| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Sheikh Shady Suleiman is just repeating classic rules of Islamic law. Attacks against women and children are prohibited "unless they are fighting against the Muslims" ('Umdat al-Salik o9.10, cf. al-Mawardi, al-Akham as-Sultaniyyah, 4.2).
"It's OK to kill kids in battle: Sheik," by Richard Kerbaj in The Australian, with thanks to all who sent this in:
THE deputy spiritual leader of Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali has told his students that it is "obligatory" for all Muslims to engage in jihad if an Islamic country is under attack, even if it means killing the enemy's children.Sheik Shady Suleiman, a youth leader at Lakemba Mosque in Sydney's southeast, told his students in a one-hour Arabic and English lecture that it would be "self defence" to kill children who were attacking them in battle.
Muslim leaders yesterday attacked the 29-year-old cleric, who has a substantial following in Sydney, and accused him of delivering a message contrary to that of Prophet Mohammed who said children should not be killed in war. Prominent Sydney-based imam Khalil Shami said Sheik Shady's message was "dangerous" because it was open to being misconstrued by young Muslims.
"It is very dangerous," he said. "Because ... he puts in their minds that they have to do this, and he prepares them for something wrong for sure." The nation's leading spiritual Muslim woman Aziza Abdel-Halim said Sheik Shady's message diverged from Islamic teachings that prohibit the killing of children.
In a lecture titled Rulings on Performing Jihad, obtained by The Australian, Sheik Shady differentiates between defensive and offensive jihad and quotes the Prophet by saying anyone who fights to defend their land, soul, and wealth was considered a "Shahid" (martyr). "If attackers or invaders want to invade a Muslim country or attack a Muslim country then it's obligatory on every Muslim ... to fight and protect the country," he says.
Sheik Shady says while the Prophet condemned the killing of children, "if they are involved then you have to stop them".
"If you have a child carrying a knife and coming to you, or a sword and coming to kill you in the middle of the battle, they (the fighters) are going to look at him and say 'the Prophet said not to touch him' - no, that's wrong."
Sheik Shady, who is lecturing in Britain, yesterday defended his message on jihad, saying it was a part of a series of lectures delivered in 2002, before the Iraq war - and focused on the collection of the traditions of Mohammed - although a copy of the lecture appears on his website dated May 2004.
He said the lecture was delivered to 60 young men who were advanced in Islamic studies and would not take it out of context and was "not an open lecture", despite being on his website.
"When I said children, I did not mean, of course, if you're going to get a five- or seven-year-old coming to attack you, you can stop him," he said yesterday.
"I was talking about self-defence. If you get attacked by someone, then you have the right to defend yourself. It doesn't mean you go kill them, especially if it's someone young."
Sheik Shady said that while it was obligatory for all Muslims to defend an Islamic nation under attack, there were no Muslim countries living under Sharia law that were currently under attack.
Posted by Robert at May 9, 2007 9:11 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
They also seem to be ok with killing children even when they are not under attack. Look at all their attacks in Israel. They don't even mind killing muslim kids - and then using their dead bodies as propaganda - look what they did in the Lebanon/Israeli war when they lobbed bombs from other's houses, left hurridly knowing the Israelis would strike, and then scurrying back and taking the children and wailing like a bunch of morons. And the media ate it up like rats on the last cracker in a trash can.
Posted by: R_not![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 9, 2007 9:26 AM
"If you have a child carrying a knife and coming to you, or a sword and coming to kill you in the middle of the battle,"
Just off the top of my head, it's mostly pictures of palistinian children that I see posing with weapons. Oh, and the Iranian children with little keys to heaven around thier necks attacking the Iraqi army in the 1980's .
I'm not familiar with any other religion that sends it's children into battle to be slaughtered.
Posted by: walterc at May 9, 2007 9:37 AM
'...youth leader...'
Imagine the kind of youths he leads.
And love good ol' Imam Shami, '...he prepares them for something wrong for sure (I mean I think it's wrong, isn't it? I still have to say it's wrong, don't I?)'
The Islam = Peace canard has been fairly effectively demolished. Only people of Karen Armstrong's ilk mouth it anymore. Next, to educate non-Muslims what 'war', 'attack', and 'self-defence' means to Muslim minds.
Posted by: Dane at May 9, 2007 9:39 AM
What kind of a 'Religion' can even discuss the
pros and cons as to whether you can kill kids or not!!
Muslims are happily killing their own or Infidel
children.
Many are blown up every day in Iraq,used as human
shields or suicide bombers by Palestinians,nor should we forget the many child brides[Afganistan
top's the world's list for maternal Deaths] who die in childbirth every day because THEIR YOUNG UNFORMED BODIES WERE TOO NOT MEANT FOR IMPREGNATION[AND RAPE].
Let us not forget the Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia who were beheaded on their way to School... The Infants used as 'Camel jockeys' by
Middle Eastern Scumbags,the sort that Blair & Bush cultivate with nary a squeak from Cherie Blair about these Innocents 'Human Rights.'
at May 9, 2007 9:42 AM
Sheik Shady? Would that be Sheik Slim Shady? The Rappin' Imam.
Posted by: TheOmegaMan at May 9, 2007 9:51 AM
Why do the downunders allow this kind of Muslim riff raff into their country? either jail or deport him. Muslims are not welcomed in any western country.
Posted by: The Resistance at May 9, 2007 9:53 AM
A significant proportion of Muslim populations in dar al-Harb have been 'taken out of context'.
Posted by: Dane at May 9, 2007 9:57 AM
I guess this means that it's okay for coalition forces in Iraq to kill the kids who are pelting them with rocks when they drive around in their armored vehicles...
Posted by: seville844 at May 9, 2007 9:57 AM
Some information on camel jockeys.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_camel_jockey
I stumbled on this link today.
http://www.kashmir-information.com/Atrocities/atrocities1.html
Muslim atrocities - in Gaza and Nigeria.
http://zionism-israel.com/israel_news/2007/04/muslim-atrocities-in-gaza-and-nigeria.html
Never in the 1400 years of jihad history have the muslims shown any sort of mercy towards children and women. The girls were thrown into the harem, while the boys were forced into slavery.
Posted by: arjun.sevak at May 9, 2007 9:57 AM
Look - I think by now everyone 'gets it' who has taken the time to study Islam.
Islam should be translated 'Expedience' not 'Submission'.
Basically anything is allowed as long as you
a)insist it furthers the Cause of Allah. Anything.
b) are willing to threaten or kill people who disagree with you.
Islam is a religion of Expedience - not peace. It's a world-class justification machine for anything you want or need.
Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at May 9, 2007 10:04 AM
I have not seen any reports or photos of Hindu, Buddist, Or Christian children attacking anyone...
I have seen photos of Iranian Children undergoing full military training and indoctrination, I have seen photos of Palestinian children being forced to stand beside the Palestinians as they ambush Israeli soldiers (perhaps hoping the Israelis fire back and presto!, dead children to show the MSM). I have seen photos of Afghani children learning the art of the ambush and military tactics...
The Muslims do not object to using children either as soldiers or as items to bait the MSM...The Muslims certainly do not object to killing them...(see the number of school girls the Muslims kill)...
Posted by: exsgtbrown at May 9, 2007 10:09 AM
Sheik Shady said that while it was obligatory for all Muslims to defend an Islamic nation under attack, there were no Muslim countries living under Sharia law that were currently under attack.
from the article
So what is the justification for all the attacks, Sheik? Aren't you justifying attacking all non-Muslim nations for the simple reason that they ARE NOT ruled by Sharia law?
Posted by: PMK at May 9, 2007 10:19 AM
Re: "THE deputy spiritual leader of Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali has told his students that it is "obligatory" for all Muslims to engage in jihad if an Islamic country is under attack, even if it means killing the enemy's children".
I have a presentiment that a Jihad attack-hostage-crisis will happen at some grade school in Dar-al-Harb in the not terribly distant future. My 6th sense on this makes me very uneasy. (I had a similar uneasy feeling just prior to 911, and told friends I thought a terrible terrorist attack was about to occur in the US. Truthfully, I noted the 1993 attack on the WTC when I expressed my presentiment then.) I hope I'm wrong.
Posted by: Frank at May 9, 2007 10:34 AM
Sheik Shady, who is lecturing in Britain ...
Why did we let this piece of slime into our country? We've got umpteen thousand too many already. Not to mention 1.6 million too many Muslims.
Posted by: watling at May 9, 2007 10:40 AM
"If you have a child carrying a knife and coming to you, or a sword and coming to kill you in the middle of the battle"
Knives and swords?? how far back in the past are these people!! This Slim Shady sheik shouldn't be allowed in the country.
Posted by: Demvaril at May 9, 2007 10:44 AM
Ah, how I remember the battlefields of DisneyLand. The frenzied children running over ramparts at me with their Pirates of The Carribean swords and knives glistening in the California sun. Lucky for me they were all wearing their Pirate eye patches so their vision was off just enuff that I could escape. Allah curse the one-eyed children of Dar-al-Disney.
Posted by: TheOmegaMan at May 9, 2007 11:04 AM
"When I said children, I did not mean, of course, if you're going to get a five- or seven-year-old coming to attack you, you can stop him," he said yesterday."
Of course not. He threw that absurdity out there (knives and swords?!) to calm the dhimmis who aren't paying close attention.
He means the 15-16 yr.old kuffar boy you'd run into during a Cronulla style face-off.
at May 9, 2007 11:06 AM
Would it be okay if they just took the children as sex slaves or regular slaves, instead, as justifiable "prisoners of war" and "booty"?
Inquiring infidels want to know.
Posted by: profitsbeard at May 9, 2007 11:17 AM
Well, If a child came at me with a bomb strapped to his chest, it would be two slugs, center mass, no hesitation.
But, a knife or a sword??? C'mon, it's a kid! How hard can it be to disarm the little ankle-biter?
Cheers,
http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com
Posted by: Doctor Bulldog at May 9, 2007 11:23 AM
This is what passes for "thoughful discourse" with these psychotic freaks. If Australia were a confident society, it would vomit this piece of filth out.
Posted by: Infidel33 at May 9, 2007 11:52 AM
Another happy message brought to you by-the Religion of Peace. Delivering the peace of being in a grave more readily than any other religion.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at May 9, 2007 11:55 AM
I guess this means that it's okay for coalition forces in Iraq to kill the kids who are pelting them with rocks when they drive around in their armored vehicles...
Yes, if they are in reasonable fear of their lives or of serious bodily harm (which is unlikely, given that they're in *armored vehicles* ex hypothesi).
Posted by: Seamus at May 9, 2007 12:06 PM
Sheik Shady? You can't make this stuff up!
Posted by: MP at May 9, 2007 12:18 PM
"Youth Leader" kinda' like the Hitler-Jugend?
Posted by: MP at May 9, 2007 12:19 PM
Islam
"YUCK"
at May 9, 2007 12:47 PM
mohammed bears responsibility for the cold blooded murder of boys (non combatents) after the siege of Medina.
I think their definition of armed soldier on a battlefield extends as far as defenceless children in this case.
Posted by: Celsius at May 9, 2007 12:59 PM
I particularly like the part that indicates they only follow the advice of the Prophet (His pieces be upon them) when it indicates that they SHOULD kill children.
"If you have a child carrying a knife and coming to you, or a sword and coming to kill you in the middle of the battle, they (the fighters) are going to look at him and say 'the Prophet said not to touch him' - no, that's wrong."
I mean, of course, the Prophet (his pieces be upon them) would never suggest NOT killing children.
Posted by: TheStripe at May 9, 2007 1:01 PM
it is "obligatory" for all Muslims to engage in jihad if an Islamic country is under attack
Whew...glad at least some folks tell us that there are no Islamic countries. No Islamic country = nothing to jihad for.
Posted by: yadayada at May 9, 2007 1:04 PM
This misunderstander of Islam obviously hasn't read Karen Armstrong's books and articles. I bet a nice heart-to-heart and an autographed copy would straighten him out.
Posted by: Josephine at May 9, 2007 1:27 PM
The Australians are waking up much too slowly on this one. I am worried about them now.
at May 9, 2007 2:13 PM
A_Plague_on_Both_Houses wrote:
"Islam is a religion of Expedience - not peace. It's a world-class justification machine for anything you want or need."
This is irrefutable in reference to Islam as it is applied globally today.
Posted by: awake at May 9, 2007 2:22 PM
I am curious as to why it seems every week there is a new headline from some Australian Imam saying something that is way beyond the pale.
Is it that the Australia seems to attract the most stupid, outspoken, and least media savvy members of the Ummah?
-or-
Is it that all Imams are equally hate filled, but our media is under-reporting, uninterested, or, in fact, refusing to report the nonsense I am sure that the Clerics in our countries spew consistently and often?
I know what seems most plausible to me.
Shame on the media in our countries!!
at May 9, 2007 2:26 PM
Is Shady saying any more than what is already found in al-Misri's "Reliance of the Traveller", the classic Sharia manual?
"It is not permissable in Jihad to kill women or children unless they are
fighting against the Muslims. Nor is it permissable to kill animals, unless
they are being ridden into battle aginst the Muslims, or if killing them
will help defeat the enemy. It is permissable to kill old men, meaning
someone more than forty years of age, and monks."
Just what defines a boy child is ascertained by checking for pubic hair, as affirmed by the boy survivor of the Qurayzah tribe, wiped out by Mohammed and his followers.
If all your law is based around the seventh century I guess your behaviour and culture will be as well.
Posted by: MBR at May 9, 2007 2:59 PM
Well, of course, you have to understand the Really Devout Islamic Imam definition of "attack" which includes
1) Disapproval of anything even remotely connected to Islam (eg, beheading, stoning, child brides)
2) Approval of anything remotely connected to the West (eg, free speech, gender equality, rule of law)
Since children "belong" to individuals in whatever greater society that is "attacking Islam" (read "not bowing down in reverence/awe/submission" to the dictates of the idiot imams) then these kids are considered to be fair targets by their twisted, savage logic.
Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at May 9, 2007 3:09 PM
Muslims are not welcomed in any western country.
Posted by: The Resistance
AMEN!
Posted by: Allahfanculo at May 9, 2007 3:43 PM
Another happy message brought to you by-the Religion of Peace. Delivering the peace of being in a grave more readily than any other religion.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS
Sad but true! And if "children are our future", then where does that leave Islam? I can dream can't I?
Posted by: champ at May 9, 2007 4:15 PM
Islam is inconsistent with a democratic free society. It is a bumbling creeping mass that achieves success by being bad neighbors and driving out the natives. The ideology is in trouble though. Everything boils down to money.
The Islamic population feeds off the surpluses of successful societies; the ‘problem of overproduction’ that Orwell wrote about. But our problem of overproduction will shortly become a problem of overconsumption as our social safety nets break. When things go ‘pop’, political power will be concentrated in a powerful executive. Eagleburger was just on TV warning about how democracy is in trouble in France. France will be the first democratic country to go broke but it won’t be the last. Islam will be a glaring scapegoat.
My favorite Qu’ran line is: 6:106 Stay away from disbelievers. That will make things easier.
The powerful executive will put the Muslims on planes if they are lucky.
at May 9, 2007 5:32 PM
"It is not permissable in Jihad to kill women or children unless they are
fighting against the Muslims.
This is the most stupid statment yet from a muslim cleric, there are no Western country where children and women carry guns, knives attacking any muslim. as someone said earlier, it has been noted that musims children being used as pawns by their elders who are carrying guns and knives. islam is a disease that needs to be destroyed for the sake of humanity.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at May 9, 2007 5:51 PM
Yea right Mickey mouse is being (or was) used to teach "kids" how to kill without remorse,those apes and pigs and infedels,and then this joker teaches them it's okay to kill kids.
What other nation on this earth is teaching thier kids to hate and to kill?
Save for those in africa and those under islam.Even africa being influenced by islam.
It's rediculous.This guy shouldn't have spent another free night in that country.He should have been on the earliest plane to hellsville.
Why would they even bother to teach thier kids this garabage unless they planned to use thier own boys and girls to kill other boys and girls?
I tell you just when you think these losers hit an all time low they set a new record.
They prove every day ISLAM IS THE WORDS OF THE DEVIL.
What you gonna do about my insults to islam losers?
Trust me i want at you as much as you want at me.
Islam is filthy and disgusting everywhere it roams life wilts,lands fall into ruin and souls corrupted.
Pure undeniable filth.....all of them.Moderates have earned no merit to be out from the "them".Lay in it all of you losers.
Posted by: Dar al-harb at May 9, 2007 5:53 PM
Slightly off topic. I read an article today ("A question of Honour") in which the author (Barbara Kay) writes: "Honour is not morality...and herein lies the difficulty for Western societies trying to come to grips with the appropriate response to an Islamist enemy whose motives and methods resist morality-based analysis." I agree, you cannot discuss "morality" with psychopaths. It is a futile endeavor.
But, then, the author goes on to mention the arguments put forward by the author of the text, "Honour: a history" (by James Bowman) who maintains that "honour based" societies or cultures teach children certain rules of conduct and what's expected of them (and it's not necessarily based on a moral code). Kay writes: "Honour in men is always associated with physical courage; honour in women is bound up with sexual rectitude." Thus, one gets "honour" killings of un-chaste females in Islamic societies.
The problem with this argument, though, becomes apparent after reading the article posted above about Shady Sheik. The killing of children is neither honourable for men (hardly "courageous"), nor moral. So, this "society/culture" of Islam is neither "honourable" nor "moral." On both counts the culture fails!
Posted by: J.S. at May 9, 2007 7:23 PM
It is my opinion that the Imams speak to a very juville audience. limited in education, indoctrinated over many years, and frustrated at their own governments.
It is almost like the same the doctrines of communism, and facism , but based on a religious preface.
Children combatants are not a new occurrance, Vietnam, Korea, Cuba, Phillipines etc are all examples of a the adults using children as weapons both in defense of a cause and as the at angonists.
It is not right that this should happen, but the Imam is correct in saying that when faced with a 7 year old equipped with a AK47 , the choices are limited and as a soldier you are responsible for protecting your trooper.
Pete
Posted by: Peter at May 9, 2007 11:37 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)