And which states would those be, Dr. Qaradawi? Who's in dar al-harb, the "house of war?" "Islam against citizenship in 'hostile state'," from The Peninsula:
DOHA - Prominent Islamic cleric Dr Yusuf Al Qaradawi has said that Muslims accepting the nationality of non-Islamic countries in times of war is against the teachings and tenets of Islam.
"It's a betrayal of Allah and His Prophet (PBUH)," the scholar said of a Muslim accepting the citizenship of a hostile non-Muslim country in times of war. His comments were carried by a local Arabic daily in a special Ramadan supplement yesterday.
Muslim clerics in Tunisia had issued an edict (fatwa) during the invasion of their country by the French forbidding Muslims from accepting French nationality, he said. Anyone defying the edict was considered a non-Muslim.
Islamic edicts of this kind are an effective means of resisting invasions by colonisers and a strong weapon in waging jihad, the cleric said. But Muslims need to travel and settle down in countries other than their own.
This way they get an opportunity to become nationals of other countries and get political rights, which ensure their empowerment.
Things are changing now due to globalisation and modern outlook on life. But there was a time when scholars like Hassan Al Banna (the Egyptian scholar who is considered the founder of the Akhwan Al Muslemeen or Muslim Brotherhood movement) were quite strict when it came to issuing fatwa on issues like migration of Muslims and their accepting the nationality of non-Muslim countries, said Al Qaradawi.
Muftis (those authorised to issue edicts) change with time and circumstances and as they become more mature and richer in experience, their outlook on issues changes.
But what has really changed here? Qaradawi has not specified any hostile non-Islamic states, and he still upholds the prohibition on accepting the nationality of a hostile state. Nor does he forthrightly address the possibility of simply living in such a country without acquiring citizenship.
" Prominent Islamic cleric Dr Yusuf Al Qaradawi has said that Muslims accepting the nationality of non-Islamic countries in times of war is against the teachings and tenets of Islam."
Frankly I'm all for Al Qaradawi's Fatwa. Maybe less Muslims will be immigrating to our country.
He's only doing what our stupid political leaders should be doing -- telling Muslims to stay home.
Ah hell, I thought this was going to something to rejoice about,. then I read the following;
"But Muslims need to travel and settle down in countries other than their own."
"This way they get an opportunity to become nationals of other countries and get political rights, which ensure their empowerment."
Talibanisation in chandigarh
Islam does not allow watching T.V
Can the kind Dr. Qaradawi direct us to what place we need to escort them to so that they can be sent back?
I hope that most take the good Dr's advice and as good conscientious Muslims return to whence they came.........somehow I don't think so since Islam has a tendency to create unfavourable living conditions for every one except the Mullahs.
As the United States is under invasion by Islam (Death to America, The Great Satan), that means all the Muslims with American citizenship are apostates? Or are they scouts and infiltrators for the Army of Islam. Is America considered to be a hostile non-Muslim country by the Islamic world at large? I think so.
Globalisation has changed things so now they attack from within using petrodollars, ably assisted by Americans who believe that Islam is a "Religion of Peace"
Finally a Fatwah that we can get behind. We should support Dr Yusuf Al Qaradawi and the Tunisian clerics. In the name of political correctness we should support the fatwah and reduce immigration quotas from Muslim countries to 0.
Hopefully, American Mosques will pick up on the cause and it will become the new feel good movement of the decade.
Muslims should not accept the nationality of a NON-MUSLIM state during TIMES OF WAR.
But as long as there exists a non-Muslim state anywhere on Earth, the Umma will technically be in a "state of war" so in effect, this fatwa simply states that; Muslims should never accept the nationality of a non-Muslim state.
Okay, so they aren't going to accept or seek the nationality of any nation the is "at war" with Islam. Does this also mean they are not going to accept welfare checks from those same governments to pay their bills while they sit in some dingy apartment planning a terrorist attack? I doubt it.
Marisol and others are treating these Muslim "scholars" such as Qaradawi with far too much respect. They are full of contradictions and illogic because that's how the Koran is. So there is no "gotcha" with them. These geniuses of Islam are like the spaced out druggies in your college dorm only they are wrapped up in fantasy lives about a fantasy false prophet and his fantasy allah
I think what he was saying is that any muslim living in a non-muslim country should only support the their muslim leader locally or abroad. This superseeds the laws of the non-muslim country for example, paying taxes, voting & to only follow sharia.
the fact that muslims will come from their war-torn slump country that does not have freedom but sharia to developed nations only to tear them apart to be just like home one way or another.
home sweet home.
(PLEASE POST THIS ANNOUNCEMENT AT OTHER WEBSITES)
The Jihad Awareness Project (to wake up the U.S. Senate and Congress) currently has 107 volunteers in 44 states.
WE ARE STILL SEEKING ADDITIONAL CITIZEN VOLUNTEERS
FROM ALL 50 STATES, ESPECIALLY THE FOLLOWING 6:
Delaware
Mississippi
North Dakota
South Dakota
Vermont
West Virginia
THE PROJECT: We're looking for people in every state of the Union who would be willing to purchase, from Amazon or any other source, a copy of Robert Spencer's new book Religion of Peace? Why Christianity Is And Islam Isn't and mail it, on an agreed upon date, to one of the senators in your state. We want to get the book simultaneously to all 100 senators, in order to send a strong message. If we get more than two people per state, books can also be sent to the U.S. House of Representatives.
If you'd like to participate (or you just have questions), please write to me at traehnam@yahoo.com under the subject heading "Senate," and tell me the state your senator represents, and a nickname. No need for your real name. And I will never share your email address with anyone, not even with other volunteers for this project.
And visit jihadawareness.blogspot.com to get more info on this project and to leave comments other volunteers can read. You can also see there the growing list of participants in this project, and the states their senators represent. I've also designed a graphic that might amuse. Scroll down when you get to the site.
Once we have at least two people from every state, we can agree on a mailing date and then each of us can mail a copy of the book on that date.
Right before each of us mails the book, we’ll issue a press release to media outlets in as many states as possible, and in that way announce and explain the mailing. And perhaps we can come up with some other ways of maximizing the effectiveness of this project and gaining as much positive attention as possible.
One of the project's volunteers suggested contacting Rep. Sue Myrick, who started the Anti-Jihad Caucus in Congress. When we reach the goal of having all 100 senators covered, I'll call Rep. Myrick's office and see if she can help. I've called several congressional offices to get advice on how best to proceed.
"But Muslims need to travel and settle down in countries other than their own.
This way they get an opportunity to become nationals of other countries and get political rights, which ensure their empowerment"
.
....this is part of their battle plan.....already it is reaping great rewards, Muslims are establishing large voting blocks, infiltrating school systems, flooding the courts with friviolous law suits, and forcing Muslim customs upon the non Muslim countries (foot baths, prayer time, Muslim clothing requirements)....
more urgent than ever it is time to ban Muslim Immigration...
Yes, please - all Muslims obey this Islamic cleric and stay in your own countries!
Marisol or anyone slightly more awake than I this morning:
I have read three times now. Cannot figure for the life of me what on earth he is saying.
"Don't become citizens of these infidel countries. But, hey, these are modern times, so go travel and be citizens of these infidel countries?"
Huh?
Anyway, I thought, initially, hooray! They can't become citizens! Dear Imam says so! No school boards, no city councils.
But then he flat out contradicts himself in the next sentence. (Not that I'm surprised, but why bother, then?)
MR Q: This way they get an opportunity to become nationals of other countries and get political rights, which ensure their empowerment.
Unless someone or thing throws a monkey wrench into those works, this will happen/is happening, in the US. Immigrate, multiply, get the vote/political power, and take over. It's the American way. And no shots need be fired. But this plan is also proof that Islam is a hostile political entity, desiring to prevail by any method at any cost. Bush and the House of Reps have now made it nearly impossible for Islams designation of 'religion' removed, and 'political entity' applied. It's hard to understand what is in the minds of these people. Maybe they don't notice that domino's have a tendency to fall over, or that it snows behind you was well as in front. The US government is clearing a path for an Islamic take over. The gov removes obstacles, Islam multiplies, a winning combination for Islam.
Unless we can tolerate being second class citizens in our own country, and unless we can adjust to Sharia law, something has to change. Population jihad is already happening...The muslim Ellison is already in office, an ice breaker, expect more behind him...
His comments were carried by a local Arabic daily in a special Ramadan supplement yesterday.
............................
Many posters have addressed the more obvious aspects and contridictions of this fatwa. I'd like to address its timing.
Here in the West we like to consider holidays joyous times. Sure, some do have aspects of sadness--Passover, Good Friday--but even these are usually followed by confirmations of joy.
Easter, Purim, even things like Neo-Pagan Winter Solstice festivals--joyous, life-afirming events. Why should Ramadan be any different?
But it is. Oh, yes, for some Muslims it is just an occasion to gather with family for good fellowship at fast-breaking feasts. But for many, it is a time to "renew one's faith", which can take the form of attacking Infidels and other-sect Muslims (Sunni, Shi'ite, Amadaya), or for issuing fatwas like the one above, naming yet more things haram, and yet more people non-Muslims and apostates.
Consider most "Special Christmas Messages"--reprints of "Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus", stories of Holiday suppers for the homeless held at churches, stories of family reconciliations, stories where soldiers organize toy drives for children in war zones--sometimes for the children of their enemies.
Some people do find these stories a bit treacly, but a more common criticism is that we do not get more of these stories of people doing good all year round.
I think it unlikely that articles cropping up at Ramadan will be so positive. As more schools are putting up Ramadan decorations (something that doesn't exist in the Muslim world), and hosting Iftar dinners at the White House, this is something we need to consider.
"Don't become citizens of these infidel countries. But, hey, these are modern times, so go travel and be citizens of these infidel countries?"
Yeah, it left me scratching my head too. But then, being Muslim means never having to be reasonable.
From an islamic site:
Rabi'a ibn 'Amir(radiyallahu 'anhu) went to the leader of the Persians. The leader asked him, "Why are you coming to our lands? If you are coming for money then we will pay everyone of you a salary so leave us alone." But Rabi'a said, "That is not why we are here. We are sent to free the creation from being slaves of one another to being slaves of Allah the Creator of the creation and from the oppression of religion to the justice of Islam and we want to deliver people from the narrowness of this world to the vastness of this world and the Afterlife.
http://www.al-buruj.com/
"unite and conquer!"
This is the guy who is always at demonstrations, he has decided to follow darkness.
Ramadan is the holy month when Muslims believe the Qur'an was first revealed to the Holy Prophet Muhammad sal Allahu alayhi wa salaam, may God's blessings and peace be upon him.
It's great that many in the United States are acknowledging it as a holiday and being considerate towards the Muslim community. I think it's a good sign of progressiveness that exists in our society. To accuse Islam and Muslim people as violent "barbarians" (as some of you have called me) is immature and reminds me of behavior associated with bullies in elementary school. I hope that you're self-esteem isn't so low that you have to insult and hate people just because of religious differences.
Muslims invite non-Muslims to their Mosques, homes, cultural/religious events, and many have established peaceful relation. The MAJORITY of Americans respect the Muslim community, and vice versa. I think the reason why most of you are so hateful, angry, and frustrated is because you are the minority. It insults many of you that I have Christian and Jewish friends. I feel sorry for you all, really. You will never know Love if you continue to think with your antagonistic and egocentric mentality. May God help all of you to find peace, unity, and true Love in your lives. Ameen.
~JehanZeb~
. I hope that you're self-esteem isn't so low that you have to insult and hate people just because of religious differences.
You have got to be kidding!
www.sistani.org:
"84. The following ten things are essentially najis: 1. Urine 2. Faeces 3. Semen 4. Dead body 5. Blood 6. Dog 7. Pig 8. Kafir 9. Alcoholic liquors 10. The sweat of an animal who persistently eats najasat [i.e., unclean things].
Yes, JehanZeb.
We, infidels are also jealous of the magnificent achievements of Islam in Science, Medicine, Space exploration, Art, Music, literature in the wealthy and technologically advanced Islamic societies...
Shees.
Zeb wrote:
"To accuse Islam and Muslim people as violent "barbarians" (as some of you have called me)"
Prove that someone here called YOU a violent barbarian. Go ahead, prove it. Provide the link. Additionally, are you referring that we here also accuse ALL Muslims of being violent barbarians?
Zeb:
"reminds me of behavior associated with bullies in elementary school."
You mean us of the jihadists?, you know the ones that kill when they don't get their way. I believe that people here were commenting on al Qaradawi's words, you know, the news article provided above.
Zeb:
"I hope that you're self-esteem isn't so low that you have to insult and hate people just because of religious differences."
What religious differences? Per Islam, are we not all under the divine guidance of the same God? Aren't we, the Jews and the Christians, just a corrupted form against Allah's intent, to be corrected and encapsulated at the end of time?
Do we "insult" and "hate" (typicaly used words by Islamic apologists), because of Ramadan? Or maybe we hate you because you prohibit alcohol? Foot washing before prayer? Halal foods? Conservative women's wear?....Is it because of things like that?
Or could it be that the Islamists wish to subject us, the dirty kuffar, to the same set of standards through agressive coercion?
Are there not mandates in your holy book, the Qur'an, to wage jihad against all unbelievers and to fight in the way of Allah until all obstacles to his will are removed? Did you ever hear of something like that or of the jihadists that evoke such passages explicitly as justification for their actions? Ever?
Probabaly not, huh? It is easier to swing on by and throw out baseless accusations, label us all as haters and move on. Whatever you do Zeb, don't ever deviate from the playbook and actually comment on the article.
By the way, I must say you have some nice new pictures at your blog. I think they will prove to be quite helpful to the discussion here.
"Muslims invite non-Muslims to their Mosques,
Posted by: ~JehanZeb"
August 17, 2006
Fitzgerald: Tips for visiting a mosque
Before visiting a mosque, please google the phrase "taqiyya and tu-quoque" and arm yourself with knowledge. Be prepared to ask -- sweetly, in an Infidel-Wants-to-Know Mode -- about Muhammad's marriage to Aisha when she was nine, about the assassinations of Asma bint Marwan and others, about the massacre of the inoffensive Jewish farmers of the Khaybar oasis, about the decapitation of 600-900 helpless prisoners of the Banu Qurayza, and about so much more. Be sure to mention the Hadith.
Do not let the presentation to those Infidels (hmmm, doesn't that spicy chicken and that pita, and then the honeyed dessert, all waiting for us afterwards, smell good, I can't keep my mind off it, how nice these people are, what good hearts they have to invite us in to share their food and their faith) be allowed to finish without making the most that you possibly can out of that "question time." And bear in mind that you will only be called on once, so you had better have your questions ready -- not really to be answered, but so that they can provoke thought and unease in your fellow Infidels who have come, unlike you, without any mental weapons whatsoever.
Ask about the relevance of what Muhammad did and said for today's Muslims. Ask why he is called in the Qur'an "uswa hasana" and in Islamic tradition "al-insan al-kamil"? If told such things as Muhammad's marriage to Aisha must be "put in the context of their times," don't forget to ask why virtually the first act of Khomeini in Iran was to lower the marriageable age of girls to nine.
Oh, and ask about the concept of the "Dhimmi." Ask what was required of Christians and Jews as non-Muslims under Muslim rule. What did they have to do, in order to remain alive, as "Protected People," rather than dead, as Unprotected People, or to prevent their being forcibly converted -- as opposed to the slow conversion, over time, which was usually the only way open to them to escape the onerous, sometimes unendurable situation of being a dhimmi.
And afterwards, when the talk and question time have come to an end, and when other Infidels come up to you, quietly, to thank you for speaking up and speaking out, and expressing their own inarticulate unease, tell them a few of the books you have read. Tell them about Bat Ye’or, Ibn Warraq, Spencer and Bostom. Tell them of this and other websites (www.faithfreedom.org, www.dhimmitude.org, www.answering-islam.org, for a start). Agree to take their names and phone numbers or emails, and to send them a further list so that they, too, will not merely rely on the nonsense and lies fed to them by the soft-voiced propagandists.
Be sure, that evening, to count how often those propagandists mention something about "the three abrahamic faiths" and the "three monotheisms" that "have so much in common." See how often one of the Muslims present tries to use crocodile-sympathies to deplore the mistreatment of Jews by Christians, as opposed to what he will claim is the "tolerance" of Islam, and do agree with him on one point: that Islam manages to mistreat all non-Muslims.
See if there is any mention of Hindus, or perhaps bring with you to the evening a Hindu colleague of the completely unfoolable kind, so that his mere presence in the audience will unnerve the speaker and others. See if there is mention of the 60-70 million Hindus murdered under Muslim rule, and if not, point out that strange omission sometime during the evening.
Oh, and after that? When you all go to the room with the steaming table of that chicken (or lamb) and pita bread and that delicious baklavish dessert? Go right in, along with the other Infidels, mingling with the handful of Muslims in that mosque who agreed to come out that night and agreed to allow the defilement of their mosque by these Infidels, for it was all in a good cause: defending, shoring up, the Faith, until such time as it becomes strong enough here and in other Infidel lands, so that no more Mosque Outreach, no more phony politeness and sweet reason, will be needed with these Infidels.
Break the silence of the lambs. But not by bleating. By studying in advance just enough about Islam -- enough to make things hot that night in the mosque, and not only for that waiting chicken, that pita, that rice.
Posted by Hugh at August 17, 2006 7:18 A
Muslims invite non-Muslims to their Mosques, homes, cultural/religious events, and many have established peaceful relation.
The people that need to be invited to the Mosque are those Muslims flying planes into buildings, wearing suicide bomb vests into pizza parlors and beheading people on the internet.More people might be impressed with "peaceful" Islam if Muslims marched in the streets against terror with the same intensity as they march against cartoons and the occasional report of a wet Koran.Of course 50 people did show up for the "Free Muslims against terror march" in Washington a few years ago, unfortunately not all of them were Muslim.The problem for Muslims is that non-Muslims have learned too much about Islam because of the example set by Muslims.As Jesus said you will know a tree by its fruit.
"Many non-Muslim critics make misinformed accusations that Muhammad ordered Muslims to kill Christians, Jews, and/or anyone non-Muslim, but there is nothing in the Qur’an nor in the history of his life that shows the slightest hint of that."
"What I am reading: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, et al."
-from JehanZeb's website
Anyone want to comment, or is it just too easy?
Listen, JZ. You obviously have a kind heart, if we take you at your word about your Jewish and Christian friends. How tolerant is your mosque's imam about those friendships? Do you hang out together? Are they different genders? It doesn't appear from your site that you're a "C & E" Muslim (pardon the tongue in cheek...just meaning a holiday-only type religious person). So how on earth do you get away with these friendships without being censured?
You are practicing the Islam of your own imagination. It is admirable; desirable even. I wish it were so. But if you can't admit that your desire for these friendships is contrary to those who supposedly rule on the matters of the faith, then you are deluding yourself.
If you think that those who prohibit those religious and gender relationships are wrong, feel free to branch out and create a 2.0 Islam. We'd welcome your version.
Please specify who in authority in your faith has permitted the relationships you specify.
Wishing doesn't make it so.
More double talkin bs, if I was a muslim I wouldn't know which end was up these days.
""Many non-Muslim critics make misinformed accusations that Muhammad ordered Muslims to kill Christians, Jews, and/or anyone non-Muslim, but there is nothing in the Qur’an nor in the history of his life that shows the slightest hint of that."
"What I am reading: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, et al."
-from JehanZeb's website
Anyone want to comment, or is it just too easy?
"
....must be an example of Muslim Humor....
JehanZeb
In Reliance of the Traveller, Umar Barakat lists as one of the acts that entail leaving Islam (apostasy) o8.7(7) "To deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus belongs to it, or to add a verse that does not belong to it."
Quran 5:51 "Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends"
Does this mean that you are an apostate?
Jehan Zeb wrote:
It insults many of you that I have Christian and Jewish friends.
..............................
Jehan, you may well be a sincere person. What, then, do you make of Qu'ran 5:51:
"O you who believe! Do not take Jews and Christians as your friends!"
And the even more troubling Sura of the Sword, Qu'ran 9.5:
"Fight and slay the unbelievers wherever ye find them and seize them, confine them, and lie in wait for them in every place of ambush"
Many Islamic scholars have stated that Sura 9 abrogates every treaty of peace between Muslims and Infidels. Please read these Suras, and be sure to ask your Imam about them. What you find may be disturbing.
@JehanZeb
I'm an infidel in a Muhammadan's eyes.
So tell me, how could I trust being friends with a Muhammadan when Muhammadans are commanded in their holy book Koran to: "Fight and slay the unbelievers wherever ye find them and seize them, confine them, and lie in wait for them in every place of ambush" Quraan 9:5
Even if a Muhammadan expressed a desire to be my friend, how could I know for sure that it wasn't scam to lure me into Islam or slay me for refusing to submit?
How should I trust you when your prophet told you to hate my guts?
"Muslims invite non-Muslims to their Mosques" ~JehanZeb~
I'm going to decline your invitation, Zeb. However I would like to invite you to leave Islam, just as many other brave and insightful Muslims have done:
http://www.apostatesofislam.com/
Jehan Zeb wrote:
It insults many of you that I have Christian and Jewish friends.
....hmmmmm.....
Question:
Are Muslims allowed to make friends with Christians, Jews or other non-Muslims?
Summary Answer:
Unbelievers are described by Muhammad as "the vilest of animals" and "losers." Christians and Jews are hated by Allah to the extent that they are destined for eternal doom as a result of their beliefs. It would make no sense for Muhammad to then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims. In fact, the Qur'an plainly commands believers not to take unbelievers as friends.
The Qur'an:
Sura (5:51) - "O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people."
Sura (5:80) - "You will see many of them befriending those who disbelieve; certainly evil is that which their souls have sent before for them, that Allah became displeased with them and in chastisement shall they abide." Those Muslims who befriend unbelievers will abide in hell.
Sura (3:28) - "Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah..."
Sura (3:118) - "O you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than your own people..."
Sura (9:23) - "O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers" Even family members are not to be taken as friends if they do not accept Islam. (This is the mildest interpretation of this verse from the 9th Sura, which also advocates "slaying the unbeliever wherever ye find them").
Sura (53:29) - "Therefore shun those who turn away from Our Message and desire nothing but the life of this world."
Sura (3:85) - "And whoever desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the hereafter he shall be one of the losers."
From the Hadith:
Muslim (1:417) - Taken to mean that one's own relatives should not be taken as friends if they are not Muslim.
Abu Dawud (41:4815) - "The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: A man follows the religion of his friend; so each one should consider whom he makes his friend."
Bukhari (59:572) - "O you who believe! Take not my enemies And your enemies as friends offering them (Your) love even though they have disbelieved in that Truth (i.e. Allah, Prophet Muhammad and this Quran) which has come to you."
Ishaq 262 - "Some Muslims remained friends with the Jews, so Allah sent down a Qur'an forbidding them to take Jews as friends. From their mouths hatred has already shown itself and what they conceal is worse"
Additional Notes:
Even though they are explicitly kufr (unbelievers, Sura 5:17, Sura 4:44-59) Jews and Christians are given special status in Islam. So, if Muhammad warned believers against taking them as friends, then it surely is not permissible for Muslims to befriend atheists or those of other religions.
Some Muslims interpret this to mean that they should not even act friendly toward nonbelievers. (Most, fortunately, do not).
Some Muslims are embarrassed by verse 5:51 and have gone to elaborate lengths to modify its intent by interpreting the word 'friend' as "guardian" or "protector" - which are just two of several legitimate translations of the Arabic word. According to these apologists, the verse is referring to a Muslim's allegiance to a non-Muslim government (which is not all that comforting either).
Others point to (Sura 60:8-9) which says that Allah doesn't necessarily forbid showing kindness to unbelievers, but to shun the ones "who warred against you on account of religion and have driven you out from your homes and helped to drive you out." This is a definite reference to the Meccans, whose leaders expelled Muhammad and his handful of followers from Mecca. The verse was given shortly after their arrival in Medina, when is was necessary for the Muslims to build alliances with non-Muslims in order to survive. The verses quoted above from Suras 9 and 5 are given much later, when Muslims had power, and they expand the scope of unfriendliness to include those who are not Muslim.
Modern apologists such as Jamal Badawi try to cloud the straightforward interpretation of verse 5:51 by pointing out that Muslims are allowed to take non-Muslims as marriage partners, thus implying friendship.
But, in fact, only Muslim men are allowed to marry outside the faith. The women they marry relinquish control over their own lives, even to the extent that they cannot raise their own children in their own faith. All children must be raised Muslim. The non-Muslim woman also agrees to a lifetime of sexual servitude, and may be beaten if she does not submit.
This certainly doesn't sound like friendship to the rest of us. If your local Muslim cheerleader tries to pretend otherwise, then simply ask if a non-Muslim man may enter into this sort of "friendship" with a Muslim woman... then sit back and enjoy watching the backpedaling.
On the whole, Islam is very clear in teaching that there is no equality between believers and unbelievers, and hence no basis for a relationship of peers. Those who do not profess Muhammad are intended to exist in subjugation to those who do, then spend eternity in Hell. This does not preclude Muslims from acting friendly toward others, of course, but this does not constitute friendship as it is generally understood in the modern world.
TheReligionofPeace.com Home Page
© 2006, 2007 TheReligionofPeace.com. All rights reserved
Go easy on him, fellas...
Obviously JZ doesn't get out much from whatever bubble he's in, lest he be in for the rudest shock of his life...
...not only are we NOT the minority (maybe in his neighborhood), or even just a simple majority, but a SUPERMAJORITY...to the tune of 80%+, which has long been documented...and growing by the day.
I find such takes amusingly funny, so don't shut him up...he's doing us a favor, and that reflects in ever growing negative opinions of his peers.
LAN ASTASLEM!
P.S. Zeb --
On the link I've provided there's a "New" video that you need to see; a video of a poor Muslim man getting one of his hands and one of his feet cut off. It isn't easy to watch, but the website encourages ALL Muslims to watch this video so that they can see what is being done in the name of Islam. The same Islam you are promoting on Jihad Watch.
This is a "must watch video" for you, my friend, because you cannot argue with the brutal facts. Trust me, it isn't easy to see someone being butchered like that -- but this is what your so-called "religion" stands for: BARBARISM!!
Dear "Awake,"
So far, you seem like the only civil person who is capable of holding a mature conversation. I thank you for that.
I have been called "barbarian" many times while visiting this site, among other things (this isn't the first time I've been here by the way. I can't remember the exact date of my visits, but I wouldn't lie about someone calling me "barbarian"). If you knew that someone *did* call me that, would you denounce it?
I was called a terrorist by ignorant customers over the summer for no reason at all. Am I being an "Islamic apologetic" for speaking out against it and standing up for my rights?
You said: "Or could it be that the Islamists wish to subject us, the dirty kuffar, to the same set of standards through agressive coercion?"
First of all, I hope you recognize that I am speaking respectfully and politely to you, and it would be much appreciated if you showed the same respect towards me and not use words like "Islamists". I do not use any derogatory words in my speech (whether online or in my personal life) about people of other faiths. One must wonder, what ever happened to treating others the way you would like to be treated, right? Just by the use of your adjective, i.e. "dirty kuffar", I already sense your intolerance towards Islam and Muslim people. Who are the kuffar? This is something you really need to read up on. If you are ok with the negatively biased works of Mr. Spencer and others, then why not give the other Islamic scholars and authors a chance (the ones who speak about the True and Positive nature of Islam)? Kuffar is NOT (emphasis here) attributed to Christians or Jews or anyone of any other religion. If you learn about Islamic history, you will see that the Muslims were practicing goodness, tolerance, and peace, until they were faced with persecution, torture, rape, murder, and war from the pagan Arabs, or the Quraysh. It is unfair to be so insensitive to the trials, hardships, and murder of the early Muslims. Why sympathize with the Quraysh when they were the aggressors? Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance, and I know many of you love to slam moderate Muslims on this (which is why you claim we don't speak out because you don't want to listen to us in the first place!), but that's the Truth. What are your opinions on the Qur'anic verses on Christians and Jews and on anyone else who believes in God. What does the Qur'an say? It says Christians and Jews and anyone who believes in God will not fear nor grieve. I think the fear that many of you have is that Muslims wants to convert everyone, but this is false. It is not the Muslims duty to convert people, it is their duty to be good and educate others about the faith. Anyway, let me reiterate that the word Kuffar or "infidel" or "unbeliever" is directed to no one else but those who fight Islam. If you mention "dirty kuffar" again then I know that you haven't read anything that I've said and you are not interested in actually learning. Second, there is no aggressive coercion in Islam. The Qur'an even says that there is no compulsion in religion and that everyone has a CHOICE. I share this knowledge with you because I am a devout Muslim, and I think it would be only sensible to learn about Islam or any other religion by those who follow it.
You asked: "Are there not mandates in your holy book, the Qur'an, to wage jihad against all unbelievers and to fight in the way of Allah until all obstacles to his will are removed? Did you ever hear of something like that or of the jihadists that evoke such passages explicitly as justification for their actions? Ever?"
No, the Qur'an does not mandate Muslims to wage jihad or war upon the non-believers. If you read those verses in their entirety (along with the Qur'an) with historical references, you will see that the Muslims fought out of DEFENSE. Muhammad, peace be upon him, himself never even hit anyone. In the Qur'an, it is forbidden to even cut down a tree. The Quraysh waged war upon the Muslims, they evicted them out of their homes, tortured, raped, and murdered many of them. Do you know the story of Bilal, the Ethiopian slave who was freed and became a Muslim? Bilal was nearly killed by his Qurayshan master because he disobeyed an order, but Muhammad saved and freed him. Do you know about the female infanticide that existed in 6th century Arabia? If it was not for Muhammad and the Message of Islam, the killing of new born girls would have continued. Do you not at least appreciate these aspects of Islam? If you are a Christian, have you ever read any of the Islamic literature that contains Jesus (peace be upon him) in Muslim mystical parables? I've shared stories with my Christian friends who were fascinated by them. There's a book called "The Muslim Jesus" and I'm sure you could enjoy it. You don't have to believe every word of it, but even if you don't believe in anything it says, you can at least enjoy it and see how another religious group respects and Loves such a prominent figure in your religion. Do you understand this at least?
Have I heard extremists use the Qur'an to justify their actions? Yes, of course, I've heard them on TV, but never in person. I never met a Muslim who used those verses to say that Islam wages war upon non-Muslims. I personally believe that many of you who dislike Islam and Muslims is because of 9/11 and what is going on in the Middle-East today. But you must understand that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 has NOTHING to do with Islam. Muslims, including myself, have been saying this so much that we get sick of saying it! But when I visit sites such as this, I see non-Muslims accusing moderate Muslims of not speaking up. The truth, we HAVE been speaking up and we ARE speaking up. The question is, will you really LISTEN to us? Will you stop denying what we're saying. I come here and talk about the verses that you ask about, but when I explain the misconceptions, I am called a liar, a hypocrite, among other things. See the "Bali" post, "Awaken" if you want to see people calling me a "liar." I believe someone asked if my Imam would approve of my friendships with my Christian and Jewish friends. lol, of course he does! We have Bible Studies that visit our Mosque, I gave my Christian friend a tour not too long ago, and our Imam is one of the most friendly people in the community. The anti-Islamic sentiments that some of you hold are due to the misunderstanding of the religion as well as wrongly associating politics with religion. The Palestinian struggle for example has been criticized as anti-Jewish, but there is nothing in the Qur'an that says Jews and Muslims have to fight each other! During the height of Islamic civilization, Jews thrived under Islamic rule and major conflicts did not occur until the creation of Israel. As a result of political tensions and violence, people use their religious texts to justify their actions. The insurgents in Iraq are defending their homes from the American invasion. Don't you think that you too would defend your home if you were invaded? I'm not trying to spin this conversation into a debate about the war because I know that will lead to countless other discussions, but think about it for a moment. If people truly believed in their religions, there would be peace, but all the wars, and terrorist attacks are politically motivated, not spiritually! It's important to understand this, especially if you seek to understand Islam.
I'm not asking ANY of you to accept Islam. I am just asking you to respect it, and not judge it by those extremist morons who use the religious text to justify their actions. Their way is NOT the way of the Prophet. The way of the Prophet is Peace, and if you doubt that, then you are doubting this very peace that I'm offering you.
Thanks for reading. I have class soon. Take care
~JehanZeb~
~JehanZeb~
Watch the video that I've provided and THEN ask me to respect Islam. I'm afraid that will be a very tough sell on your part.
Islam is an evil hoax -- get out while there's still time!
Hmmm...more monotonous monologues...
Let's invite him to comment on the thread below this one (speaking of "hatred" and all that hypocritical drivel)...about the islamist "love fest" on 5,000 swedish websites...over something petty like a cartoon. Talk about "considerate", "low self-esteen" and all that rot!
May God help WHOM...???
LOL
Classic taqqiyah at its finest.
~JehanZeb~
From your website:
The last temptation of Christ, “theaters were burned down for playing this movie”.
Its all a bunch of BS.
Christians don't go around cutting off hands and feet -- only Islam does that. Islam is backwards and barbaric. Get out while you still can, because none of us can say that we have another day to live.
"But Muslims need to travel and settle down in countries other than their own."
So did the Nazis.
Good Lord Almighty!! How in the world do you argue with someone who has been brainwashed??? It's like Islam wrings the truth right out of the brain, to be replaced with 'brain clouds' (nod to Joe vs the Volcano). Wonder if you die from that too? lol
Muslims the world over are blowing up people in the name of Allah. So what do peaceful and loving Muslims do to counter that? Well, one of them comes here attempting to shame us, to highlight our hate and anger.
JehanZeb should be taking his message of love and peace to those who are killing in the name of Allah, not wagging his finger at those who are reporting and commenting on those atrocities.
If JehanZeb were to honestly look into his own heart, perhaps he could see the anger that acts as a twisting force on his logic, a warped logic that thinks we non-believers are the ones who are most in need of his "message" of peace and love.
To thine own mote be true, JehanZeb.
-
JehanZeb,
I found most of your comments on early Islam open to debate. Can we speak about a few of them here?
If you learn about Islamic history, you will see that the Muslims were practicing goodness, tolerance, and peace, until they were faced with persecution, torture, rape, murder, and war from the pagan Arabs, or the Quraysh.
Why does this Islamic history have any bearing on the activity of Muslims today? Muslims are the ones who cite the Koran and the words of Muhammad as justification for killing others.
You said that Muhammad and his followers were acting out of defense. I beg to differ. Once they left Mecca and moved to Medina, what was defensive about the raiding of caravans? After arrival in Medina, he soon launched an unceasing war against Mecca, initially by attacking Meccan trade-caravans one after another leading to a number of bloodletting battles, causing death of more than a hundred Mecca citizens. The struggle culminated in prophet’s capture of Mecca in 630 CE.
Christians and Jews weren't seeking to kill Mohammad. They just made the mistake of rejecting his message. As a result, they were driven from Arabia, if they were lucky.
After arriving in Medina, Muhammad sought to draw the Jews to Islam and wanted them to accept him as their prophet. The Jews not only rejected his exhortations, but also became a nuisance to his mission through their criticism and ridicule of many of the inconsistencies of Muhammad’s creed. Exasperated, Muhammad gave following open order (July 624): “Kill any Jew that falls into your power” [Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, Karachi, p369]. (When merely the rejection of Muhammad’s creed by Mecca citizens could incite Muhammad’s followers to raise swords how can you say that early Muslims fought only a defensive war?)
Of course this reaction to mockery/rejection continues today. We saw it in the reaction to cartoons in a Danish newspaper and to a Muslim's own cartoon in a newspaper in Bangladesh. Both incidents resulted in the deaths of many far from the offending publications. What did Nigerian Christians have to do with a cartoon by a Muslim in a publication in Bangladesh? Why aren't people who don't believe as you do not allowed to voice their own opinions? How about "treating others as you would like to be treated"?
As for Jesus' position in Islam, how about the requirement that Christians and Jews live a second class existence in Muslim societies, devoid of equal rights before the law? Why aren't non-Muslims allowed in Mecca today? Mecca was there before Islam, non-Muslims lived there before Muhammad was born. Why are none allowed to visit today?
If the Christians and Jews don’t accept Islam, Muslims must by-default fight, kill and enslave them. But for belonging to the so-called ‘people of the book’ category, they are allowed to retain their faith if they accept a subjugated and humiliated status to Muslims and willingly pay Jizya (poll-tax) to Muslims:
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." [Quran 9.5; Yusuf Ali]
Why do current-day Muslims cite traditions from an imam who lived almost one thousand years ago? Why is he considered one of the greatest thinkers in Islam:
Muslims’ religious obligation is concisely defined by Imam Al-Ghazzali (d. 1111 CE), the greatest Islamic Sufi mystic and considered second-greatest Muslim after Muhammad, as follows (Kitab al-Wagiz Fi Fiqh Madhab al-Imam al-Shafi, Beirut, 1979):
“one must go on Jihad at least once a year… One may use a catapult against them when they are in a fortress, even if among them are women and children. One may set fire on them and /or drown them… One may cut down their trees… One must destroy their useful book (Bible and Torah etc.)."
You say that you are sick and of defending Islam from its many detractors. Why can't you see that events from 1979 onward have been carried out by Muslims citing the Koran to justify their actions? What are you doing to prevent another 9/11 from happening today? Do you go to your mosque and preach against violence? Why is CAIR not fighting for the rights of American Muslims to live freely in a secular society? Why can't CAIR also fight for the rights of Americans who work in Saudi Arabia? Why not shame the Wahhabist government into allowing the "people of the book" to bring their Bibles and crosses and rosary beads into the land of Muhammad? Why don't Muslims treat others they way they want to be treated? Do you seek Sharia law in America? If not, then why don't we see you on the evening news and in many public forums denouncing al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Muslim Brotherhood and all imams who preach violence and the overthrow of the US government and the installation of a Muslim government in its place?
Zeb,
I know you are not new, but I ask again, where on JW has someone specifically called You a barbarian as you claim. Also, I read every word of yours and will not use the term "dirty kuffar". I would not want to offend a Muslim by pointing out a common slur that Muslims use in reference to non-Muslims. Curious, that YOU would find that phrase offensive however. Oh, and the term "Islamist" is derogatory as well in your estimation? A bit thin-skinned, aren't we?
That being said, you did drop on by and comdemn the entire community here, by ad hominem I might add. Surely, you expected a response. You also, in your last comment, unfairly criticized Robert with:
"If you are ok with the negatively biased works of Mr. Spencer and others, then why not give the other Islamic scholars and authors a chance (the ones who speak about the True and Positive nature of Islam)?"
Once again, I charge you to prove where you believe Robert is biased. Most of Robert's quotes which support his position come from the Islamic community itself and the canonical Islamic texts, not his conjecture. What authors specifically do you recommend instead?
when you said:
"I personally believe that many of you who dislike Islam and Muslims is because of 9/11 and what is going on in the Middle-East today. But you must understand that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 has NOTHING to do with Islam."
Well Zeb, I fully concur with the first part of that statement, as being obvious. The second part in my estimation, is utter hogwash.
You cannot take the Qur'an and it's arrangement by size, with a verse or two preceding or following 9:5 or 9:29 and derive from it a different intent. If you can in your view, prove it. Don't just say so.
I do agree about historical connotation of the Qur'an however, through the historical occrence of abrogation, which you are fully aware of I am sure, and the reality that the 9th Sura was revealed penultimately by Muhammad.
Being a history buff, and your use of the Quraysh tribe story, I assume you also are familiar with the progression of Islam which validates abrogation of the Qur'an. The historical differentiation of the Meccan verses of the Qur'an as opposed to the Medinan ones, which are essential to understand Islam in context.
You know when Islam was weak that "there is no compulsion in religion" was the prevailing idea of the day. Muhammad was certainly not going to declare outright war in totality against Jews and Christians. Also, when Muhammad gained in strength and was drawing negative attention, the mandate from Allah changed from no bloodshed permitted at all, to allowance for defensive Jihad. And in Medina, when Islam was strong, the call for offensive Jihad took shape and form and was supported and mandated by the Qur'an in the 9th Sura as a duty for all Muslims.
The community here is well-versed in Islam. To that we owe our thanks to Robert Spencer and the administrators of this site, even though most "moderates" still deny any correlation between Jihad and Islam, as ludicrous as that denial may be. You yourself, are attempting to put forth the same argument, but to no avail.
If there is no problem with Islam or the Islamic community, what are you and your ilk specifically speaking out about? What are you trying to change? When we hear comments from respected Islamic scholars like Yusuf Al Qaradawi, the same guy who found justification for suicide bombing in Palestine, contrary to the Qur'an's strict prohibition of suicide, what do you think?
Most importantly, if people like al Qaradawi are heretics to Islam, where is the outrage on a degree similar to the Danish cartoon riots? Why has he not been correctd by the Muslim community?
It appears a global pandemic problem these days, the misunderstanding of Islam by both Muslims and non-Muslims alike, but in your estimation, who is the governing authority? You found the time to come here and attempt to correct OUR collective misunderstanding. I would ask that you provide links to pro-jihadists sites, so we can see you engaging in your fight against them, correcting THEIR misunderstanding as well.
I patiently await your reply.
"The way of the Prophet is Peace, and if you doubt that, then you are doubting this very peace that I'm offering you.
Thanks for reading. I have class soon. Take care
~JehanZeb~"
the Muslims have indeed offered peace before:
will Muslims publicly denounce the use of the Treaty of Al-Hudaibiyya as the basis for all Muslim treaties with non-Muslims? ...
~JehanZeb~
I went to church and listened to a sermon.. essentially the message was that it wasn't enough for a Christian to lead a good life, be a good citizen and neighbor. At the judgment day, God would assess whether you were a good Christian. That you had read the Bible and conducted one's life according to the teachings in the Bible. Without doing that we were a bunch of feel good Christians, but that wouldn't cut it when judgment day came.
As a Muslim, your book is the Koran. Clearly following the edicts in the Koran are more difficult to observe and follow than those in the Bible. Throw in Sharia law, and you have a difficult standard by which to conduct righteous life.
Since you "have class soon" and have non-believers as friends, you appear to have been corrupted by our Judeo-Christian schools and culture. I further believe that, if you stay in the West, your family will be "corrupted" by western culture. Your daughter, someday, will want to go out on a date without a chaperon or go to school. God help you and her if she adopts western dress and ways. Next thing you know, she will want to marry outside the faith, convert, and/or possibly raise her children as Christians.
Or maybe you will complete your education, and move back to Saudi, Kuwait, or the UAE. Hopefully, you will not sneak out, like so many other men there, for an alcoholic drink and/or seek the unchaperoned company of foreign women, while your wife is cloistered in your home. I suggest that you don't even think about taking your Philippino maid's passport away to press her into bondage.
Unfortunately, judgment day will come. Clearly, you will end up in the feel good Muslim line. On the day of judgment you and your family will have less chance to get to paradise, than the proverbial camel passing through the eye of a needle.
JehanZeb: I had to jump into this give and take. You seem to expect respect for Islam or else you're prepared to call anyone who criticizes it a hater, bigot, narrow-minded, possessed of low self-esteem, immature, pathetic, etc.. All right, so I take it you would describe Bertrand Russell as a bigot because he maintained that Islam is the one major religion which is totalitarian in structure; Winston Churchill for characterizing Islam as the "greatest retrograde force in the world;" Thomas Jefferson for referring to the Koran as "demonic;" Arthur Schopenhauer for calling Islam "that despicable doctrine;" Ernest Renan for describing Islam as "the heaviest chains that ever shackled humanity." Well, you get the idea, I think. Many significant human beings over the past two hundred years or so have found Islam to be wretched for sundry reasons. David Hume, Edward Gibbon, John Quincy Adams and Alexis de Tocqueville are yet others who made scathing assessments of Mohammed and the Islamic faith. Were all these folks just uninformed bigots? Do you really want to refer to these persons as immature?
By the way, is it or is it not the case that each devout Muslim must want to replace every constitutional and legal system across the earth with Islamic religious law (sharia)? Doesn't a devout American Muslim want to see the Constitution of the United States eventually replaced with sharia? Can you be a good American Muslim and publicly assert with full conviction and truth that you would never want sharia to replace the Constitution of the United States as the law of the land? I ask you politely how can you be a good American citizen and a devout Muslim at one and the same time? I say you can't. Prove me wrong.
" personally believe that many of you who dislike Islam and Muslims is because of 9/11 and what is going on in the Middle-East today
Posted by: ~JehanZeb~"
"The Myth:
Islam is completely incompatible with acts of terrorism. It is against Islam to kill innocent people.
The Truth:
Even though many Muslims earnestly believe that their religion prohibits the killing of innocent people by acts of terrorism, the truth is certainly more complicated. This is why the Jihadis and their detractors are both able to point fingers at the other, while confidently insisting that they are the true Muslims.
In fact, the definition of an “innocent person” is far more ambiguous in Islam than Muslim apologists will lead others to believe. So, also, is the definition of terrorism.
First, consider that anyone who rejects Muhammad is not considered to be innocent under Islamic law. The most protected and respected of all non-Muslims are the dhimma, the “people of the book.” These would specifically be Jews and Christians who agree to Islamic rule and pay the jizya (tribute to Muslims). Yet, the word “dhimmi” comes from the Arabic root meaning “guilt” or "blame." ["...the dhimmi parent and sister words mean both 'to blame' as well as safeguards that can be extended to protect the blameworthy" Amitav Ghosh, In an Antique Land]
So, if even the dhimma have a measure of guilt attached to their status (by virtue of having rejected Allah’s full truth), then how can non-Muslims who oppose Islamic rule or refuse to pay the jizya be considered “innocent?”
Within the Islamic community itself there is a category of Muslims who are also said to bear guilt – greater even than the average non-believer. These are the hypocrites, or “Munafiqin,” whom Muhammad referred to in the most derogatory terms. A hypocrite is considered to be a Muslim in name only. They are distinguished either by an unwillingness to wage holy war or by an intention to corrupt the community of believers.
When Muslims kill Muslims in the name of Allah (which occurs quite frequently), they usually do so believing that their victims are Munafiqin or kafir (unbelievers). This is actually a part of Islamic Law known as takfir, in which Muslims are declared apostates and then executed. (A true Muslim would go to paradise anyway, in which case he or she could hardly be expected to nurse a grudge amidst the orgy of sex and wine).
In addition to the murky definition of innocence, there is also the problem of distinguishing terrorism from holy war. Islamic terrorists never refer to themselves as terrorists, but always as holy warriors (Mujahideen, Shahid, or Fedayeen). They consider their acts to be a form of Jihad.
Holy war is something that Muhammad commanded in the Qur’an and Hadith. In Sura 9:29, he establishes the principle that unbelievers should be fought until they either convert to Islam or accept a state of humiliation under Islamic subjugation. This is confirmed in the Hadith by both Sahih Muslim and Bukhari.
In many places, the prophet of Islam says that Jihad is the ideal path for a Muslim, and that believers should “fight in the way of Allah.” There are dozens of open-ended passages in the Qur’an that exhort killing and fighting – far more than ones of peace and tolerance. It is somewhat naïve to think that their inclusion in this "eternal discourse between God and Man" was of historical value only and not intended to be relevant to present-day believers, particularly when there is little to nothing within the text that distinguishes them in such fashion.
Combine the Qur’anic exhortation to holy war with the ambiguity of innocence, and a monumental problem develops that cannot be covered over by mere semantics. Not only is there a deep tolerance for violence in Islam, but also a sharp disagreement and lack of clarity over the conditions that justify this violence... and just whom the targets may be.
Even many Muslims who claim to be against terrorism still support the “insurgency” in Iraq, for example, and often entertain the allegation that there is a broader “war against Islam.” Although the Americans in Iraq are trying to protect innocent life and help the country rebuild, Muslims around the world and in the West believe that it is legitimate for Sunnis to try and kill them.
Enjoying the sanction of holy war, the Mujahid reasons that it is permissible to attack fellow Iraqis – the ones helping the Americans… even if they are part of a democratically-elected Iraqi government. These non-combatants and combatants alike are believed to be the “Munafiqin” assisting the enemy “Crusaders.”
Although we use Iraq as an example here, this is the same rationale that is ultimately behind all Islamic terror, from the Philippines to Thailand. Wherever the religion of Islam is a minority, there are always radicals who believe that violence is justified in bringing it to dominance - just as Muhammad taught by example in places like Mecca and the land of al-Hirath.
And what of the so-called “innocents” who suffer from the bombings and shootings? Even in Muhammad’s time they were unavoidable. The much-touted hadith in which Muhammad forbade the killing of women also indicates that there were such casualties in his conflicts.
If there is any doubt that he believed that the forbidden is sometimes necessary, it should be put to rest by an incident in which Muhammad's men warned him that a planned night raid against an enemy camp would mean that women and children would be killed. He merely replied “they are of them,” meaning the men.
This is the slippery slope that is opened by the sanction of holy war. What starts out as the perception of a noble cause of self-defense against a supposed threat gradually devolves into a "let Allah sort them out" campaign through a series of logical steps that are ultimately justified by the sublime goal of Islamic rule.
Islam is not intended to co-exist as an equal with other religions. It is to be the dominant religion, with Sharia as the supreme law. Islamic rule is to be extended to the ends of the earth, and resistance is to be dealt with by any means necessary.
Apologists in the West often shrug off the Qur'an's many verses of violence by saying that they are only relevant in a “time of war.”
To this, Islamic terrorists would agree. They are at war."
JehanZeb,
Your last post reminds me of the saying "who are you going to believe me, or your lying eyes".It doesn't matter what you say when Muslims prove everyday by their actions what Islam is all about. For example, most people in America know about the Amish. They wear strange clothes, want to live in the 19th century and have odd customs. But no one could imagine an Amish person wearing a bomb vest into a pizza parlor and killing and maiming teenagers. That's something Muslims do in the name of Islam.As for respect for Islam its been said many times that respect is something you earn.I'll respect Islam when Muslims conduct themselves in a way worthy of my respect.
'Jews thrived under Islamic rule
Posted by: ~JehanZeb'
The Myth:
Religious minorities have flourished under Islam. Muslims are commanded to protect Jew and Christians (the People of the Book) and to do them no harm.
The Truth:
Religious minorities have not “flourished” under Islam. In fact, they have dwindled to mere shadows after centuries of persecution and discrimination. Some were converted from their native religion by brute force, others under the agonizing strain of dhimmitude.
What Muslims call “tolerance,” others correctly identify as institutionalized discrimination. The consignment of Jews and Christians to dhimmis under Islamic rule means that they are not allowed the same religious rights and freedoms as Muslims. They cannot share their faith, for example, or build houses of worship without permission.
Historically, dhimmis have often had to wear distinguishing clothing or cut their hair in a particular manner that indicates their position of inferiority and humiliation. They do not share the same legal rights as Muslims, and must even pay a poll tax (the jizya). They are to be killed or have their children taken from them if they cannot satisfy the tax collector’s requirements.
For hundreds of years, the Christian population in occupied Europe had their sons taken away and forcibly converted into Muslim warriors (known as Jannisaries) by the Ottoman Turks.
It is under this burden of discrimination and third-class status that so many converted to Islam over the centuries. Those who didn’t often faced economic and social hardships that persist to this day and are appalling by Western standards of true religious tolerance and pluralism.
For those who are not “the People of the Book,” such as Hindus and atheists, there is very little tolerance to be found once Islam establishes political superiority. The Qur’an tells Muslims to “fight in the way of Allah” until “religion is only for Allah.” The conquered populations face death if they do not establish regular prayer and charity in the Islamic tradition (ie. the pillars of Islam).
Tamerlane and other Muslim warriors slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Hindus and Buddhists, as well as displacing or forcibly converting millions more over the last thousand years.
At best, Islam has a dual personality toward other religions. In some places they are explicitly cursed by Allah, in others there appears to be a measure of tolerance shown. There are about 500 verses in the Qur’an that speak of Allah’s hatred for non-Muslims and the punishment that he has prepared for their unbelief. There is also a tiny handful that say otherwise, but these are mostly earlier verses that many scholars consider to be abrogated by the later, more violent ones.
If tolerance simply means discouraging the mass slaughter of those of a different faith, then today's Islam generally meets this standard more often than not. But, if tolerance means allowing people of other faiths the same religious liberties that Muslims enjoy, then Islam is fundamentally the most intolerant religion under the sun.
Kufaar_
http://members.cox.net/arshad/imitating_kufaar.htm
Another interesting find...timeline (anti-christ)
http://www.lampholderpub.com/Islamic_Prophecy.htm
Roxane: You made an excellent point when you maintained that respect must be earned. Islam, easily so, has not earned the right to be respected.
Also, you mentioned the Amish and I couldn't help but think of that tragic incident a year ago in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania when those little Amish girls were killed by that horrible man who forced his way into their school and gunned them down point blank. What was the Amish reaction to this? Complete forgivenes for the murderer. I remember thinking then, as I do now, how the Amish shamed the entire Islamic world with their compassion and Christ-like capacity to understand all. The Amish have earned my respect many times over. The Muslims are nowhere near to having any respect manifested by me towards them.
interestinconundrum --
The "timeline" link you provided was very interesting. Here's something I found on there:
"2006 - 2007 Mahdi will emerge from hiding/seclusion as the new Khaleefah [1427] to rule for seven(7)yrs. He will be revealed first to the Inner Circle of 12 and then to the 313 Mujahidin of the Mahdi."
This is interesting because we are still in 2007 -- but NO MAHDI; and I always heard that the Mahdi will come after some cataclysmic world event. Makes me wonder what Iran's next move is. Stay tuned.
"What was the Amish reaction to this? Complete forgivenes for the murderer. I remember thinking then, as I do now, how the Amish shamed the entire Islamic world with their compassion and Christ-like capacity to understand all. The Amish have earned my respect many times over. The Muslims are nowhere near to having any respect manifested by me towards them.
Posted by: Wellington"
....yep....and we know what the Muslim reaction would be to such an incident.....quite different....
Ban Muslim Immigration...
@JehanZeb
Did any of these Christian friends tell you about your need for forgiveness of you sins? In order to stand before God you need to be clothed in Christ. Otherwise you will not stand.
Here are a few verses that you should consider because your eternal destiny is at stake.
Rom 3:10
As the Scriptures say, "No one is good- not even one.
Rom 3:23
For all have sinned; all fall short of God's glorious standard.
Rom 5:8
But God showed his great love for us by sending Christ to die for us while we were still sinners.
Rom 6:23
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.
Rom 8:1
So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus.
And to validate his (Jesus's) claims He rose for the died. I know what Islam says about Jesus and the Bible. I am not here to debate that POV. I am here to offer you the clear and remarkable claim of God. A free gift. I know Islam has nothing like this. I know that I can stand before God based upon these verse. Can Islam offer such an offer. That is the basic and major difference between our faiths. You state that yours is the religion of peace. Does that include peace with God because that is what Christ offers.
اليك بعض الآيات التي يجب النظر فيها بسبب حسابك الابدي المصير على المحك.
روم 10/15
كما تقول الكتب المقدسة "لا احد ولا حتى حسن.
روم 3:23
للجميع ماثوم ؛ جميع تقصر الله مجيد القياسيه.
روم 5:8
ولكن الله اظهر له محبة كبيرة بالنسبة لنا بإرسال المسيح للموت بالنسبة لنا حين كنا لا نزال المذنبون.
روم 6:23
للاجور الذنب هو الموت ، لكن هدية مجانيه من الله الحياة الابديه من خلال يسوع المسيح ربنا.
روم 8:1
حتى الآن ليس هناك أي ادانة لاولئك الذين ينتمون الى يسوع المسيح.
وتحقق له (يسوع لل) المطالبات ارتقى لمات. أنا أعرف ماذا يقول الاسلام عن يسوع والانجيل. لست هنا لمناقشة a/50/215-. انا هنا لاقدم لكم واضحة وراءعه مطالبة الله. هدية مجانيه. أنا أعرف الإسلام شيئا كهذا. أعلم أن بوسعي أن أقف امام الله وبناء على هذه الآية. ان الاسلام يقدم مثل هذا العرض. وهذا هو الفرق الاساسي والرئيسي بين الاديان. ذكرتم ان مهمتكم هو دين السلام. وهل ان يشمل السلام مع الله لأن هذا هو ما يعرض المس
PLEASE CHECK OUT THIS WEBSITE IN CANADA
http://www.peacevillage.ca/_mgxroot/page_10747.html
- First these Muslims came to Canada from Pakistan as victims of a Religious minorty segregated from the mainstream back home and suffered for their version of islam being Peace and Justice .
- They turned their basement into a Mosque
for others of Like-Kind on Fridays
- Then the fought to re-zone an Industrial area to build a huge Mosque as a religious minorty
- Next they fought to re-zone the surrounding land for a Housing project
- Then they dictated how the Home would be build to Islamic codes in the Quran
- They demanded the Public school be Islam-friendly with 80% of the kids Muslims
- then the demanded a new Public school near the Mosque for all the Muslim children to walk to the Mosque for the Prayers
- Now they demand a High School near the Mosque paid for by publuc funds
Today they are in Phase-II of the Housing project and if you look at the Literature and Photos along with the Floor-Plan Blue Prints
you will see it is a Whahabbi-islam community .
They demanded segerated washrooms and enterances for females and every garage has a door inside to link to the House so the females don't show themselves to ther men just to get in the car .
And the final insut to canada's values is the large Sign in Arabic and English that claims Allah was behind the projects as his Destiny for all mankind and it mentions Allah's victory
to slaughter the Jews and Chritians plus all Infidels via Allah's Judge-Day to purge the Earth of Non-Muslim and bring about Shariah-Law .
How the hell did CAIR get away this Misogeny to stay mute while the Real Estate industry was allowed to violate Human Rights with a Segregated based Home sales by religion and then the House itself designed to subjecate Females to a saperate enterance and washrooms at opposit ends of the House for genders.
USA beware , this Creeping-Shariah starts with a Saudi-Funded Mosque to aquire the land as a oppressed Minority and then build the Caliphate around it one brick at a time to be a "Islamic" community which will be ripe for a Jihad to seceed from Canada or be a Safe-Zone to harbour Terrorists to send into the USA like the Hezballah does by using Lebanon.
Hi champ.
Remember the threat about October 10 - 12th.
I hope it is just so much moslem chest-thumping.
Re: Qaradawi: Muslims' accepting nationality of hostile state during war a "betrayal of Allah and His Prophet"
It's all like the Ed-209 "find my Nazi ancestors" Lekovic. It's about deception-which is the internal contradiction of Islam. (When did you last last hear a business recommend "Business is deception". Do people need that?)
The future of the Ed-209 and Islamic deception....
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1284701055605597022
"No, the Qur'an does not mandate Muslims to wage jihad or war upon the non-believers. If you read those verses in their entirety (along with the Qur'an) with historical references, you will see that the Muslims fought out of DEFENSE. Muhammad, peace be upon him, himself never even hit anyone." Posted by ~JehanZeb~
This young man (I'm assuming a student is young) may not be evil in his heart, but woefully ignorant of the religion (so called) to which he belongs. Note he totally ignored these posts earlier, which explain his world's jihad. Is this typically Muslim denial behavior, or just slow? How do you reason with someone who blatantly refuses to acknowledge anything said? He also forgot that Mohammed did kill people by his own hand, as many as 900, Sira pg. 463-4. And also killed by order, Hadith, Vol 3, bk 29:72 , where he said "kill him." There is no conversation with either willful blindness or incurable Islamic stupidity. Then don't forget Koran 8:12, "When thy Lord inspired the angels, (saying): I am with you. So make those who believe stand firm. I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger."
Posted by exsgtbrown:
There is no way around the Muslim willful blindness, or takkiya and deception. If he thinks these have NOTHING to do with Islam, they why are they in their scriptures? Denial? Ignorance? Or just stupidly thinking they can snow us once again. They can't.
We are facing the most vile enemy against our freedoms the world had ever known. This primitive tribal war cult started by Mohammed has gone on too long. Our coming war with Islam can be averted, not too late, if they confess to their war crimes against humanity for the past 1400 years, where 100 millions died due to their jihad. Too many lives had been ruined, too many families broken up for slavery and jihadi pleasures, too many women raped, too many innocent peoples forced into genocide extinctions. It will not go on, it is over. We understand Islam now.
If they cannot do this, and it is not too late for them to start, then there will be a war of liberation like this world had never known, where 1.2 billion of humanity will be set free from their enslaving Mohammedan cult of war. It is better for Muslims to stand up and confess the rabidly violent hateful portion of their (so called) religion and stop the coming bloodshed. But if they continue in denial, or lying and deceiving us further, there will be no stopping the coming war. This will be for their own good, though they do not understand it. With our blood and strength we will set humanity free, and lift the yoke of Islam that had kept one fifth of the world in slavery. It's over.
There is no Sharia law, and there is no holiness to what the Islamic war machine had unleashed on the world 1400 years ago. They had better pay attention, and stop lying to us.
We got their ticket.
If there is any doubt in anyone's mind of Islamic jihad's intent, review this:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15311&start=0
We are not in a new "state of war"... We had been for 1400 years in a state of jihad war.
ala-sux -- Did you read the report on this Islamic community in The National Post?
It's not great news.
It is common for immigrant groups to live together when they first come to Canada. Within a generation or two, in the past, we always saw much more mixture between the groups as people intermarried and moved around for work.
The problem is that we keep reading reports from other Western countries that second and third generation Muslims have not assimilated; instead of integrating into the larger Western society, these communities have become even more entrenched in their replications of their home countries.
On the surface, some people would think we are anti-Muslim for being concerned about the building of a Muslim community. After all, my Irish ancestors lived in predominantly Irish towns when they first came to Canada in the early 1800s; Germans settled my childhood hometown as well as the city where I went to college.
However, given what we are learning every day about Muslim communities around the world, it makes sense that we are uneasy when we learn that they are not only sequestering themselves within neighbourhoods and schools (or homeschooling to avoid non-Muslims) but are now building Muslim-themed neighbourhoods.
I look forward to the future and worry about these children who were born in Canada but whose first language is Urdu. Will they be more radical Muslims, more separatist, than their parents? What about their children?
Can we, like many in the Canadian media, reassure ourselves that Canada is different from European countries, that of course Muslim immigrants to Canada will blend into the Canadian culture and not make waves? (I hear this on the radio and TV all the time, especially as concerns the question of government funding of religious schools.)
Given what I am reading and hearing in the news, I can't take comfort in these reassurances.
"Remember the threat about October 10 - 12th.
I hope it is just so much moslem chest-thumping."
Posted by: interestinconundrum
No! I missed that one. Do you have a link to that headline? Thanks.
exsgtbrown, amazing posts. Very insightful.
I have a very important and interesting question about a conversation that I had the other day with someone I befriended that turned out to be a Muslim. First off, let's start by saying he is a very well educated guy. I developed rapport with him enough for him to know that I am not what others might react against with name calling or dispensing of "hate, bigotry, lies". It was enlightening to see how people adhere to a particular religious background especially when logical connections are involved and the individual happens to be well educated.
I had to start at the basics. I asked if he thought the Quran was the literal word of God and was true, immutable, unchanged, given by God through the prophet. He agreed with this. I then pursued the topic of naskh (naskh wa'hal mansoukh) citing the references of alcohol, qibla, progressive revelation at later times of more violent activities, etc. He had never heard of this. The conversation really came out of discussion of how terrible people can be, what they do, specifically beheadings and how brutal they are (having kids do this as well). There was a relativistic sense I gleaned from him about "there are reasons why people come to this" which didn't really answer my questions about why they have to behead anyone, in that way, on video, etc. when you could just shoot them instead. When mentioning Sahih Bukhari and it as the most reliable hadith by the Sunni Muslims, he had not heard of this either.
So what I learned and therefore am asking people on this board, "How mainstream are these texts." Do most self identified muslims NOT know what Bukhari is? I mentioned Ibn Ishaq, the first biographer of Muhammad, and he had never heard of him. I'm not really sure what we can expect.
Additionally:
He all but agreed that nonbelievers in muslim countries were not treated as equals. He knew about Shari'a but tried to gloss over it when I spoke of equality of women (men can just say "I'm divorced" and that's that, there need to be 2 female witnesses for 1 male, 4 witnesses to a rape to say it actually happened, how muslim men are allowed to marry infidels, not vice versa) and finally, which takes the cake:
No one disagrees in any school that apostates should be killed. Formerly he was touting equality, free will. Then he just shrunk into a shell and tried to let this topic pass by.
I wasn't attacking. I was telling him, in his times of relativity ("every religion has crazy people") that the other religions don't quote versus, don't have precedents or their leaders weren't started out in 70+ battles or wars. I left it open that these wars may be justified, just to allow for some freedom of thought.
The summary here is that we have an educated man who to me, from all of my study, doesn't have a historical understanding of texts, etc. Ok, so what, he's American, I can see it happening. But even a man like this tried to tell me things like, "The Koran tells us things scientifically" and gave some lame examples as if I'm going to be convinced that something is from God if alcohol is prohibited because to most people at first it doesn't taste good, or, it's bad for average citizens, because it does a lot of harm. It reminded me of Sam Harris. This guy is very intelligent, but when I point out that things are chauvinistic, male dominated, dhimmi-esque (he never heard of jizya!) and show how completely illogical things can be esp. when you take literal interpretations of things (like Protestant Christians do, although the outcomes of their decisions are generally not harmful like the islamic ones, of course) everything falls apart.
There will be more questions and he'll follow up. I'm glad I challenged it, perhaps it will lead to more understanding. It's fascinating to me that intelligent people can take things so literal and believe really asinine stuff --- and not have a response whatsoever to the points you bring up that are clearly contradictory --- only to continue things. Is it cultural? It showed me the power of culture, religion, politics/group thinking all at the same time. Fascinating.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Here you go champ.
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2007/09/17/school-terror-threat-jihad-boom-postcards-with-threatening-cartoon-sent-to-nine-schools/
Also the speech Ahmadinejad gave at the UN had a threatening tone....and Eid is the 12th of this month.
@Palamas
Thanks for the post. This is what I like about this blog. You get very good, logical, sometime funny and well thought out answers and questions.
My take in regard to the way this fellow responded. Most people have build up a shell of beliefs over time. The subject is not that important to them that is why there are holes in the logic. Most of them were born into it so it is like very familiar and is not something they question. It is also very threating to them to question anything because of family ties. Because of this even if they agree this will not cause them to change. They need to see the value in believing something else as well as being against what Islam says.
My point is to fight fire with fire. I take it from your post you may not believe the Christian POV. That is were I am coming from. I believe I can offer them something far more valuable spiritually than anything that Islam has. Anyway keep talking to him.
Isa 52:7
How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news of peace and salvation, the news that the God of Israel reigns!
عيسى 52:7
كيف جميلة على الجبال القدمين لمن جلب الاخبار الساره السلام والخلاص ، الانباء التى تفيد بان الله سيطر على اسرائي
Thanks interestinconundrum. Now I remember that headline and those postcards. Eerie stuff!
"I'm glad I challenged it, perhaps it will lead to more understanding. It's fascinating to me that intelligent people can take things so literal and believe really asinine stuff --- and not have a response whatsoever to the points you bring up that are clearly contradictory --- only to continue things. Is it cultural? It showed me the power of culture, religion, politics/group thinking all at the same time. Fascinating."
Palamas:
I don't think it's cultural. It just shows that having intelligence doesn't necessarily mean having truth or wisdom. That requires more discipline of the mind; a capacity for deep thought or reflection.
We see this failure to think critically with reason and depth as a result of an educational system in our country controlled by the left. Like cultic religions, they don't want you to think.
We will all meet Muslims from any point along the scale of purely peaceful to extreme violence. Is a peaceful Muslim peaceful because he has love in his heart for all righteous peoples of any faith? Or is he peaceful because he lives in a community where he does not yet have the numbers and it is therefore expedient to be so? I think in most cases, in dealing with Jeheb or CAIR lawyers or whoever, it is obviously the latter.
These people are fervently Islamic, and yet realize that in order to live, thrive, and propagate in a country like America or Great Britain, they must push a patient, stealthy agenda. A few mumbled phrases praising the beauty of multiculturalism and religious tolerance is all our dhimmi-wit Vichy Left needs to then take the ball from them and march all the way to the goal line. Everyone feels so good about themselves...it is like the Prozac of the West. Allah must REALLY love a CAIR lawyer. There are examples of this brand of propaganda and cultural encroachment brought up on this website every day.
Honestly, if you are a Muslim, why start shooting people? There is a whole wing of the Islamic Army performing this work all over the world, and by comparison, the task put before a CAIR lawyer living a six-figure life in the United States is a dream job. These guys cannot believe their good fortune: they get to live off the high-end of the Western hog and still win the promise of a magic carpet ride to the Great Whorehouse in the Clouds.
I think what most people here would argue to those "peaceful" Muslims is that, sorry, none of us are buying it anymore. The terrorists committing outrageous atrocities on innocent people IN VIRTUALLY EVERY REGION OF THE WORLD do literally, and correctly, act faithfully upon the essential Islamic texts.
To whatever extent you are not with them, it does not matter. They are clearly the true Islam, and they are driving the Islamic agenda throughout the world. The very fact that so many of us here day after day discussing, analyzing, sharpening our rhetorical regimen to combat Islam is testament to this fact. So are the hundreds of billions of dollars spent annually around the world just so people can take a simple airline passage without a lunatic Mohammed lover blowing our airplane up. The concept of Islam, its teachings and violent expressions, bring an avalanche of contempt, disbelief, and disgust from virtually all of the other cultures and religions of the world.
Nobody likes you. And not because some of you are not "peaceful," but because the message of your religion is not peaceful. Simple as that. Tough to convince 5 billion people of that fact when it is stated clearly in your most precious texts.
Muslims invite non-Muslims to their Mosques, homes, cultural/religious events, and many have established peaceful relation. The MAJORITY of Americans respect the Muslim community, and vice versa. I think the reason why most of you are so hateful, angry, and frustrated is because you are the minority. It insults many of you that I have Christian and Jewish friends. I feel sorry for you all, really. You will never know Love if you continue to think with your antagonistic and egocentric mentality. May God help all of you to find peace, unity, and true Love in your lives. Ameen.
~JehanZeb~
Posted by: ~JehanZeb~ at October 8, 2007 11:15 AM
Oh my, where to begin? First of all, save your pity; we don't need it. We are all educated, compassionate, tolerant people who deeply resent the fact that hostile, alien creatures have invaded our country and threaten our way of life. These predatory invaders believe that their religion and culture are superior to ours yet they voluntarily migrated to our country; they CHOSE to come here, not to assimilate and become Americans but to proselytize, infiltrate our institutions, and ultimately destroy our republic. We are justifiably concerned about islam's agenda in America and we will never let our guard down, never stop warning others, never roll over and die for islam.
Yes, muslims have invited Americans into their mosques, but not to share "real" islam with them; quite the contrary. They know that they cannot reveal the truth about islam to non-muslims. That would be suicidal, comparable to a den of spies and insurgents inviting the army in to reveal their war strategy. But we know what goes on in mosques and we know that muslims are reminded every year by malevolent islamic clerics not to acknowledge Christian and Jewish holidays, or even unique American holidays, like Thanksgiving. This is just one example of how muslims reject everything American except the many economic opportunities available here, which they eagerly, greedily enjoy. They also avail themselves of our superior medical facilities, colleges and universities, and a multitude of opportunities found nowhere else in the world, all the while cursing America, Americans, and wishing death and destruction on us. The islamic world is a barren wasteland of destitution, tyranny, illiteracy, fanaticism, terrorism, and misery, all of which our wonderful muslim immigrants would like to bestow on us. And we're supposed to love muslims?
Why don't muslims visit our churches and synagogues to learn about our faiths? Why do they recoil from our celebrations and holidays as if they were poison? Instead of insisting that WE learn about THEM, shouldn't muslims be learning about US? After all, they voluntarily came to OUR COUNTRY, where islam was virtually unheard of a mere twenty years ago, and where muslims comprise a very tiny minority of the population, and may God see fit to keep it that way. What do muslim immigrants expect when they arrive in America: a mosque on every corner; women in burkas walking behind their owners; the call to prayer blaring in earsplitting cacophony? Throughout history, the IMMIGRANT has adapted to his new country, presumably because he wanted to become a part of that country. Not so with muslims. They invade country after country and create contention and chaos, and attempt to impose their culture, their religion, and their way of life on the host country. We won't sit still and allow muslims to ruin America. Fighting islamic aggression is a tough job, but somebody's got to do it and as long as there is a breath left in my body, I will not allow muslim invaders to turn my beloved country into another desolate islamic hellhole.
"Prominent Islamic cleric Dr Yusuf Al Qaradawi has said that Muslims accepting the nationality of non-Islamic countries in times of war is against the teachings and tenets of Islam."
-- from the article above
But a state of permanent war -- though not necessarily of open warfare through combat -- exists between Believers and Infifdels, Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb. Al-Qaradawi knows that, and so do all Believers, save those who are still limited in their understanding to the Five Pillars, but who, as they find out more about Islam -- and thanks to Western technology appropriated by Muslim disseminators (and the electrical grids that are often built with the aid of Infidels, and the television sets and monitors so often paid for with the same aid from Infidels) few can remain uninformed for much longer -- do not turn away from Islam, but as primitve people who have long been inured to the habit of mental submission that Islam incculates, accept whatever Islam does indeed teach, no matter how disturbing or aggressive it turns out to be. There are some who, upon finding out about the full contents of Islam, and realizing how seriously it is taken, do manage -- think of Ayaan Hirsi Ali -- to secretly or, if they live in the West, sometimes openly, to jettison Islam, but they are very few in number. And Western policy cannot pretend that they are more numerous than in fact they are (those apostates from Islam are the first to warn Infidels of that). Very few.
There will be those who will, openly or secretly, preach against Al-Qaradawi, and who will claim that the aims of Islam can best be achieved at this point by accepting the "nationality" of this or that Infidel nation-state, taking full advantage, and then some, of every conceivable benefit -- free education and medical care at a level no Muslim country offers, support for children including government grants, free housing or heavily-subsidized housing, and a panoply of individual rights that would not for one minute last in a Muslim-dominated polity but that, meanwhile, may be readily and cynically exploited to bring about that very goal of a Muslim-dominated polity may be exploited for Muslim ends. They, and Al-Qaradawi, want the exact same end: a world where all obstacles to the spread and dominance of Islam are removed. The only difference is in the degree of immediate purity one preaches. Al-Qaradawi preaches the less guileful means; Tariq Ramadan, the means more guileful.
For Infidels, it hardly matters.
Excellent post Hugh.
Actually the difference between Al-Qaradawi and Tariq Ramadam is de-minimus at best, negligable.
Islam is Islam. Always was...always will be. The only differing factor is the historical response by Dar al Harb to it's influence. It appears to be an ebb and flow type of relationship.
Islam is certainly enjoying a flow, so to speak currently, at least from where I sit.
It was a long day for me, in a long line of long days. It is good to have you back, Hugh.
There are different schools within Islamic thought concerning immigration.
One forbids Muslims to emigrate to non-Muslim lands.
How do we encourage them?
And get them to teach that all Muslims belong in Saudia Arabia.
Only.
To take the Great One-Way Hadj.
Kissing meteorites and stoning Satan pillars and eating sheeps' eyeballs.
And leaving the civilized world alone.
"Muslims invite non-Muslims to their Mosques, homes, cultural/religious events, and many have established peaceful relation. The MAJORITY of Americans respect the Muslim community, and vice versa. I think the reason why most of you are so hateful, angry, and frustrated is because you are the minority. It insults many of you that I have Christian and Jewish friends. I feel sorry for you all, really. You will never know Love if you continue to think with your antagonistic and egocentric mentality. May God help all of you to find peace, unity, and true Love in your lives. Ameen."
~JehanZeb~
I think you'd be better to take a good long honest look at the Islamic world. I don't think you'll wonder for long why there are people who are hateful, angry, and frustrated at what that dysfunctional world looks like.
If people are angry it's because they're angry at the injustice, intollerance, and persecution of non-Muslims, that exist where ever Islam dominates a society.
If people hate Islam, it is only natural that people would hate anyone that wants to kill them and the freedoms they cherish.
If people are frustrated it's because they cannot understand how a religion can glorify evil as Islam does, and claim it's God's will.
Thank you for you're prayer that God help all of us to find peace, unity, and true Love in our lives, but I think your prayers might be better directed at the loveless, oppressive societies of the Islamic world.
As for your Jewish and Christian "friends", neither one of them would last as long as a snowball in hell in an Islamic paradise like Saudi Arabia.
Still wonder why we'd rather not import that sickness into our free and democratic world?
Why don't muslims visit our churches and synagogues to learn about our faiths? Why do they recoil from our celebrations and holidays as if they were poison? Instead of insisting that WE learn about THEM, shouldn't muslims be learning about US? After all, they voluntarily came to OUR COUNTRY, where islam was virtually unheard of a mere twenty years ago,
Yes Susan. I am so disheartened. Sunday night in my little home town I encountered 2 moslems in full islamic garb in my neighborhood grocery store. It is becoming clear that this is a full scale invasion.
The big cities have been populated by islam since the 60s, but small town America is feeling the wave too. It felt like I was watching 2 SS officers walking in MY TOWN. The ideology is the same...eliminate the "other".
I'm mad as hell:
Regardless of what faith I follow, I think it is important to try to understand why people randomly do NOT question or confront brutally illogical flaws in their belief systems. God knows that what I may have done with this friend was productive. It will allow him to ask questions and even if in the immediate future it doesn't change him, it will change his approach to things and the way others may think about things (more objectively).
I've come to the realization that it is a very human thing to follow group ideas for obvious reasons: for one it is solidarity and therefore in line with evolution of societies to strengthen themselves and make opposition to define themselves as something of (against) the "other".
[This is why Jesus Christ said I came to put a man against his father/mother/brother] --- it's a very difficult thing that takes some people a long long time to overcome.
For this reason I have come to acknowledge that it all has a context. For some reason I'm more interested in being able to defend my points of view from a leap of faith point of view than others are. Most others in America especially don't care so much about exactly what they believe, they just call themselves something to identify, even though they don't agree with all of its teachings. Catholics are a classic example of this from my experience I hardly know 1 person that actually believes in all of the teachings of that Catholic Church who is young. That is astounding to me, mostly because if you don't, how can you identify yourself as such? You should call yourself something different, or "in the process of seeking" or find a different religion if it matters to you.
If you want to know my background, you should be able to tell by my name. My faith is the least fundamental of all, it is a way of life and not a belief system as such, and for that it is malleable and gives the greatest potential for understanding the unending paradoxes and mysteries that we constantly seek to find ourselves and God ultimately.
It is also the reason why I have studied so many things historically about Islam, which is clearly a 7th century heresy as it was in contact with eastern christianity at all times.
I highly recommend Christophe Luxenburg's theses on syriac lectionaries and the beginnings of the Koran. Finally, my friend admitted as much:
He is fluent in Arabic but said that the Koran is hard to understand. I thought, of course it's hard, Arabic wasn't written at the time of Muhammad, but Syriac/aramaic was, and this is from where they get the basis for the texts and why upwards of 20% of the Quran makes little to NO sense for arabic speakers.
To him it was supposedly God's word and therefore the fact that he couldn't understand didn't matter, so he would never question that. As I've said, anyone who has had literal interpretations is in a whole lot of trouble, because there is an inflexibility there that is impossible to overcome and all too human/impersonal. Who interprets it? Any imam, or in western christianity, any of the 10,000 different denominations that came out of protestantism. Islam has no church, no guiding spirit. Christianity does, and you have to find it. St. Paul wrote to churches in his letters. Luke was with him. They existed already and knew what the teachings were. They existed before anything was written down and in actuality, they wrote it down. So they know how to interpet it. The ways of interpretation (not fundamental in the proper religion) have not changed. The Way continues from the apostles and churches, just as they lived. I think you can now tell what my background is. It's the only one that hasn't changed from 33 AD. I thought maybe you were of the same ilk. In any case, I remain, seeking knowledge and ways of discovery to LIVE more perfectly, more truly, more REALly
Best wishes,
Palamas
"If you want to know my background, you should be able to tell by my name. My faith is the least fundamental of all, it is a way of life and not a belief system as such, and for that it is malleable and gives the greatest potential for understanding the unending paradoxes and mysteries that we constantly seek to find ourselves and God ultimately."
Have you been reading GK Chesterton? :)
A seemingle ready solution would be to allow only those of the Islamics that accept Western citizenship to remain in our country.
This, however, would also be in vain, as Moslems can swear fealty to a nation while abjuring their oath in silence. Deceit, lying, oaths--even if sworn on the koran--is permissible. Everyting is, as long as it furthers the inroads of Islam into the Free world (the Islamic's "world of war").
The only solution is separation from all Islamics--from the Islamic world. that is, Moslems out of Western lands. Western countries give no economic or military support to Islamic lands.
How this can be accomplished I must leave to a less squeamish time--a time that I can only hope will come in the future--near rather than far.
"The truth, we HAVE been speaking up and we ARE speaking up. The question is, will you really LISTEN to us?
Posted by: ~JehanZeb~"
.....sure....some Muslims do speak out against the violence, but not against the writings the Muslims use to justify the violence.....Speaking out against the Qur'an, the Hadith, and the Sira is something no Muslim does.....
jehanzeb,
i have read all your comments on this site and have come to a simple resolution.
why the hell are we even having a dialogue with you and your islamic peers.
no matter what we do or say you are going to blame the jews and christians for the evil your islamic fanatics do in the name of islam.
please you and all your islamic mates go to pakistan or saudi arabia and let the rest of the world get on with living peacefully.
Muslims are just un-beliveable.
"I'm not asking ANY of you to accept Islam. I am just asking you to respect it, and not judge it by those extremist morons who use the religious text to justify their actions. Their way is NOT the way of the Prophet. The way of the Prophet is Peace, and if you doubt that, then you are doubting this very peace that I'm offering you.
Thanks for reading. I have class soon. Take care
~JehanZeb~
Posted by: ~JehanZeb~"
From the Hadith:
Muslim (19:4294) - "When you meet your enemies who are polytheists [Christians], invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them ... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them"
Several points:
Is ignorance about Islam -- for an intelligent Muslim -- bliss?
A poster above tells the story of an intelligent acquaintance, possibly a colleague at work, who is a Muslim but who has explained that there are certain things he does not know, such as the names of the most important muhaddithin (Muslim students of the Hadith), including Bukhari.
What, he says, should he, or would we, make of that? The answer is: not much. First, the answer "I don't know" or "I never heard of that" or "Let me find out and I'll get back to you" are conveniently invoked often by Muslims who know perfectly well what you are getting at -- see the testimonies of so many apostates, both those known (Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq) and those unknown to the world (such as those whose views are collected in "Leaving Islam"). Muslim spokesmen, confronted on radio or television talk-shows, or in public debates, by the well-informed -- say, by Robert Spencer -- and when asked to comment on a certain doctrine, as expressed in the Qur'an and Hadith -- will very often say they haven't heard of it, or need to study the matter further, or some such. And by this time we should see it for the deliberate face-saving, time-wasting diversionary tactic it is.
But let's suppose that Muslim acquaintance described above was not feigning, and did not know about the doctrine of abrogation, did not know about Bukhari, did not know about this or about that. Then what? There are, after all, humble illiterate villagers deep in Central Asia, who know about Islam only that they must recite the Shahada, say the five canonical prayers with their bodies meccatropically prostrate, give something to fellow Muslims, observe Ramadan, and at least hope that once in their lifetimes they may visit Mecca and walk seven times widdershins around the Magic Wonderstone. But they also know one other thing, One Big Thing: they know that they are Muslims. And from their knowledge of that One Big Thing all else so grimly and naturally follows. They know, for example, that their belonging to the category "Muslim" immediately makes them, makes indeed all Muslims everywhere, forever superior, no matter what else they do, to everyone else in the world who belongs to the category "non-Muslim." They know that they must owe their allegiance always and everywhere to other Muslims, whatever the nationality -- a trivial matter in Islam -- of those Muslims, and must never offer true allegiance (feigned allegiance, in order to promote the goals of Islam and protect the status of Believers, is quite another thing, and can be allowed) to Infidels, even those who might share the same nationality (Muslims in Pakistan are loyal to Muslims in Saudi Arabia or the Sudan,not to Hindus and Christians who may live in Pakistan, and be, officially, Pakistani nationals).
And there are hundreds and hundreds of passages in the most influential -- because later -- suras of the Qur'an, and among the vetted and ranked (for authenticity) stories in the Hadith, and of course in the example of Muhammad's attitudes and behavior in the Sira, that would naturally lead any Muslim to conclude -- and they always have, and there is no reason to believe they will ever change that belief -- that a state of permanent war, if not outright warfare, must exist between Believers and Infidels, Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb.
The unprecedented situation, of course, is that we see around us: in Dar al-Harb millions of Muslims have been allowed to settle, because of the ignorance and inattention -- some would say nearly criminal negligence -- of the political elites in Western countries. What does this mean for Muslims living within those countries, where they are still a tiny minority (though their numbers are inexorably rising because of continued immigration and high birthrates relative to non-Muslims and active, well-financed, carefully-targetted campaigns of Da'wa, successful among the psychially and economically marginal, who find a justification for their behavior in a Total System that offers, at long last, a Way To Belong)?
In other words, even great ignorance of what Islam inculcuates should not comfort us, should not hold out any hope, unless the evidence shows that when those Muslims who are ignorant of parts of Islam learn about those parts, they recoil in horror and decide to give up Islam. That happens to the morally and intellectualy advanced, those who are capable as well of putting aside any filial piety. But when even someone such as Kanan Makiya starts to defend Islam, or at least put off what he forefeels as possible attacks on it as a doctrine, by invoking his pious grandmother, and when even someone such as Fouad Ajami is greatly impressed with Al-Sistani (and appears not to know about the concept of "najis" nor have heard the same antisemitic rants from Al-Sistani that John Agresto, in his memoir of Iraq, describes with disgust), because of his own pious Shi'a mother, then one realizes what a hold this Islam has, or rather, what a hold, even for people such as Makiya and Ajami, the belief that one who comes from the world of Islam should overlook this, or defend that, or distract those Infidels who cannot possibly have known one's gentle and pious (because limited in her idea of Islam) mother or grandmother.
That is a big problem. It is only those who follotw the logic of things, who are relentless in their pursuit of the truth, who are morally offended by Islam as a Total System, whom one can trust. And who, among those who through no fault of their own are born into Islam, will demonstrate, or so far have demonstrated, that? Very few.
Many more might be compelled to do so, I think, if all around them Infidels were well-informed about Islam, and implacable in their opposition to it, and scathing -- truthfully scathing - in the expression of their attitudees. That would force the makiyas and ajamis to do a bit more than so far they have been asked to do. It may be that they see right through Edward Said's nonsense and lies. It may be that they are appalled by the brutality and cruelty of Arab regimes, and of the Muslim Arabs who do not seem to mind, who utter not a syllable of protest, against such things as the massacres of the Kurds.
But one should not be satisfied with that. One wants, from Ajami in his many articles on Iraq, to explain why Islam itself explains the failure of the stated American goals, and why the dangers emanating from Islam itself make those goals in any case exactly the wrong ones. One waNts from Makiya, in his soul-searching "What Went Wrong" ponderings about Iraq, one at this point has a right to demand from Makiya, that he begin to look steadily and whole at the influence of Islam on the minds of men, not of Makiya himself, but of the primitive masses (made, or at least encouraged in their continued primitivieness, by Islam) in Iraq, both Sunni and Shi'a.
Makiya had an English mother. Makiya attended Baghdad College, the Jesuit school where the Iraqi elite,, intellectually as well as economically defined, sent their children. He is, in almost every respect, a Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only Muslim, even though he still demonstrates unease and defensiveness when Infidels start to talk about Islam (and so few of them do), start to critically examine this Total System, because Makiya continues, for the sake possibly for his own stability, to imaginatively inhabit not the world of Arab Greatness, but another sort of "Dream Palace," in Ajami's phrase, where dreamed-of haroun al-rashids, their greatness exaggerated, with much attributed to "Islam" in the art, literature (including translation), and science of High Islamic Civilization, that in fact was the product of Christians or Jews, or even Zoroastrians, or "Muslmis" who had been Muslim only for a generation or two, and had still been raised in an intellectual milieu that was heavily influenced by Christianity, Judaism, even Zoroastrianism, rather than Islam.
Given that Arabness, or "Uruba," and Islam mutualy reinforce one another, it is far more difficult for Arab Muslims to see into Islam, and to come to deplore its effects, than it is for those from Iran or the subcontinent or the East Indies to do so. Turning one's back on Islam is not only physically dangerous, but may imply, as well, that one now recognizes that the great gift of the Arabs to the world, Islam, is no gift at all, but a poisoned chalice, and that had Islam never come to the Middle East, never come to Sassanian Persia, never come to overwhelm the Christian civilization of North Africa, never arrived in Hindustan to "wound" that civilization and kill 60-70 million Hindus, never destroyed the Greco-Bactrian civilization of Afghanistan, never destroyed those Buddhist statues and steles, that Christian statuary, those Byzantine paintings, those Hindu temples and temple complexes right from the very start, as early as Mahmud of Ghazni at Somanatha, had not taught those conquered peoples in their conquered lands, islamized and in many cases arabized, to be indifferent or hostile to their own pre-Islamic or non-Islamic histories, had not consigned that part of humanity that had, over those 1350 years of conquest, taught much of humanity that it was not right to paint, it was not right to sculpt, it was not right to compose music or use music in any but the most limited settings, that it was not right to encourage free and skeptical inquiry that the enterprise of science requires, that is was right only to obey the laws of Allah as to what was Haram and what Halal, and was right only to accept the Will or Whim of Allah, without ever questioning why, for the habit of mental submission was at the heart of Islam in the seventh century, and has remained at the heart of Islam ever since.
When the ajamis and makiyas begin to see that, they will also come to understand that the attitudes of Islam explain why the American effort, with all its vast and continued squandering of men, money, and materiel, will never succeed. It will not succeed because Islam teaches that the only two possibilities in any contest -- and for Islam the contest is that betwween Believer and Infidel, but the attitudes do not stop with that contest, but are internalized by Believers, taken in, made their own, and applied in other situations as well -- those of Victor and of Vanquished. And that, too, is what the Sunnis now believe, and the Shi'a now believe, as they confront each other, in Baghdad, and surroundings.
"This, however, would also be in vain, as Moslems can swear fealty to a nation while abjuring their oath in silence. Deceit, lying, oaths--even if sworn on the koran--is permissible. Everyting is, as long as it furthers the inroads of Islam into the Free world (the Islamic's "world of war")."
unicorns62000,
One way of tackling this problem is to require more than just swearing feality to the U.S. in the citizenship oath.
The oath should require a renunciation of any religious doctrine that in any way contridicts the constitution of the United States, including its guarantees of freedom of speech and religion.
It should also require new citizens to swear to uphold the secular nature of all governments in the United, and never to advocate the imposition any form of devine law in the United States.
It should also require a new citizen to state clearly that he understads fully that any future activities on his part that indicate that he took the citizenship oath in bad faith, invalidates his status as a citizen of the United States.
http://www.snopes.com/business/alliance/caribou.asp
Is this the same Qaradawi who is head of the Caribou Coffee Sharia Advisory board, helping to ensure that everything about Caribou Coffee conforms to Sharia?
So, Caribou Coffee could marry an eight year old?
Hugh, nice post.
"That happens to the morally and intellectualy advanced, those who are capable as well of putting aside any filial piety"
And it is SO difficult to accomplish, my point and your recognition. An overwhelming majority (99%) can't see through this. If I were not optimistic about eternal things, I would despair.
---
As for the other posters, I haven't read Chesterton, I have, I guess independently understood/entertained the paradox thing and how it plays out to eternity, which it should. Funny that his most famous book is "Orthodoxy".
All the anglicans (notably CS Lewis, seemingly this Chesterton man) were trying to revert to the the teachings that were unchanged from the apostles and uncorrupted by the papacy/west so naturally they were very eastern orthodox in their outlook, but divided by geography, times, and argument that have defined Protestantism vs. Catholicism and caused even more offshoots and inauthentic ways of life, systems, and visions of the one true God.
rational,
But they'll swear to anything you ask them to--Islam absolves them from any oaths--and they will act like "good Americans," as the CAIR gang claims that they and all American Moslems are. It is meaningless. The only way to rid ourselves of the Islamic invasion is to deny citizenship, deny entry into our armed forces, stop the State Department's freely handing out visas to Moslems in Islamic areas such as Saudi Arabia, etc.
Fat chance for these events to ever happen. So then, how far should we trust a Moslem, any Moslem? Should we patronize Moslem establishments? Do business with Moslems?
Or should we shun them as the outsiders, the interlopers, our would-be conquerors which they are?
Or should we shun them as the outsiders, the interlopers, our would-be conquerors which they are?
Posted by: unicorns62000 at October 9, 2007 8:01 PM
We should absolutely "shun" them, avoid their places of business, and avoid all pretense of becoming their "friends", because we all know that we can never be their friends. True friendship is impossible between paranoid islamic supremacists and friendly, good-natured, naive Americans. The only reason muslims would venture into the friendship arena with non-muslims would be to try to convert or exploit them, or both.
Some might say that it would be advantageous to play along with a "friendly" muslim, pretend that he is just an ordinary guy, maybe lonely and in need of companionship. Earn his trust and encourage him to express his convictions, beliefs, aspirations; get into his head and find out what's cooking at the local mosque. But I don't think that is advisable or necessary because if he is a practicing muslim who traipses to the mosque five times a day for prayers, he is the enemy.
Mosques are islamic war colleges where the enemy congregate to plot our destruction. Islamic clerics are the generals in the jihadi army who teach the foot soldiers the art of jihad and its many techniques and strategies. Those "ordinary" muslims poised on their prayer rugs are the infantry, the breeders, the brainwashed minions of allah who have been inculcated with hate, resentment, and a false sense of victimhood---literally primed to erupt like a seismic event.
I think muslims should be avoided like the plague but should be scrupulously observed from a safe distance at all times. We already finance the worldwide jihad and spread of islam by buying Saudi oil. We have no control over that but we can certainly choose not to patronize their terrorist enterprises in America.
Palamas:
Chesterton was a devout Catholic. His greatest work, "The Eternal Man", examines history before Christ and after:
The cave of Lascaux is evidence of man's signature, of "man in the cave".
Then, the nativity of Christ, "the man-god in the cave".
His observations and perceptions are astounding.