| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Also, "al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country 'under the laws of the infidels.'" Which means that those in the West who are taking that religious law seriously will eventually either have to move, or to work to Islamize the country that they're living in. Which option do you think they will choose?
"Al-Qaida No. 2 says group still targeting the West," by Maggie Michael for Associated Press (thanks to all who sent this in):
CAIRO, Egypt - Osama bin Laden's chief deputy warns that al-Qaida still has plans to target Western countries involved in the Iraq war in a new audiotape released Tuesday to answer questions posed by followers.The voice in the lengthy file posted on an Islamic Web site, could not be immediately confirmed as al-Qaida No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahri's. But it sounded like past audiotapes from the terror leader.
The tape is billed as the second installment of al-Zawahri's answers to more than 900 questions submitted on extremist Internet sites by al-Qaida supporters, critics and journalists in December.
Asked by one follower if the terror group still had plans to attack Western countries that participated in the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and subsequent war, al-Zawahri said: "My answer is: Yes! We think that any country that has joined aggression on Muslims must be deterred."
Asked if there are any women in al-Qaida, the terror leader answered simply: "No."
In another answer, al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country "under the laws of the infidels."...
Posted by Robert at April 22, 2008 7:33 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Some asked if al-Qaida had a long-term strategy- Was that answered?
Posted by: Borg![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 22, 2008 7:49 AM
Through the backdoor of finance.
http://ifptest.law.harvard.edu/ifphtml/
Why is the conquest of our lands not being opposed by our own leaders and press?
In dar-al-islam the "infidels" do not get equal treatment, they are eliminated.
http://www.aina.org/news/20080408013637.htm
at April 22, 2008 8:15 AM
I sure hope the FBI is tracking AQ's source of funds.
Also, the job is made harder since so many Saudi "students" are being allowed into the country. It seems impossible to do background checks on all of them. Just a matter of time before something really bad happens, folks.
at April 22, 2008 8:21 AM
Pirates. Muslim pirates?
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jCWMavaJkDCjuhuxjy2FDOSyZEjg
at April 22, 2008 8:58 AM
"al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country"
Well in that case I wish they would obey Islamic law.
Posted by: Sounder at April 22, 2008 8:58 AM
"al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country"
Hmm... I wonder what the punishment is for breaking this law, and if we might be able to assist with the enforcement of the penalties for it.
Posted by: Abscedere at April 22, 2008 9:06 AM
"Pirates. Muslim pirates?"
-posted by Borg
Aye me hearties.
'tis a long and ignoble tradition within Islam:
"At the dawn of a new century, a newly elected United States president was forced to confront a grave threat to the nation — an escalating series of unprovoked attacks on Americans by Muslim terrorists. Worse still, these Islamic partisans operated under the protection and sponsorship of rogue Arab states ruled by ruthless and cunning dictators.
Sluggish in recognizing the full nature of the threat, America entered the war well after the enemy’s call to arms. Poorly planned and feebly executed, the American effort proceeded badly and at great expense — resulting in a hastily negotiated peace and an equally hasty declaration of victory.
As timely and familiar as these events may seem, they occurred more than two centuries ago. The president was Thomas Jefferson, and the terrorists were the Barbary pirates. Unfortunately, many of the easy lessons to be plucked from this experience have yet to be fully learned."
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/london200512160955.asp
Posted by: Mike_W
at April 22, 2008 9:20 AM
I have to agree with al-Zawahri - pack up your stuff and leave ASAP.
Posted by: HOV Dummy at April 22, 2008 10:05 AM
This is what England is letting in.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1073965.ece
Posted by: Borg at April 22, 2008 10:25 AM
Sun, sand, sex and stupidy
Holiday in Turkey.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=561156&in_page_id=1879
at April 22, 2008 10:33 AM
Mike_W
There is no connection made over the years because they constantly go by different names, even though they are all umma.
The Barbary pirates, The Saracens, The Moors, etc.
All with one goal.
Posted by: Borg at April 22, 2008 10:36 AM
al-Zawahri said: "My answer is: Yes! We think that any country that has joined aggression on Muslims must be deterred."
'Aggression on muslims', really means 'rejected Allah'. Any rejection of Allah is aggression against Allah. To take up arms against muslims just confirms that rejection. Allah created the world for muslims, all of it. Any resistance to these claims is aggression against Allah. It is Allah's desire that dar al-Islam, eat up dar al-harb, till harb is no more, any resistance to that is aggression against Allah and has to be dealt with harshly...
at April 22, 2008 10:37 AM
"al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country 'under the laws of the infidels.'"
-- from the article above
This is true. After the Reconquista, Muslims in Spain sent a delegation to Morocco to consult with scholars there on the subject of Muslims remaining under non-Muslim rule. They were told such an arrangement was impossible.
It is clear that most Muslims are not going to "integrate" into Infidel societies, nor can anyone expect them to (or, indeed, expect the children or grandchildren of those few Muslims who do seem to integrate to forever remain impervious to the demands, the duties, of Islam --a return to that old-time religion is always possible, as so many examples, from Chapel Hill to Portland, Oregon, testify), as long as they remain true to the texts and tenets and attitudes of Islam.
They are permitted to remain in Dar al-Harb if they are working, as so many of them are, for the furtherance of the cause of Islam and of Muslims, by constantly attempting to remove all the obstacles to the spread and dominance of Islam that Infidel legal and political institutions, and social arrangements, correctly are seen to constitute. And they conduct their operations not through terrorism, in the main, but through ways, and means, apparently too subtle -- though perfectly obvious -- for our political and media elites to to recognize, identify, and usefully label correctly.
There has not been a collective failure of this calamitous size since the 1930s. In this case, the results can end up being as disastrous. It is a matter of how the recognition, the grim and the fateful anagnorisis, finally comes, of how, and of when.
Posted by: Hugh at April 22, 2008 10:38 AM
interestinconundrum,
"Why is the conquest of our lands not being opposed by our own leaders and press?"
The answer is: GLOBALIZATION.
Posted by: PMK at April 22, 2008 10:51 AM
>>In another answer, al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country "under the laws of the infidels."...
WooHoo! So, maybe there is a light at the end of this dark Mohammedan immigration tunnel...Follow your wise and fearless leader, Mohammedans!
Posted by: darcy at April 22, 2008 11:14 AM
al-Zawahiri left a typical Muslogic loophile in his comment about warning Mohammedans not to live "permanently" in non-Muslim lands.
"permanently" is like "innocent" in their lexicon.
Mostly con.
Posted by: profitsbeard at April 22, 2008 11:47 AM
I""n another answer, al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country "under the laws of the infidels."..."
Good. Get the hell out of my country.
Posted by: Lori B. at April 22, 2008 12:00 PM
"Which means that those in the West who are taking that religious law seriously will eventually either have to move..."
Sounds like a plan.
Posted by: Eastview at April 22, 2008 12:01 PM
"In another answer, al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country "under the laws of the infidels."...
This is a good thing to have clarified. What do the different schools of jurisprudence have to say on the subject? More importantly, what do we have to say about it?
When we decide that it is against *our* laws for Islam to flourish amongst us, marching toward its grim destination and destruction of all that we hold dear, then we will have a common understanding. We will both understand perfectly that Muslims living permanently in the West is a proposition as unacceptable to them as it is to us.
Posted by: lycaste at April 22, 2008 12:15 PM
heh,
I especially like the part where he admonishes Iran for their "9/11" idiotic remarks that it was done by the Jews. Hey Troofers, listen up!! Here it is straight from the proverbial horses mouth (or ass).
Aside from that, yawn. Last time I read the whole 69 pages, felt like I'd swallowed a thesaurus afterwards. Not again.
Posted by: gymgal at April 22, 2008 12:24 PM
I'm in agreement with the scab headed smelly old Klingon Dr. Zed.
Muslims should not remain in Kaffirstan. Note to self: The next time he holds a town meeting, be sure to ask him his timeframe for withdrawal. The surge has failed -- it's time to bring the Muslims back home.
Posted by: jsla at April 22, 2008 12:40 PM
Ayman Al-Zawahiri,
Biblical Christians will continue to resist and counter Islamic agression everywhere. Also remember that Biblical Christians are worldwide,wide spread,and decentralized so any terrorist attack will not kill every Biblical Christian. Enough will survive to continue to spread Biblical Christianity.
at April 22, 2008 3:35 PM
Soooo, al Zawahri won't have a problem with us packing up his friends and sending them home. They need not be in trouble with Allah on our account. By all means, Issue a Fatwa demanding they leave Infidel Lands.
If we tried to get rid of them, the Press would crucify us. A Fatwa would just be a perfectly normal Cultural thing. Something we all could embrace-finally.
You have to hand it to the Good Doctor. For the First time in his life, he could actually wright a "Script" that would actually cure a Disease.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at April 22, 2008 10:11 PM
Excellent!
Posted by: breezy55 at April 23, 2008 1:15 AM
The article says...
al-Qaida still has plans to target Western countries involved in the Iraq war..
What is this idiot talking about, doesnt he know that we can read and see, that Muslims target all nations not just those involved in the Iraqi war..
I have hard them say that they will bomb America and Britain for many years now, and they still havent, I think it is just scare tactics.. they dont have the knowledge or the brains to do so...
at April 23, 2008 5:13 AM
Gaye, don't be too sure about that. Sept. 11/01 showed us they are able. Remember back in 1998 when Bin laden declared war on the USA?? We all said, yah, you and who's army? and look what happened.
Posted by: gymgal at April 23, 2008 12:06 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)