those who are not active partipicants (i.e. running off to join Al Qaeda, setting off bombs) are expected in their own way to support Jihad to spread Islam, to strike fear into the hearts of Infidels, so as to force them to remove any obstacles to the spread of Islam, is a duty that all Muslims have. That some may be bad Muslims, and not entirely agree (and we Infidels have no way of knowing how many do not agree, for how many that disagreement is stated but not felt, or perhaps felt at the moment but will no longer be felt in a week or a year or five years).

A few weeks ago Bush quoted, quite misleadingly, Quran 5.32. It was one of the two passgees that Muslim apologists always like to quote. (The other, the real meaning of which they know Infidels will not comprehend, is that phrase which does not mean what Infidels take it to mean: "There is no compulsion in religion"). It comes from a Jewish source: "He who kills a person, it is as if he has killed the whole world." Sounds good. Sounds very good. What Bush did not recite, did not tell us, perhaps did not even know himself, was Quran 5.33, that follows and clearly modifies, and changes entirely, the meaning of 5.32.

Why didn't Bush do this? There are two possible explanations. One is: he doesn't read, or doesn't read closely, or cannot make sense of the Qur'an (it is not easy to make sense of, and it takes time and much re-reading). The second is: he was handed that passage by advisers, perhaps an "adviser on Islam," who either did not understand the passage himself, or thought no one would notice, that Bush could slip it in, and who would be the spoilsport in the press, in this collective atmosphere of not wanting ever to quote truthfully, or have the public confront the actual texts of Qur'an and Hadith, or what Muhammad did (have you seen, once, in the major newappers or on television ever, a single mention of Asma bint Marwan, Abu Akaf, the Khaybar Oasis, the Banu Qurayza, little Aisha? You haven't? Of course you haven't.).

At the excellent French web-site www.france-echos.com, which records the slow, day-by-day assault on French liberties, French laws, customs, manners, which records the slow day-by-day nonsense and lies that are offered, not only by official Muslim spokesmen, but by successive French governments manipulating, and in some cases suppressing, the reality of daiy life in France (including reports from all over the country about attacks on Christians and Jews), there was posted yesterday a furious denunciation of Boubakeur, the Algerian-connected imam of the main Paris mosque. He is regarded by the French government as okay, a "moderate" (his "moderation" presumably coming from that Algerian connection, for everyone knows the government of Algeria faces its own fight with so-called Muslim "extremists"). And the fury expressed by visitors to www.france-echos.com was that Boubakeur, on television, had quoted that Qur'anic verse 5.32, but had failed to add 5.33, leaving an entirely false impression on viewers.

In this way did the imam of Paris, a sinister figure, do exactly what George Bush, not sinister but sily, had done a few weeks before. Highly selective and misleading quotation.

And when Alexander Downer tells us that there is no connection between the "war on terror" and Islam, he is wrong. He is quite wrong. It is the instrument of "terror" that is given far too much attention as if it stood alone. In fact, it is merely one instrument, and not the most effective, of all the instruemnts of Jihad. One can find all of these weapons of Jihad discussed endlessly by Muslims themselves, in their newpapers, in the sermons of clerics, in the radio and televsion, at Muslim websites you are all capable of visiting. What do Muslims say are the instruments of Jihad? They talk and write and point with great satisfaction to the "money" weapon. That is, to the use of the trillions in OPEC reveneu, or some of it, to bully and cudgel and buy favor in the West. Arab oil wealth gives force to their economic boycotts of countries or companies. The continued misunderstanding in the West of Arab and Muslim reliance on oil revenues has also led some, no matter how often things are explained, to believe in an "oil weapon" that does not exist. There is the use of money for bribery (as, after 1967, the bribes paid to certain black African diplomats and government officials, to completely turn away from Israel, and to shut down Israel's extensive and effective aid program in sub-Saharan Africa). There is money that can pay for "academic centers" for the study of "Muslim-Christian Understanding," or Islamic studies, or "Contemporary Arab Studies" -- at Exeter, at Durhahm, at Georgetown. There is money for the setting up of King Abdul Aziz Professorships here and there. When Reagan was President, a California school received the honor. When Clinton was president, it was suddently the turn the University or Arkansas. money can buy a stake, and has bought stakes, in major media. It can buy public relations efforts -- remember Fred Dutton? It can by a host ex-diplomats to the Arab countires, all now dutifully offering their unsolicited and "disinterested" advice to governments about how important it is to "keep the Saudis on our side" and in other ways do nothing to offend either Saudi Arabia, or the world's Muslims (google "Jihad Watch" and "financial dhimmitude" for more). Not merely ex-diplomats, but ex-intelligence agents (google "Raymond Close" and "Jihad Watch"). Not merely ex-diplomats and ex-intelligence agents, but all sorts of former government officials, back in their law firms or "consulting" operations know that Arab money is there for those who exhibit good behavior, or are careful what they say. So many of both parties are involved, that perhaps this explains why the 9/11 Commission never made the study of Arab, and especially Saudi, propaganda, which helped create the cliimate in which dangers were not foreseen, visa policies not changed (and for all I know, a varient of that pollyannish view helps to explain the lack of any official alarm about the U.A.E. ports deal).

Along with "terror" and conventional military combat ("qital" mentioned dozens of times in the Qur'an) and the "wealth" weapon, there is Da'wa, or rather, all the kinds of activities, the propaganda, to spread Islam. In the Western world, targetted populations of those deemed ready for conversion ("reversion") are to be found among the alienated, those who might be seeking a vehicle of protest -- and Islam is a vehicle of protest against everything that is not Islam. Prisoners -- truly, a captive audience -- have been targetted by busy Muslim missionaries. And all over the Western world, Infidel governments have noted this, but done nothing. They justify this inaction because they say "What can we do? It's freedom of religion." They fail, that is, to see into the heart of the thing, to view Islam clearly, and to accept, or pretend to accept, in order not to make waves, that Islam really is just one more "religion" like all the others. It isn't.

And then there is the newest instrument of Jihad. Of course this is not in the Qur'an or Hadith. No one thought in such terms in 630 or 660 or 720 A.D. Indeed, Muslims for years were taught never to live under the rule of non-Muslims, for it would be impossible. But now there are millions of Muslims living in the Lands of the Infidels. They are quite unlike the other immigrants -- from Indian Hindus, to Vietnamese Buddhists, to Ecuadoreans or Tibetans, Christians from Nigeria or Uganda, who may be living in the Western world, and who do not carry in their mental baggage not merely non-Western ways, or perhaps what might once have been called an alien creed -- but do not carry an alien and a hostile creed. Islam is not a religion that calls for genuine, Western-styel pluralism. It calls for Muslims to rule. And in that Western world, behind what are regarded as enemy lines by Muslims themselves, it is not possible to offer support to the Infidel nation-state, its laws, customs, manners, if one is to remain a fully believing Muslim. A bad Muslim, one who has jettisoned much or all of Islam, can adapt -- can adapt, and offer real, as opposed to feigned, loyalty -- but only to the extent that he loses his loyalty to Islam. Demographic conquest is discussed everywhere in the Muslim world, on Muslim webistes, within Muslim communities smack in France, or Belgium, or England. To ignore these plans, these comments, to ignore even the anecdotal evidence of individual Infidels who have been startled to be told by a Muslim in France, as one lady testifies at www.france-echos.com, pointing to her own swollen belly, that "this is why we will take over." And why not? It is all a question of numbers, and of doing the math. Do the math. Extrapolate. In Holland in 1970 there were 15,000 Muslims. There are 1,000,000 today. Many live on the dole supplied by the Infidel taxpayers. Many families have ten or more children. In Holland, as in Italy and France, the non-Muslim population is at or below the level of reproducing itself. What will be the percentage of the French, Dutch, Spanish, Italian populations if things continue in the future this way, with no one allowed to worry, much less to change immigration and naturalization policies, because the "only" thing to worry about is that "war on terror"? Bernard Lewis, among many others, has predicted the complete islamizaion of Europe by the end of the century. He was wrong -- he was wrong to place it so far ahead. Long before that, long before there is an absolute majority, aggressive Muslim tactics (look at what Muslims do now, in countries where they have the rest of us tied in knots to avoid offending them or taking reasonable actions) will cause "Islam to dominate" and "not to be dominated." The lack of common sense, of foreseeing the foreseeable, the willingness to engage in ostrich-avoidance, is common. It has happened with environmental degradation, and atmospheric changes that may become irreversible. But few ruling anywhere can face up to this. And it is the same with Islam.

None of these other instruments of Jihad, and the importance of recognizing and dealing with them, is given attention by Alexander Downer in the speech discussed in the article above. Perhaps he thought he had to utter some more soft words. But why? Appeasement will simply confuse the Infidels, and make more determined and heartened then ever -- when one wishes them to be disheartened, demoralized, perhaps even to come to the melancholy conclusion that they will have either to fully accept Infidel laws, customs, and manners, and give up their campaign to slowly undermine them and to islamize, through demographic conquest, the Infidel lands, or remove themselves altother.

Downer's speech, and all speeches that would reduce the defense by Infidels, against the Jiahd in all of its instruments, merely to this "war on terror," simply mimics the awful and dangerous confusion that we have seen elsewhere -- not least from official, tongue-tied, confused members of the current Administration, and all those others, so silent on the subject, of both parties, within Congress, and without.

It's called a Paradox.

There are three sides to this war. All collectivist ideologies. The Fabian/Gramsci types, the Leninist types, and the Islamic Jihadist types.
The first two share the same ultimate goal, they just differ on the means of achieving it and who then will manage the domination of the planet. They are all Pragmatic types and are inter-related and many of them move back and forth between the two depending on situation. Ultimately both are subservient to and tools of a higher authority, which is the international banking cartels. They are the ones who control our destiny, they are the ones who own the various "nations" of the world. They are the ones who are the loan-sharks of the world. they are the legalised Mafia of the world.

Then there is the Islamic world. A cruder, more primitive form of mind-slavery. The land that time forgot. And a place the first two entities were too busy elsewhere to have paid much attention to.
So as the subversion project was pursued and consolidated in the Western world, the Islamics took notice. They developed a counter-strategy. And have had some success in Europe. But ultimately, Bin Laden screwed that game up. Probably he believed that eventually the Marxist-Humanist ideology would be successful in "corrupting" and pacifying Islam. So he brought the real reality, the truth as written in the texts out in the open, and shoved it into the faces of the Islamic world. The TRUTH. This is what Bin Laden represents. He's the only open and honest one in the whole bunch. And in a limited way, I admire and respect him for that. Yep, he is resisting the "Globalization" domination project.

By the way, the only real "innocent" members of a society are children and those actively working against the "government" in time of war. The majority of a society is responsible for the actions of the powers above them. This belief is what justified all the city bombing and destruction known as "total war" earlier in this century. And it is true.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 3, Number 125: Narrated Abu Musa: A man came to the Prophet and asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What kind of fighting is in Allah's cause? (I ask this), for some of us fight because of being enraged and angry and some for the sake of his pride and haughtiness." The Prophet raised his head (as the questioner was standing) and said, "He who fights so that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, then he fights in Allah's cause."

Muslims (much like Leftists) have a Two-Step Dance they do in response to criticism:

1) When criticism of the absence of moderation in Islam is raised, Muslims deny it;

2) When all the evidence (as Archimedes has provided above) is shown, Muslims then pull out the Self-Defense argument -- Self-Defense against Jews and against the powerful evil West in league with the Jews.

No religion of any flavor should be (nor is) allowed to "defend itself" militarily. All religious (and non-religious) groups in the modern Westernized secular world leave their defense up to the secular authorities, whose responsibility it is to protect all groups under their aegis. The West insisting on the elimination of the Self-Defense clause from Islam should be a priority in any reformation of Islam. If Muslims can't oblige us, then they show they can't reform. (Millions of people in our own PC West, meanwhile, will also have to be convinced that aggrieved, enraged Muslims are not simply "defending themselves" in noble Third Worldish Che Guevara-style from the evil West and its evil silver-haired Anglo-Saxon (and Jewish) fat cats and their neo-colonialist policies.)

Downer is a Liar! {So says 'allah'

hmmmm.....Asking ALL 'moderate' Muslims....

What's the punishment for calling your own 'Allah' a Liar?

Is there any punishment for that?

"Downer." Rather appropriate, as his remarks, propagated in the mainstream media (motto: "All the News We Wish Were True") will continue to dull the senses of his listeners from realizing the true nature of the threat.

Aussies: Next time, vote for "Upper," or at least "Juan Valdez."

One more of the "useful idiots" who do not know enough about Islam to even frame the debate properly.

Of course it is not a war against "Islam".

Who even knows what that would mean?

It is a war against (the violent, imperialistic tenets) of Islam (rooted in the Koran).

Is that so difficult to grasp, or are those two little parenthetical phrases too hard to enunciate?

It is a problem within Islam.

Not Buddhism, Mormonism or Presbyterian.

And it is not a fight by Muslim jihadists with only "Christians", as this moron tries to narrow it down to, and thereby fatally distort it.

It is a fight by Islamicists using violence, from their Koranic teachings, against Christians, Jews, Moonies, Bahais, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Animists, Wiccans, Agnostics, Jains, Atheists, Confucians, and anyone else they consider despised infidels.

Over-simplifying the war is to not only to lie about it, but also makes it impossible to fight.

Socrates said: define your frickin' terms.

But then, religious fanatics killed him, too.

Hmmmm....

Australian pol: Fighting terrorism is not a fight against Islam.

American citizen; Yes, it is.

I could see the reasoning behind the fight against "terrorism", if the "nice" mohamaddans would speak out and help us in our fight.Until that day comes,(it wont)...it is against islam.

McSeamus is right, as long as Islam acts as one entity, we should act against that entity. If someday there develops an honest, viable, schism within Islam that truly (not taqiyya) tries to end the violence in Islam, we can support that group. From my understanding of the Qur'an, that group would not be truly "Islamic" because they would be going against their own god and their own prophet, but we could support them nonetheless. In the meantime, one Islam, one fight.

special guest

Even if there were millions of moslems stepping up to the plate to clear the name of their religion, it would be a relatively small number compared to the total population of moslems around the world.Since we are nowhere near even thousands of them taking any kind of action,we have to act like they are all in on it.

They seem to be everywhere nowadays, leaders who don’t lead, can’t lead, or afraid to lead. What happened to common sense, logic, cause and effect, the scientific method? Has it been completely abandoned? I often wonder how intelligent (?) people can ignore all the facts and evidence of the Islamic menace and just walk on. They tell us to our faces “we hate you, we will kill you” and no one blinks an eye. I’m so very tired of the charade, the denial.

"I often wonder how intelligent (?) people can ignore all the facts and evidence of the Islamic menace and just walk on."

So true...I have a few liberal friends who are very smart.I watch the world news at night, they watch the Simpsons.Sometimes I wish I was so easily entertained...

Pepper,

That an argument is advanced does not make it valid. It's not difficult to show as much. Jihad is not only, nor even chiefly, self-defence. Jihad is to defend or promote Islam, at all costs, including (especially) self-destruction/self-sacrifice. I look forward to any Islamist or apologist citing the self-defence argument. Any number of the quotes that I cited above (or, for that matter, from modern Islamists) would show that such an Islamist/apologist would be a liar. Assassinating poets is not self-defence. Killing a Jew for no other reason than that Mohammad gave an order to kill Jews is not self-defence. Waging imperialist jihad to make Islam superior (the central tenet of Islam), including invading other territories for this purpose, is not self-defence. Raids to capture booty and land are not self-defence. One should not fail to point this out.

Because disbelief is considered an act of aggression against Allah, and as persecution/oppression of Muslims, then killing disbelievers (if they refuse Islam or dhimmi status, slave status, or are not protected by temporary truce, etc.) is considered "defensive." It is defensive of the interest of Islam, which is to destroy all forms of disbelief thoroughly(2:193; 8:39), and conquer the entire world (48:28).

This "self-defence" argument is used by Muslim hucksters when they know that most of the audience does not know the Koran, Hadith, and Sira, and the history of Islam, and its present involvement in mayhem all over the globe.

Pepper, I saw from a previous link from another poster that you and several others tangled with an Islamist huckster/poster. I looked at the thread. The huckster made a number of false and misleading claims, and got away with several of them. I paraphrased Allah-Mohammad's insult to Jews as saying Jews look ugly and foolish because that conveys the general idea of the quote in a brief one-liner. A paraphrase is an approximation, often to reduce the length of the original quote to capture the basic concept, and this was a fair paraphrase. Here is a more precise but lengthier paraphrase: Mohammad (Allah) says Jews look like asses/donkeys carrying books (Torah) that they don’t understand or follow, and they are evil/wretched in likeness/appearance (62:5). "Donkey" approximates foolish (that's what "Donkey/ass" is intended to mean), and "wretched" in likeness approximates ugly. There is nothing wrong with the (shorter) paraphrase; if anything it was milder than the actual quote. But now that this issue has been raised, I may use the more damaging, more precise paraphrase (if not the actual quote) in the future.

Another trick the Muslim huckster tried to use was to claim that verses 2:62-65 mean that Christians and Jews will not be cast into hell-fire; that their belief in God will somehow be accepted. This is false. The Koran is abundantly clear that non-Muslims are going to hell (and even casual Muslims are probably going to hell too). Verses 2:62-65 must be seen in the context of the entire Koran. Whoever does not believe in "Allah and the Last Day" is going to hell--that's clearly implied because there are only two main options in Islam: paradise, or hell. Those verses say that Christians and Jews (and Sabians) must believe in "Allah" (or the Muslim version of God, not the messed-up versions that most of the Jews and Christians ended up with) and the "Last Day" (Mohammad's version of it), and this entails at least that those Christians and Jews in times prior to Mohammad (which is what the verses refer to) must believe Mohammad's retrospective version of God and the Last Day concept. Believers still must accept Mohammad's version of the past, of what Allah accepts as proper, and so on. And in the past, before Mohammad, only those Christians and Jews who did not assign partners, who did not "transgress" and "corrupt the scriptures," etc., and who generally conformed to principles and beliefs later construed as "Islamic", would have been saved by Allah.

Subsequent to Mohammad's revelations, everyone (no exceptions) must accept Mohammad as a prophet. Belief in Allah depends on belief that Mohammad was his prophet. Because the Koran comes into some significant contradiction and conflict with the older scriptures, e.g., accusing the Jews and Christians of corruption of the scriptures and teachings, and transgressions, it is clear that Jewish and Christian religions, as such, are not acceptable. This is most clear when we look at 9:29-9:35; as well as 3:85 (which was cited in the thread, as well as in respected Koranic tafsir of verse 2:62 which can be obtained with only a a few mouse-clicks), and several verses in Sura 5 that condemn the Jews and Christians. Note that, viz the abrogation issue, 3:85 comes after 2:62-65 and the key verses of Suras 5 and 9 pertaining to the final views/policies on Christians and Jews are last-revealed and are not abrogated.

So is the Koran contradictory on this point, eg., 2:62 vs 3:85? I don't think so. The problem arises because some verses are more ambiguous than others. Whenever the issue had been addressed clearly, with the proper distinctions, it becomes clear that Mohammad-Allah is referring to the people _from among_ (or "those of") the Jews and Christians who accepted Islam (i.e., have "surrendered") who would be saved by Allah. (For example, 30:12-16 says Christians on the Last Day will be divided among those who believe in Islam versus those who do not. Those who do not will go to hell. Note that those who believe in Islam are probably not "Christians" in any recognizable sense of the word. If they believe in Islam, they are actually Muslims). Given the differences between the Koranic and Biblical accounts, and given Mohammad's/Allah's claims about what Christians and Jews believe, it is clear that Mohammad was demanding what amounted to conversion to Islam of those from among the Jewish and Christian populations. (This is not only stated explicitly in some places, but is otherwise implied because accepting the Koran logically entails rejecting elements of Christianity and Judaism as conceived by Christians and Jews, respectively). As for those Christians and Jews who did not accept/surrender to Mohammad's "Allah", they were the worst beasts in Allah's sight, worst of created beings (98:6), evil, destined for hell-fire, and in the meantime must be fought, killed, converted, or subjugated (9:29).

In the Koran Compendium, I did discuss this issue of who from among the Christians and Jews will be accepted (by Allah) (this is mentioned in the discussion at the beginning of the section on Jews, Christians, and people of other religions). Only those who convert to Islam (and an Islamic view of Judaism and Christianity) are accepted. The attempt to say Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are comaptible is purely an exercise in public relations directed at westerner non-Muslims.

Anyone in their right mind will not tolerate terrorism, be it Muslims or Non Muslims. The media is biased and will utilise anything to pin terrorism on Islam. It is good to know that some responsible leaders are trying to clear the air.

The media is biased and will utilise anything to pin terrorism on Islam. Posted by: makdom

Are you able to comprehend makdom?

If so - take a look at these:

009.030 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; in this they but imitate what '''the unbelievers''' of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! {With that being said - everyone can see who '''the unbelievers''' are - according to the Koran

004.101 When ye travel through the earth, there is no blame on you if ye shorten your prayers, for fear '''the unbelievers''' May attack you: For '''the Unbelievers''' are unto you open enemies.

005.051 O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors {authorities]: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them for friendship is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

047.004 Therefore, when ye meet '''the Unbelievers''' in fight, smite at their necks. {Behead them! and the Muslims are commanded to initiate the fight} 002.216 009.039

002.216 Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing [war] which is good for you and that ye love a thing [peace] which is bad for you?

009.039 Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place.

033.061 They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain without mercy.

004.104 And slacken not in following up the enemy: If ye are suffering hardships, they are suffering similar hardships.

If those words are not declarations of war makdom - what is?

One thing that can be said about the 'terrorists' that can not be said about the 'moderates'

At least the 'terrorists' don't call their own allah a liar