This is a good first step, but we need laws to protect infidels. All persons must be made to renounce the pledge of the Second Aqaba in which the muslims promise to shed the blood of infidels until islam is established as the world religion. We demand that any male professing islam unconditionally abrogate the pledge. In legislation designed to protect infidels we further demand the enactment of a customary norm of international law that requires muslims to unconditionally renounce the pledge of 622.

Mr. Spencer points out in his book that in 622 all mohammedean followers at the Second Aqaba were thereafter required to promise to shed the blood of infidels until Mohammed's religion dominates all others.

Any muslim who fails to renounce the second Aqaba pledge is in fact a conspirator to infidel murder and should be tried as such and is a war criminal. The difficult question in establishing what world law should be is whether being a muslim per se creates a rebuttable presumption that the adherent is a second aqaba pledgor and should be subject to the requirement to affirmatively renouce the jihad.

Posted by: David England at September 6, 2008 8:49 AM

Hmmm - maybe I missed something - rather than taking stuff like that down, wouldn't it better be projected on the most prominant building on campus every night?

Posted by: BunrattyBill at September 6, 2008 9:06 AM

There are many Hadith and even verses in the Quran that are as offensive or more so than the Hadith above. My wet dream is that the entire religion will someday be outlawed...but I'm not holding my breath.

Posted by: Cornelius at September 6, 2008 9:46 AM

There are many Hadith and even verses in the Quran that are as offensive or more so than the Hadith above.

really. i think that the whole koran ought to be blacklisted.

Posted by: theygottago at September 6, 2008 10:14 AM

"We are outraged at the censorship of a complete religious and classic text without consulting us or any religious authority first," the group said in the statement.

Pot calls kettle black!

Moslems complaining about censorship! That's rich.

Posted by: Always On Watch at September 6, 2008 10:39 AM

"The point here is that for the first time that I know of, a university administrator has gone on record calling words of the prophet of Islam "despicable."

Great. But for the provost to take these ahadith off amounts to censorship, and it doesn't make the doctrine go away. It prevents those who want to learn about how awful and vile this belief-system is from accessing those texts.

It is great to bring it out into the open and to raise awareness in the general public.

But censorship is not only unsatisfactory, its not in our interest.

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at September 6, 2008 10:41 AM

I've send it before and I'll say it again - read the Qur'an.

If American academics would just go this simple thing - half the battle would be over. What's even more shocking - 80% of Muslims worldwide have not read the Qur'an.

Read the Qur'an.

Posted by: tanstaafl at September 6, 2008 10:53 AM

How about simply taking the word of those folks that object to the removal from the university's web site? If the works are incomplete, as they themselves say, then let the organization itself and their right to be formally recognized as an official campus group hinge upon the acceptability of the redacted phrases.

A pledge from an individual is problematic, just as are loyalty oaths. Just ban, or deny public funding or recognition, to the group that espouses the principals of killing others for holding a different belief. I use the term "recognition" in the same way as in the labor context of employer recognition of a "labor organization" as the exclusive bargaining agent for laborers with the employer; displacing individual negotiations between employee and employer. The analogy is useful here in that a labor organization (and employer entities too) have to agree to a wide range of restrictions such as those found in the National Labor Relations Act. As I survey both the mandatory and permissive terms of bargaining for any labor contract I cannot find any tolerance for an agreement, nor reference to the acceptability of members of one side, to kill the members of the other side, or even some third-party that is not even at the bargaining table. Recognition comes packaged with the implicit pledge to follow the rules of good faith bargaining, and certainly to not engage in violence. Suppose that a court where making a ruling on whether one side had bargained in "good faith" and one side kept publicizing (even if only indirectly) the acceptability of killing members of the other. Would the potential outcome of the ruling be in question. The strongest power a set of laborers has is to strike, as a group. By strike I do not mean to hit but to not show up for work and then to picket.

The campus could restrict recognition to groups that do not subscribe to violence, particularly against folks that merely hold different "beliefs" (even about the existence and nature of "God" or any so-called prophet). Affiliation with groups that do advocate for violence would itself be grounds for denial of recognition.

If the Muslim Students Association/Union (whatever name they currently use), the one's who object to the scalpel-like redactment of the violent passages on the college web site as it would paint an incomplete picture of the beliefs of their members, were instead denied "recognition" then the members could still picket on the periphery of the campus grounds all day long, so long as it is peaceful and otherwise conforms to the acceptable "time, place and manner" restrictions for the government body that has jurisdiction for the territory within which the campus is located.

The appropriate tactical rebuttal to the argument of the incompleteness, caused by redactment of violent passages, is to insist upon denial of recognition of the group itself. To refuse to recognize this reality is to admit tactical defeat, and to submit.

I am trying to picture an argument that it would be "unprecedented and unconscionable" to refuse to recognize a labor organization (as exclusive bargaining agent) or employer entity that insists upon the acceptability of randoms acts of violence by members, let alone violence based on belief. It is neither a mandatory term nor a permissible term, but instead is criminally chargeable advocacy and incitement to engage in acts of violence (regardless of the secondary matter of target selection). A belief that violence is an appropriate means of peaceful expression of disagreement over belief (a legal absurdity all by itself) cannot be squeezed into the framework of a free speech analysis. It is just advocacy of violence, by individuals, and by the group.

Deny recognition of the group, do not redact the violent terms for the group. I would suggest that the terms be reposted to the campus web site -- for all to see what the controversy is all about -- and then proceed to deny recognition of the group itself, whereupon the entirety of the redacted and unredacted portions of the group's material could be removed.

Another parallel to the labor context is useful here. Even where a labor organization represents a bargaining unit for negotiation purposes each individual member of the bargaining unit remains free, protected by the first amendment right to free association, to not be a member of the association. Any individual "Muslim" should not be viewed as automatically a member of the group that calls itself the Muslim Student Association (whatever). I have in mind the case of Communication Workers v. Beck, and the refusal of some employees to pay a portion of dues that were not attributable to allowable representation in labor negotiations.

It is the argument of the Muslim Student Association group itself (as far as I understand the facts) that every last Muslim, merely by reference to being Muslim, subscribes to the group's advocacy of violence. This apparent claim to represent all Muslims denies the protected individual right and freedom of association rights of individual Muslims to disagree with this particular violent group . . . the one that professes the authority to speak for all Muslims on campus. The objecting Muslims, those that oppose the advocacy of violence, can form their own group as they see fit, in competition with the Muslim Student Association (whatever), and independently seek recognition by the university. It is their protected free association right; vis-a-vis the Muslim Student Association (whatever). Vindicate their individual right . . . by denying recognition to the group, any group, that advocates violence. Advocacy of violence is not recognized as a protected free speech right.

The notion that the redactment is a "good first step" is itself incomplete, and a defeat. Take the group at their word and respond accordingly. They have the freedom to pick their own message, and it is one that advocates violence.

Posted by: ronled at September 6, 2008 12:15 PM

uh, well this is a start to recognize what islam is all about, BUT!!! that doesn't remove them from muslim's ahaditha overall!! They are technically still there. Just making sure that we infidels now don't see them just make us more ignorant overall.

Are they nuts!

Posted by: R_not at September 6, 2008 12:16 PM

Why would you, or they, want to censor these ahadith? I don't get it.

The USC site used to be one to which I would refer people so that they could witness for themselves what true Islamic beliefs are. Now, I must question whether the site has taken down the more dramatic/reprehensible ahadith. In other words, whether they have white-washed the true barbarism of certain Islamic beliefs.

How could this possibly be a good thing?

Why on Earth would Jihad Watch want these ahadith removed from this(or any) website?

Personally, I'd like to see all of the most extreme hadith displayed nightly on every national and local news broadcast.

Is there something I'm missing? Why would anyone be happy that the USC site will now PRETEND that Islamic teachings are not as extreme and violent as they actually are?

Posted by: Eyas at September 6, 2008 12:22 PM

I think we are happy not that they were removed, but that they were called despicable. Any further fuss that is made about the issue will draw more attention to it, I mean people who had never even known that those passages existed have probably looked into reading them now to see just what all of the fuss is about. Who knows, it might inspire more people to look further into the matter.

Posted by: BUG at September 6, 2008 2:34 PM

. A taqiyya artist would have to have a deeply naive and stupid audience
umm could ucla at Berkly ca qualify?

Posted by: ISLAMSNOTFORME at September 6, 2008 4:59 PM

My True Feelings - A Plea

A tactical win
but a strategic loss,
that can still be turned
to our advantage

I pray don't send the words away,
they are weapons we use to our advantage,
they are the pith, the truth of islam
its dna - seeds of mohammed and allah.
We must shine a light
on the darkness of islam,
not banish it from sight,
show the world its beliefs
so all can examine its right to be
at the table with decent humanity.

We must know our enemy
says Sung Tzu in the Art of War.
And each belief of islam
lives in the pages of the koran,
hadiths and sira.
If we know this trilogy,
we know our enemy.
If we know our enemy,
and, know ourselves,
we will win.

Posted by: the poetess at September 6, 2008 8:20 PM

Below is the letter I sent to Indiana University President McRobbie and IU-Bloomington Provost Hanson last Monday. No response:

Dear Drs. McRobbie and Hanson,

I am writing to update you on the letter I wrote you last Monday, August 25th. As it turns out, not only is the MSA/MSU about to be declared a terror organization as of the conclusion of the Holy Land Foundation retrial this month, but it has already been declared a terrorist organization by the US Army.

I have made you aware of the simple, ridiculously obvious fact that the MSU/MSA is a terror organization, whose express purpose is:

"a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions" (http://www1.nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/nefaikhwan1007.pdf),

And whose primary function, like all of the Muslim Brotherhood's front groups, from the early 1990s forward, has been to support, materially and politically, the Hamas movement in the Palestinian territories, as instructed by the office of the general guide of the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo, as well as to destroy America from the inside out by demopathically invoking human rights ideals in order to destroy free speech so as to suppress the truth about them and the evil they perpetrate. They have been incredibly successful on IU campuses, as I can personally attest, since I am unable to go anywhere on campus, even to the restroom, without being stalked, harassed, accosted, intimidated, and generally terrorized by Muslim students and must therefore have a babysitter with me at all times on campus, nor can I attend class in an atmosphere in which harassment is not a condition of my attendance. I used to think I was 29 years old and living in America before I attended IUB, but now I am 100% certain that I am 5 years old and living in Saudi Arabia.

It being the case that you are well-aware of this and not only doing nothing to ban these terror organizations, but actually funding them, you are, under 18 U.S. Code 2382, guilty of treasonous sedition: "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to [appropriate officials] is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both."

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/26/democrats-soft-jihadist/" rel="nofollow"> In their own words, "Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the Earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a state on the basis of its own ideology and program, regardless of which nation assumes the role of the standard bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State. ... Islam does not intend to confine this revolution to a single State or a few countries; the aim of Islam is to bring about a universal revolution." It your duty to defund and ban terror organizations on every IU campus. For you to not do so is tantamount to treasonous sedition. Do not wait for the conclusion of the HLF trial. Do the right thing right now. My letter from last Monday is below, in case you need to look it over again in order to understand the sort of evil you are supporting and funding with my tuition and tax dollars, as if it weren't horrible enough that IU shamelessly flouts admissions policies in order to admit as many 3rd-world applicants from Muslim countries who lack the equivalent of a free-world kindergarten education for the express purpose of ghettoizing the University and violating the Title VII rights of every Jew, woman, homosexual, and student who happens to be here in order to receive a legitimate education by making harassment a condition of attendance and dragging down the classroom discussion and the pace of graduate courses so as to be inappropriately slow and lacking in relevant content for pre-schoolers, as has become painfully obvious in my department.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[Aug. 25th letter]
Dear Drs. McRobbie and Hanson,

I am writing because you may have heard or read about the recent changes at USC in response to a Hadith which was linked to on the University's MSA webpage which read:

"Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him." The complete Hadith can be found here:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html#004.052.177.

href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=9E589DA9-14A5-4147-A755-47E92DA10F2A"> USC Provost Nikias has ordered that the Hadith be removed, stating:

I thought you should be made aware of the fact that Indiana University's server also contains a link to the same Hadith through the Muslim Student Union's webpage.

The above link also links to ISNA, a Muslim Brotherhood front organization which staffs its board with as-of-yet-unindicted-due-to-a-mistrial co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation case. The Muslim Brotherhood is the mother organization of Al Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and several lesser terror organizations. If you would like to learn more about ISNA's connections to terrorism, the Investigative Project on Terrorism has 50 articles to inform you. The Washington Post has also designated ISNA as such: http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/26/democrats-soft-jihadist/ .

The Muslim Student Union is itself the renamed Muslim Students Association, another Muslim Brotherhood offshoot. If you would like to learn more about the Muslim Student Union's connections to terrorism the Investigative Project on Terrorism contains 19 articles about the MSU and 10 about the MSA to inform you. The charges are too numerous to go into here. The MSU is essentially a front group for Hamas, committed to the subjugation of/violence against women, the promotion of pedophilia, incest*, polygamy, and the genocide of Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Animists, apostates, atheists, agnostics, gays, feminists, dogs, poets, artists, musicians, independent thinkers, and those who engage in romantic relationships independently of Sharia sex slavery. The MSU, not surprisingly, refused to sign David Horowitz's Declaration Against Genocide (see the last link above). If you would like to learn more about the Muslim Brotherhood's agenda for America, you can read their charter here.

I have provided several other passages which are linked to through the MSU website. Those listed below are just the tip of the iceberg, and are only a fraction of the passages which obligate Muslims to kill me. They do not touch upon many other "values" which are promoted by the texts which the MSU webpage links to, such as the glamorization of the mutilation of corpses and of parasitism as a career, torture, looting, the killing of homosexuals and apostates, slavery, pedophilia, incest, female genital mutilation, polygamy, the subjugation of/violence against women, or the fact that under Islamic law women are to only allowed to exist as the outright property (slave) of a man, and who are to be invariably pimped away by their families in exchange for monetary compensation, ideally at an inappropriately young age to someone ridiculously older, usually a relative.

I urge you to do as Provost Nikias did and force the MSU to remove from its webpage the links to these disgusting texts and any and all references to them, as well as to ISNA. I also urge you to read at least some of the articles to which I have linked above so that you can understand what the MSU stands for, who they actually are, and how they have no place at an institution of learning or anywhere in a civilized society for that matter. Finally, I urge you to ban the MSU/MSA from every IU campus, or to at least have each chapter monitored very closely and to question what kind of organization would link to passages like the one above and the ones below and what their intentions are. If you have any question as to their intentions, read the Muslim Brotherhood's charter to which I have linked above.

I find this sort of hate speech and these sorts of incitements to commit genocide and a whole host of other ungodly human rights violations far, far too offensive to tolerate, let alone be promoted by the University which I pay through the nose to attend. I also find it intolerable that IU not only hosts an organization like this, but even funds them. It is simply unacceptable that my own tuition and tax dollars are being funneled into an organization and its propaganda which are dedicated to killing, raping, and enslaving me, and to the overthrow of the government of the country which I love very much, not to mention civilization itself. Thank you.

To those of you who I have cc'ed in this letter, I did this because I thought you might be interested, and because it has been my experience in dealing with IU faculty and staff that it is necessary to cc people other than those to whom letters are expressly directed in order to confer a certain degree of accountability lest I be completely ignored. I naturally assumed that IU's administration would treat me the same way as have their faculty and staff.

Sincerely,
Justin Elizabeth Tabler

The Qur'an:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html
Sura (2:191-193) - "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution [of Muslims] is worse than slaughter [of non-believers]...and fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah." There is a good case to be made that the overall context of these verses is defensive war, however, there are two worrisome pieces to this passage. The first is that the killing of others is authorized in the event of "persecution." The second is that fighting may persist until "religion is for Allah."

Sura (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Sura (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/003.qmt.html
Sura (3:56) - "As to those who [Muslim] reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

Sura (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of killing Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html
Sura (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him. We shall bestow a vast reward."

Sura (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

Sura (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

Sura (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage not only criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, but also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Qur'an, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad).

Sura (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Pursuing an injured enemy is not an act of self-defense.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/005.qmt.html
Sura (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/008.qmt.html
Sura (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Sura (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

Sura (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah"

Sura (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

Sura (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/009.qmt.html
Sura (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."

Sura (9:14) - "Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."

Sura (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The "striving" spoken of here is Jihad.

Sura (9:29) - "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 [dhimmi tax, usually about 50%] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." This is the passage which abrogates every peace treaty and every peaceful passage so as to render them meaningless.

Sura (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

Sura (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

Sura (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew."

Sura (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination."

Sura (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."

Sura (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme."

Sura (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/021.qmt.html
Sura (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/025.qmt.html
Sura (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness, with the (Qur'an)." "Strive against" is "slaughter" in Arabic. This is an intentional apologist mistranslation. The MSU webpage also links to the original Arabic text.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/047.qmt.html
Sura (47:4) - "So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners,"

Sura (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you."

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/048.qmt.html
Sura (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom."

Sura (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves"

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/061.qmt.html
Sura (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way"

Sura (61:10-12) - "O ye who believe! Shall I lead you to a bargain that will save you from a grievous Penalty?- That ye believe in Allah and His Messenger, and that ye strive (your utmost) in the Cause of Allah, with your property and your persons: That will be best for you, if ye but knew! He will forgive you your sins, and admit you to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, and to beautiful mansions in Gardens of Eternity." This verse
was given in battle. It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/066.qmt.html
Sura (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites," those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.

From the Hadith:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html
Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.

Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/abudawud/014.sat.html
Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist).

Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/001.smt.html
Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/008.sbt.html
Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.'"

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/001.smt.html
Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause. . ."

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/020.smt.html
Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"

Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'"

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html
Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate Hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)." He had attacked a group of unarmed (Jewish) women and children in an unprovoked night raid after beheading 600-900 of the men in the tribe. He then rounded up the women and children, had them all raped, kept some as slaves, and sold the rest, taking one as his personal sex slave ('wife' in Islam).

*While Muslims are generally less than forthright regarding the incest issue, it is a fundamental practice of Islam, one which is not only condoned, but promoted and idealized. Sura 2.223 : “Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will [i.e., commit rape].” It does not say 'wives' in Arabic (although the MSU page links to the correct Arabic version as well). It says 'women/vaginas' (they are the same word in Arabic). The Sura goes on to define 'your vaginas' as one's wives, slaves, daughters and sisters. This is clearly an incitement to commit incest, as well as polygamy, and to own slaves. Please remove the link to it from the IU server.

Posted by: jdamn at September 7, 2008 12:22 AM

The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.

Is this from the Quran? Is this from hadeeth?

You guys can play games all you want and make these claims that the Muslims are the ones who teach about slaughtering jews etc...

Don't jews believe the their Messiah will come and only jews will exist? If jews only exist what happens to non jews?

Dont Christians believe the when their Messiah comes that they will only be the ones that are saved? Is this going to happen by happy peaceful means?

Stop being hypocritical....All the Talmuds and bibles have to be rejected as well.... God knows who is just and He knows those who play games.

Still wont stop the growth of Islam in OUR country.

Posted by: Isa at September 7, 2008 1:00 AM

Jdam...please stop speaking ignorantly. If you understood Arabic and read the whole Quran you would see that the verse about sexual relations with you WIVES is what is meant. It is clear that Allah tells men who is permissible to have sexual relations with and who isn't. This verse also explains that the vagina is the only place you are allowed to enter you WIFE in.

I would love for you to do the same for the vioeln passages that are in teh Talmud and in the Bible but I doubt you will do it.

Educate yourself!

Posted by: Isa at September 7, 2008 1:07 AM

A little late, but:

jdamn,

More like G--damn! Awesome letters. Awesome post.

Your comments are very in-depth & insightful (albeit also very long).

Who are you, that you have so much time to address these issues? I'm not asking for personal info, I'm just sayin' you could be Spencer himself with the amount of time you spend on these things. Kudos!

Posted by: Eyas at September 8, 2008 9:32 PM