| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Tomorrow at the National Press Club there will be a historic event: the highest religious authority for Muslims in America, "in the spirit of this Season of Thanksgiving," will present a fatwa denouncing terrorism to a leading Roman Catholic prelate and other religious leaders, who will reciprocate with their own statement praising diversity!
"Historic Display of Unity: Fiqh Council of North America to present Fatwa denouncing terrorists to Cardinal McCarrick and other religious leaders," from the Bridges to Common Ground website (thanks to Christine at CVF):
WHEN Date: November 30, 2007 Doors Open: 12:00 pm Lunch Served: 12:30 pm Event Begins: 1:00 pmWHERE
The National Press Club, Ballroom
529 14th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20045A remarkable demonstration of the unity of the American people will occur when a Fatwa denouncing terrorists and their violence, issued by the Fiqh Council of North America, Islam's highest religious authority, will be presented to Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, Very Rev. Samuel Lloyd III and other leaders of our nation's religious groups.
The Fatwa states that a believing Muslim cannot condone violence against innocent people, cannot associate with people who commit or promote acts of violence, and, most importantly, must report to the proper civil authorities those that might harm Americans.
It further states that targeting civilians' life and property through suicide bombings or any other method of attack is prohibited in Islam -haram- and those who commit these barbaric acts are criminals, not "martyrs" and that there is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism.
In response to the Fatwa, the Christian and Jewish leaders will present a Thanksgiving Season Proclamation welcoming the action and pledging to work together to make America inhospitable to terrorists.
Here's the fatwa, from the link above:
The following Fatwa was issued by the Fiqh Council of North America, Islam’s highest religious authority in North America.In the spirit of this Season of Thanksgiving, a uniquely American holiday, the Fiqh Council of North America states its unequivocal and unqualified condemnation of the destruction and violence committed against innocent men and women.
This condemnation of violence is deeply rooted in true Islamic values based on the Qur’anic instructions which consider the unjust killing of a single person equivalent to the killing of al humanity (Qur’an 5:32). There is no justification in Islam for extremism or terrorism.
Targeting civilians’ life and property through suicide bombings or any other method of attack is prohibited in Islam ― haram ― and those who commit these barbaric acts are criminals, not “martyrs.”
In giving thanks for America and for American people and in the light of the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah, we, the Fiqh Council of North America, clearly, without hesitation, strongly issue this Fatwa:
1. All acts of terrorism are forbidden in Islam.
1. It is forbidden for a Muslim to cooperate or associate with any individual or group that is involved in any act of terrorism or violence.
1. It is the duty of Muslims to report to enforcement authorities any threat which is designed to place a human being in harm’s way, bringing them before a competent court of law and in accordance with due process.
We pray for the defeat of extremism, terrorism and injustice. We pray for the safety and security of our country United States and its people. We pray for the safety and security of all inhabitants of this globe. We pray that interfaith harmony and cooperation prevail both in United States and every where in the world.
On behalf of the Fiqh Council of North America.
"In the spirit of this Season of Thanksgiving" the Fiqh Council at least could have served up something fresh. Instead, all they're going to give McCarrick and Lloyd tomorrow will be leftovers. This fatwa is almost identical to the one they issued in July 2005. That one had three points:
1. All acts of terrorism targeting civilians are haram (forbidden) in Islam.2. It is haram for a Muslim to cooperate with any individual or group that is involved in any act of terrorism or violence.
3. It is the civic and religious duty of Muslims to cooperate with law enforcement authorities to protect the lives of all civilians.
This one also has three points, although in the two intervening years the children of the inventors of Arabic numerals seem to have forgotten how to use them:
1. All acts of terrorism are forbidden in Islam.1. It is forbidden for a Muslim to cooperate or associate with any individual or group that is involved in any act of terrorism or violence.
1. It is the duty of Muslims to report to enforcement authorities any threat which is designed to place a human being in harm’s way, bringing them before a competent court of law and in accordance with due process.
Two years have passed, and many people, including I myself, have pointed out the weaknesses of this fatwa. Yet now it is being reissued with slight revisions, but without any attempt to address the concerns that have been raised. The Fiqh Council "states its unequivocal and unqualified condemnation of the destruction and violence committed against innocent men and women." Is this fatwa designed to deter Muslims from imbibing the jihad ideology and joining jihad groups? If so, it needs to be much more specific and pointed. It condemns violence against "innocent men and women," but jihadists contend that no non-Muslim is innocent. So a jihadist who reads this fatwa could agree with it entirely and continue to carry out violent attacks against those he considers to be kuffar harbi -- infidels at war with Islam, and not innocents at all. If the Fiqh Council really wants to do something to stop this, it should define what it means by "innocent men and women." But this has been pointed out for two years, and they haven't done it. Why not?
The same problem runs through the document. Qur'an 5:32 is dragged out again, although the statement does specify that it only forbids "unjust" killing, and it is of course silent about 5:33, which mandates crucifixion or amputation for those who make war against Allah and his messenger Muhammad. Targeting "civilians" is condemned, again without defining what constitutes a civilian, or refuting the jihadist contention that there is no concept of "civilian" in Islamic law. Again, why not?
Note also the modification of the third point, from Muslims must "cooperate with law enforcement authorities to protect the lives of all civilians" to Muslims must "report to enforcement authorities any threat which is designed to place a human being in harm’s way, bringing them before a competent court of law and in accordance with due process." Court of law and due process -- in other words, we reserve the right to protest the treatment of people like Jose Padilla and others held at Guantanamo, etc.
Finally, "we pray for the defeat of extremism, terrorism and injustice" -- all again undefined. So is this fatwa really intended to defeat Islamic jihad? If so, why all the vagueness and refusal to confront jihadism on its own terms?
Posted by Robert at November 29, 2007 6:55 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
So where's the video of the now mouldering Arafat screaming "jihad, jihad, jihad!" on PalTV? I know that MEMRI and Pierre Rehov, and Honest Reporting and Second Draft and of course Jihad/Dhimmi Watch have done yeoman's work in alerting us to these facts, but I wish like hell that there was a network devoted soley to the airing of the Friday sermons with subtitles, to be shown on cable television.
I realize that is a futile fantasy, but still, a girl can dream, can't she?
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 29, 2007 9:00 AM
Again, the word innocent....who is innocent?
No unbeliever is innocent.
at November 29, 2007 9:03 AM
I see we have a generous loading of taqiya served along with the turkey leftovers.
Posted by: Razdan at November 29, 2007 9:14 AM
"we pray for the defeat of extremism, terrorism and injustice"
Islamic Terms of Reference:
1. Extremism -- Active resistance of any kind to the unfettered spread of Islam.
1. Terrorism -- Organized violence or intimidation conducted by the U.S. Army, Marine Corps, U.S. Air Force, the British armed forces, or the IDF, unless it favors Muslims.
1. Injustice -- When Muslims are forced to work for a living under infidel laws and regulations and/or under infidel supervision, or when Muslims are routinely or inadvertently exposed to non-Muslim cultural influences and practices.
Posted by: Stendec at November 29, 2007 9:25 AM
"the Fiqh Council of North America states its unequivocal and unqualified condemnation of the destruction and violence committed against innocent men and women."
The shortcoming by the lack of a concrete definition of who is innocent is noticable and well-documented.
What strikes me, as was the last letter sent out to Christians by the 138 Islamic scholars is that they always condemn violence under certain parameters, alluding that violence is indeed warranted sanctioned under certain circumstances.
That is the problem. All we hear is how Islam is a religion of peace, yet as Robert has thoroughly pointed out, the Qur'an is really just "the book of war", with tons of protocols for deceit and warfare.
at November 29, 2007 9:26 AM
It's a splendid publicity stunt, and every bit as meaningful as the Presidential pardon of a turkey, each Thanksgiving.
Posted by: Abscedere at November 29, 2007 9:27 AM
With a sigh of great relief I guess this means that we can all put our pitch forks & torches down and go home now. Right?
Posted by: descendantofacrusader at November 29, 2007 9:28 AM
"we pray for the defeat of extremism, terrorism and injustice"
Those are general terms. Let's get specific, now, shall we? ISLAMIC "extremism, terrorism and injustice." There. That's correct now.
Posted by: darcy at November 29, 2007 9:28 AM
For some reason, I see Goob from "Meet the Robinsons" cackling:
"Crossies! No givesy backsies!"
Posted by: Lori B. at November 29, 2007 9:35 AM
This fatwah was conceived. . .
. . .in the light of the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah,
uh huh. Having spent far more time than I ever wanted over the last several years reading/examining some of those very same teachings - available at no cost to anyone who has the time to examine such material- online, I will pass on this taqqiya banquet.
As stated so often by Hugh Fitzgerald:
The Qur’anic text is available online, a click away, with several different translations set out synoptically. Much of the Hadith is too, and so is the Sira. More and more studies by the great Western students of Islam, from the period of genuinely free and uninhibited study, roughly 1860 to 1960, are being gathered into sourcebooks (such as Bostom’s The Legacy of Jihad) or republished (especially in accessibly cheap Indian editions). More and more people have uncovered what the Great of the Past had to say about Islam, writing as they did in a period when no punches had to be pulled, and one could speak or write one’s mind. What did that great religious reformer John Wesley write about Islam? And the most learned of nineteenth-century American statesmen, John Quincy Adams? What did that wise student of men and events, Alexis De Tocqueville, write about Islam, based on his wide knowledge, including his observations in Algeria? What did Gladstone have to say about the Turks, and about their role in Europe, and about the Bulgarian Wars? What did Winston Churchill, with his knowledge of history, say about Muslims and Islam?and
For the Sira, in addition to the Muslim version, see also the many biographies of Muhammad by Western scholars of Islam: Sir Wiliam Muir, Professors Arthur Jeffery, and Tor Andrae, and Maxine Rodinson. All are readily available.
So, as an alternate appetiser, may I suggest:
U Michigan's searchable online version of the Quran translated by Shakir.
USC's Muslim Students Association's website with multiple searchable translations of the Quran and hadiths.
For the main course:
Jihad Watch's own "Islam 101"
USC's Muslim Students Association's website with multiple searchable translations of the Quran and hadiths.
And for dessert - History of Jihad
Posted by: miira at November 29, 2007 9:39 AM
All stuffing, no bird.
Posted by: profitsbeard at November 29, 2007 9:44 AM
the children of the inventors of Arabic numerals
I have to wonder if even that phrase is true.
If you look at Arabic numbers they don't really look like the numbers that the Western world uses, except for the number one, which is pretty universal, and the number nine, even though our numbers are called Arabic numbers.
They claim credit for "inventing the zero" but it is the number five in their number scheme that is a ' 0 '. How can that represent a zero as we know it and also five? They use a large dot ' . ' for zero and I have to wonder if that was because it was added later and the ' O ' was already in common use for 5 so they couldn't change it.
How can these two 'number stories' keep getting passed on as truth?
I don't believe either one.
Posted by: Borg at November 29, 2007 9:52 AM
Another Humpty Dumpty fatwa from the taqiyya council.
The word innocent means just what they want it to mean, no more and no less, and that leaves out a lot of Infidels.
at November 29, 2007 10:04 AM
taqiya.
The fatwa isn't worth the paper it's written on.
Posted by: Ernest T Bass at November 29, 2007 10:21 AM
Is this coming from Sunni's or Shia? Does the opposite side have to comply, or can they shine it on, and continue jihad and terrorism? It looks like no one obeys it anyway, so this is just more 'magick theater for mad men only'. A little show for the folks, a little soft shoe will do, some razzle dazzle, and a lot of pazazz, makes for a great fatwa. Since they issue these routinely we should refer to them as 'Fiqhie Fatwas'. Sound good, last a long time, and do nothing...
Posted by: duh_swami at November 29, 2007 10:43 AM
The fatwa states what it means. Violence against "innocents" meaning "innocent Muslims" is denounced.
Violence against infidels, it's business as usual.
Posted by: sounder at November 29, 2007 11:26 AM
Well, here we go again, folks. Another Fatwa, another dismal day in paradise. As Robert so elegantly points out, once again there is this practice of obfuscation and Taqyyiah (sic) that does nothing to advance Islamic reformation and only serves to distract the West (read white people) from the realities of Islamic thought and practice. The Fiqh Councils use of Surah 5:32 only reinforces their belief that if they present any Surah in a context that relieves them of responsibility, they have achieved their goal of circumlocution. I answered a letter in my local paper from a Muslim doctor who used the out of context version of 5:32 to state that Muslims are not allowed to murder, I pointed out that the entire verse is directed to Jews and Christians ONLY, not Muslims. The letter was printed, I do not know if it had any effect. As pointed out by Robert, another section of the Fatwa did not address what "innocent" is nor what the definition of terrorism is. And this glaring omission should be called on, and a complete and full definition needs to be presented, otherwise the continuing blindness from the West will not be lifted. Those in power scare me, they cannot seem to muster the strength to pull their skulls out of their respective anal canals.
BTW, a little OT, due to my schooling from Robert, Hugh, Marisol, Greg and others I have taken it upon myself to produce and air a series of local cable TV shows titled "Islam Today", starting in 2 weeks. I will present, as best as I can what we really need to know about Islam. I hope I can shed a little light, as Robert. et al do here and give people the information they need to realise the danger we are in, and how to combat the growing threat. I will let you know how it goes, Wish me luck.
"Kuffirs of the world, Unite!"
"Islam, abusing women since 622AD"
at November 29, 2007 11:40 AM
Was this fatwa also produced in Arabic? If not, then it is a worthless piece of propaganda designed to lull dhimwitted dhimmis into a false sense of security.
"It's OK people, we can stop screening passengers; the Fiqh Council of North America issued a fatwa."
Posted by: Pelayo at November 29, 2007 12:00 PM
Yes, indeed, Jake - GOOD LUCK! And good luck to the rest of us 'innocents/infidels'. These muslims only consider muslims as innocent, everyone else, non-muslims/infidels, are to be killed and/or enslaved. Who is this 'islams highest autority' kidding? As said earlier nothing is changed by their statement. It's business as usual. It only shows they will never change their thinking of killing/enslaving non-muslims.
at November 29, 2007 12:01 PM
"This condemnation of violence is deeply rooted in true Islamic values based on the Qur’anic instructions which consider the unjust killing of a single person equivalent to the killing of al humanity"
The great 19th century statesman, Metternich, said that "in Austria, humanity begins at the rank of Baron."
In the Islamic mentality, humanity begins at the rank of Muslim. To kill a Muslim is to kill all humanity.
If the Fatwa means all persons, of all faiths, when talking about humanity, why not say so?
Posted by: rational
at November 29, 2007 12:06 PM
Unlearned infidels have trouble understanding this fatwaa because it was taken "out of context". It really means "we will play along with your man made laws for now, but later... only Allah can rule you infidels, or else.
Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at November 29, 2007 12:45 PM
BTW, a little OT, due to my schooling from Robert, Hugh, Marisol, Greg and others I have taken it upon myself to produce and air a series of local cable TV shows titled "Islam Today", starting in 2 weeks. I will present, as best as I can what we really need to know about Islam. I hope I can shed a little light, as Robert. et al do here and give people the information they need to realise the danger we are in, and how to combat the growing threat. I will let you know how it goes, Wish me luck. "Kuffirs of the world, Unite!" "Islam, abusing women since 622AD" - Posted by: OregonJake
Good luck! Kindly post video of this effort on YouTube so global kuffar can make it go viral on www.
at November 29, 2007 12:51 PM
Only some more deceit.
"We are Americans of Christian and Jewish heritage who have joined together with Muslim Americans in celebration and thanksgiving for the United States of America."
http://www.bridgestocommonground.org/rtp.html
"We're all Americans joined together . . . " If you believe it, you're as gullible as the "Christian and Jewish religious leaders" who still regard Islam as "just another religion."
What they are doing is getting us to accept Islam--and its Moslems--as part of the American fabric.
Should we be cynical? Yes.
Posted by: unicorns62000
at November 29, 2007 12:57 PM
As long as there are no political leaders who take these guys to the cleaners nothing will change. Nothing on the horizon looks like anything is going to change anytime soon. Even Tancredo and Giuliani are not quite there yet. Romney only mentioned the word 'jihad' once and was ridiculed.
Perhaps radio hosts like Michael Savage can get the message out, but the question is how long can he last when the ACLU in tandem with CAIR are threatening their advertisers?
In the end it all boils down to the almighty dollar, and with every drop of oil we buy from Sowdi Arabia we are actually financing the global jihad against ourselves. Add to this the jiziyah and you shudder about our own stupidity.
'Global warming' in my considered opinion is the greatest scam ever invented. ‘Climate Change’ is nothing but the transfer of wealth from developed countries to failed nations under the most corrupt kleptocracy the world has ever known: The UN
UN: Rich owe Poor Countries $86 Billion for Global Warming….
http://sheikyermami.com/2007/11/28/krudd-mista-warmonista/
at November 29, 2007 12:57 PM
"....the Qur’anic instructions which consider the unjust killing of a single person equivalent to the killing of al humanity...."
UNJUST being the key word here. "Unjust" killing is condemned, except in the terrorists mind they ARE justified because we are non believers or for some other JUSTIFIABLE reason.
This fatwa is code for "go get em boys"....thanks for generating more of the same. Thank you note is in the mail....
Posted by: champ at November 29, 2007 1:09 PM
mirra, thank you for the suggestion. I am not much of 'puter geek (no offense to real 'puter geeks) but my fiancee's son knows how to do all that, I will have him help me with it. I will post to let everyone know when it is available.
"Kuffirs of the world, Unite!"
"Islam, abusing women since 622AD"
at November 29, 2007 1:31 PM
the Fiqh Council of North America, Islam's highest religious authority
Highest authority my eye.
The only people the FCNA represents is themselves and the Ikhwan al-Muslimun. Who made them the "highest authority"?
Why not the AIFD or the the ISC , or some of the folks listed here ?
at November 29, 2007 1:41 PM
Somebody get the water-balloons ready.
Posted by: TheOmegaMan at November 29, 2007 1:43 PM
I thought you might find this dialogue interesting.
Hamas seems to be a stumbling block to to "Muslim Bridges" www.muslimbridges.org.
I read "Suicide Bombing" in their web site..
section called " Addressing Islamophobia"
I asked them if they were in agreement with Hamas...as to killing all the population of Israel,
After going around in circles, they refused to answer my question and
Their final reply to me was ...
"Peace"
Here is their article;
"Suicide Bombing"
http://www.muslimbridges.org/content/view/442/
Suicide is forbidden in Islam so the concept of "suicide bombing" is fundamentally unacceptable in Islam.
The intention behind suicide is to escape the problems of this life. Life has become so burdensome for them, they decide to end their lives. Those who strap bombs around themselves in order to kill as many of the enemy soldiers as possible are not tired of life. This is a form of military strategy. The Hamas Movement resorts to this method of attack because they do not have the military strength to confront the enemy on the battlefield.
In terms of civilian deaths in Israel, those involved in the struggle there argue that the whole population undergoes military training and most carry arms, particularly the settlers in the occupied territories. Consequently, the population at large are not considered civilians, but military reserves. They also argue that their military operations are not directed at civilians.
Targeting innocent civilians, whether by military operations, "intentional" or "collateral damage" such as combat airplanes dropping bombs in residential areas, suicide bombing, or any other form of war resulting in the killing of innocent civilians, is absolutely prohibited under any circumstances.
After reading it , I wanted to be clear on how they felt about this so called
"Military strategy" of Hamas.
1 > > On 3/19/07, bob > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is an enquiry e-mail via http://www.muslimbridges.org from:
> > > > bob
> > > >
> > > > The whole population undergoes military training.
> > > > That makes all "military reserves"..so suicide bombing is a form of
> > > > military strategy .thus ok. to blow up babies? children? The whole
> > > > population?
> > > >
> > > > Is this a fatwa against terrorism....or is it condoning it?
> > > > Please be clear..
> > > > Do you condemn Hamas for this "Military strategy" ? as they claim it
> > > > to be.
2 > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > *From:* Muslim Bridges
> > > *To:*
> > > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 20, 2007 1:47 PM
> > > *Subject:* Re: Muslim Bridges: fatwa against terrorism....
> > >
> > >
> > > "Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful
> > > preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for
> > > thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive
> > > guidance." -Holy Quran, Surah 16:125
> > >
> > > Assalamu alikum (Peace be upon you) Br. Bob,
> > >
> > > Thank you very much for taking the time and visiting Muslim
> > > Bridges. We appreciate your message.
> > >
> > > Regarding the topic of "suicide bombing", there is clear reference in
> > > the last paragraph of the articles, as to the position of Islam on this
> > > subject. Here is another short article titled "Notes on Islamic Jihad",
> > > that you may find very interesting : http://www.muslimbridges.org/content/view/548/
> > >
> > >
> > > Muslim Bridges is not a political site. Our goal is to build bridges
> > > of understanding. President Carter has recently published a book
> > > "Palestine, Peace not Apartheid", offering a sensible solution that could
> > > bring peace to the entire M.East, and positively impact the entire
> > > world. Here is a link for the book review, and a free book offer :
> > > http://www.muslimbridges.org/content/view/42/35/
> > >
> > > Here is one more article titled "Waiting for Jesus", reflecting our
> > > common hopes for peace and prosperity, love of God, and mutual respect of
> > > Jesus (Peace be upon him):
> > > http://www.muslimbridges.org/content/view/433/81/
> > >
> > > Thank you again. We hope to hear from you soon.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Your friends at Muslim Bridges
> > > www.MuslimBridges.org
> > >
>
3 > On 3/20/07, bob wrote:
> > >
> > > Muslim Bridges does not have to be a political site to answer my
> > > question .
> > >
> > > I am asking it because;
> > >
> > > When reading the topic "suicide bombings" the main subject was Hamas's
> > > "Military strategy".
> > >
> > > If this is a fatwa against terrorism, and you used Hamas as an
> > > example, why would you not state if you agree or disagree with them.?
> > >
> > > Do you condemn Hamas for this "Military strategy" ? as they claim it
> > > to be.
> > >
> > ----- Original Message -----
4> *From:* Muslim Bridges
> > *To:* bob
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 20, 2007 2:41 PM
> > *Subject:* Re: Muslim Bridges: fatwa against terrorism....
> >
> >
> > *Targeting innocent civilians, whether by military operations,
> > "intentional" or "collateral damage" such as combat airplanes dropping bombs
> > in residential areas, suicide bombing, or any other form of war resulting in
> > the killing of innocent civilians, is absolutely prohibited under any
> > circumstances. *
> >
> > Unlike bias media - always taking the one side, this statement applies
> > to all.
> > Best regards,
> > Your friends at Muslim Bridges
> > www.MuslimBridges.org
> >
> >>
>
5 On 3/20/07, bob scha
> > I understand that..""targeting *innocent civilians* is prohibited
> > under any circumstances"..In Islam.....
> >
> > Please understand what ..I am asking ......
> >
> > ..The "military strategy" of Hamas.. is as follows... The military
> > reserves are *"the whole population of Israel",*
> > *
> >
> > The population of Israel at large are not considered civilian,
> > *So therefore ...to strap a bomb around oneself and to
> >
> > *kill this population , *is a justified military strategy* of war *because
> > Hamas does not have the military strenght to confront the enemy on the
> > battlefield, and
> >
> > Israel has no civilians.
> >
> > *ok.. I got that ...But please tell me..*
> >
> > Does Hamas have approval in Islam, to use this form of "Military
> > Strategy?.
> >
> > Do you agree, with Hamas that it is a justified act, during war time ,
> > to strap a bomb around oneself, and blow up, killing *non civilians ,
> > military reserves,*
> >
> > who, in this case are the whole of the population of Israel...?.??.
> >
> > Your article " Suicide Bombings" explains the difference between Suicide
> > and Mililary Strategy, .
> >
> > I never knew the difference, or that there was a difference..
> >
> > thanks for the explanation.... but you have to understand...
> >
> > This following statement means *NOTHING....*
> >
> > Targeting innocent civilians, whether by military operations,
> > "intentional" or "collateral damage" such as combat airplanes dropping bombs
> > in residential areas, suicide bombing, or any other form of war resulting in
> > the killing of innocent civilians, is absolutely prohibited under any
> > circumstances.
> >
> > Is just alot of *blah blah blah ...*if you don't define who are
> > *" innocent civilians"....*get what i'm saying?*
> >
> > so......
> >
> > Please ...
> >
> > What do
> > you say ...
> >
> > The population of Israel...
> >
> > Are they " innocent civilians"...or
> >
> > Are they "
> > military reserves" ..*
> >
> > you said ......."Unlike bias media - always taking the one side, this
> > statement applies to all."
> >
> > applies to all Do you mean All=-*innocent civilians*-.
> ---- Original Message -----
>
6 *From:* Muslim Bridges
> *To:* bob
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 20, 2007 10:16 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Muslim Bridges: fatwa against terrorism....
>
>
> Is there any reason you are only interested in the innocent civilians in
> Israel and not the innocent civilians of Palestine. Aren't both the same
> and both deserve the same ruling, the same human rights, and the right to
> live in dignity? Do you not find Jimmy Carter's views and proposals to be
> valid and positive for the sake of peace for all the people in the M.East?
>
> The challenge we often see Br. Bob is the media only speaks of the victims
> in Israel. This is wrong. There are innocent victims on both sides. Here
> is a video clip that you may find interesting (the second segment of the
> clip): http://www.muslimbridges.org/content/view/604/
>
> We suggested a number of links in our earlier messages to give you a>
7 On 3/20/07, wrote:
>
> WoW...You still have not answered me?
>
> Please understand..
>
> I never knew Hamas believed the population of Israel was military,
>
> and not civilian, and that is what makes the
> difference between suicide bombers
>
> and the" Mililary Strategys of Hamas".
>
> Why did you ask me .... "Is there any reason you are only interested in
> the innocent civilians in
> Israel and not the innocent civilians of Palestine." ?
>
> I never said .. I do not care about the innocent civilians of Palestine.
>
> That question has nothing to do with my questions....
>
> Israel has not said; the innocent civilians of Palestine are non
> civilians , they are military reserves.
>
> Hamas did make that claim..You used it in your article " Suicide Bombings"
> to explain the
>
> difference between suicide and the mililary strategy of Hamas. .
>
> That is why I would like to know
>
> Is this an accepted "Military Strategy" in Islam? and..
>
> Do you agree with it?
>
> The questions are very clear, and I believe worthy of answers.
>
> Will you answer them for me please.?
>
> Thankyou,
8 from ;Muslim Bridges
date; wed march 21,2007 12:48 pm
to; bob
Subject:* Re: Muslim Bridges: fatwa against terrorism....
We regret, this discussion is going beyond the type of dialogue and healthy
exchange desired.
Here are 2 links that may help you put things into prospective (You stated:
Israel has not said; the innocent civilians of Palestine are non civilians
, they are military reserves.)
http://www.muslimbridges.org/content/view/135/
http://www.muslimbridges.org/content/view/136/
We are encouraged not to exchange in arguments and simply say "Peace"
Therefore, as our final reply. Peace.
9----- Original Message -----
at November 29, 2007 5:51 PM
For the record
1John 2:22
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?
He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
—Qur’an 112:1-4
Say: ‘GOD is One, the Eternal God.
He begot none, nor was He begotten. None is equal to Him.’
at November 29, 2007 6:07 PM
In the "About Us" statement on the Bridges to Common Ground Web site, one finds this:
"People of good will on both sides of the Divide need to come together on 'common ground' found in the Qur'an and the original Aramaic Injil."
This is an echo of what the Christian academics, seminarians and activists who authored the obsequious response to the Muslim letter "A Common Word Between Us and You" said in praising "the deep insight and courage with which they have identified the common ground between the Muslim and Christian religious communities." But in identifying said "common ground," the Muslim letter's authors cited the Qur'anic verse 3:64, in which Allah issues this command to his prophet:
"Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to a common word between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him)."
It will be seen that the "common word" Christians are exhorted to come to is in fact the Muslim word: that there is no God but God, and that the divinity of Jesus, his status as God's only begotten son, and the existence of the Holy Trinity are all to be refuted. This is simply another form of da'wa, the call to Islam that is the first course of action laid out by Muhammad for dealing with "enemies who are polytheists," as related in the hadith of Sahih Muslim:
"Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war ... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action ... 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."
The verbatim citation of this verse by Muhammad in his letter to the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, demanding his conversion -- or else -- confirms this:
"In the name of Allah the Beneficent, the Merciful (This letter is) from Muhammad the slave of Allah and His Apostle to Heraclius the ruler of Byzantine. Peace be upon him, who follows the right path. Furthermore I invite you to Islam, and if you become a Muslim you will be safe, and Allah will double your reward, and if you reject this invitation of Islam you will be committing a sin by misguiding your Arisiyin (peasants). (And I recite to you Allah's Statement:)
'O people of the scripture! Come to a word common to you and us that we worship none but Allah and that we associate nothing in worship with Him, and that none of us shall take others as Lords beside Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are Muslims (those who have surrendered to Allah).' (3:64)."
The store Muslims set by this tale and letter may be seen in the fact that they are found in no fewer than three hadiths of Sahih Bukhari -- this one, this one, and this one -- and this one and this one of Sahih Muslim as well. And in the aftermath of Muhammad's death, the Muslims followed his prescription to the letter: having failed to receive either Heraclius' conversion or the jizya protection money, they launched a jihad campaign of conquest and slaughter against him that would cost his empire the territories of Egypt, Palestine, and Syria by the time of his death in 641.
In this historical context, the choice of verse 3:64 by the Muslim scholars for a supposedly peaceful overture is gravely disquieting. It is not to be supposed that these men, so steeped in the traditions and history of their creed, are unaware of the way in which Muhammad used it when addressing Christian leaders in his own day -- or the sanguinary course his followers took when the response was not to their liking. It is far more likely that these scholars are following the plan of their prophet himself -- who also declared, according to yet another hadith of Sahih Muslim, that
"I have been commanded to fight against people, till they testify to the fact that there is no god but Allah, and believe in me (that) I am the messenger (from the Lord) and in all that I have brought."
While summoning Christians to a non-existent "common ground," the Muslim scholars are in fact threatening them with a battle ground -- all in strict accordance with the scripture, history and traditions of their totalitarian creed. The Christian "leaders" who so eagerly accede to such blandishments are doing both their faith and the followers a profound and historical disservice.
Posted by: Papa Whiskey at November 29, 2007 7:10 PM
Quote from the so called fatwa above:
"This condemnation of violence is deeply rooted in true Islamic values based on the Qur’anic instructions which consider the unjust killing of a single person equivalent to the killing of al humanity (Qur’an 5:32)."
So now it's "al humanity "?
I'm sure this is a typo, but this is an excellent freudian slip.
As pointed out in Robert's analysis, to many Muslims "innocents" can only refer to Muslims themselves, and certainly cannot include all we hideous fighters of Islam (read: resisters of Islam) that inhabit the vile world of disbelievers and unbelievers of the West.
Muslims betray their true thinking quite often -- it usually takes the form of projecting onto us the oppression and abuse they'd gleefully practice on us if they, and not we "infidels" were the majority in the West.
Posted by: jsla at November 29, 2007 9:37 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.)