Last week on ABN I filmed this show with David Wood and Sam Shamoun.
Last week on ABN I filmed this show with David Wood and Sam Shamoun.
In PJ Lifestyle I discuss a new example from Syria of how jihadis are made:
The videois chilling: a jihadist from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, al-Qaeda’s branch for those two countries, addresses a crowd of boys at a school in Syria, rallying them to jihad. The boys look to be about ten or twelve years old, and they eagerly participate in the lesson – which is all about how Muslims should wage war and slaughter infidels in order to defend Islam....
All this is bad enough, but the video ends shortly after that, leaving us with no clue as to the answer to the most important question: What happened next? Did these boys rush to join the jihad and slaughter infidels? Did they go home and get asked by their mothers, “What did you learn in school today?” If they did, and answered honestly, did their mothers react with horror and tell them that believing that Islam required them to slaughter infidels was a twisting and hijacking of their Religion of Peace? Did they quickly pull their children out of the school and upbraid the principal for allowing this incitement to hatred and violence to take place on school grounds?
And whatever happened next, what will become of these boys in five or ten years? How many of them will heed the call to slaughter infidels for the sake of Islam? Will any of them be stopped by the moderates that we are constantly told are the vast majority of Muslims, and who despise and abhor the violent jihadists? Will any school – the school where this jihadist spoke or any other – hold a session about how Islam is really peaceful and doesn’t involve slaughtering infidels?
For years the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), the source of this video, has been chronicling similar teachings of violence and hate in Islamic schools in Pakistan. And so it is no surprise that the Taliban are today alive and well in Pakistan, and that in that country the tiny Christian and Hindu minorities increasingly face violent persecution. The boys in Pakistani madrassas learned their lessons well, and are applying them. The same thing is likely to happen in Syria and elsewhere – everywhere that the Qur’an’s exhortations to violence against infidels is taken as applying to the present day.
Children, at least some of them, learn what they’re taught, and follow in the paths their elders have mapped out for them. Yet in response to all this, Western leaders issue denial after denial that any of this has anything to do with Islam, or that it calls for any accountability, much less genuine reform, among Muslims in the West. Some of the current shapers of public opinion and public policy may be repeating that Islam is a religion of peace and that only “Islamophobes” think otherwise right at the very moment that one of the boys who learned the Syria jihadist’s lessons in this video begins to slit an infidel’s throat.
The Muslim Brotherhood's second great theorist, after its founder Hasan al-Banna, was Sayyid Qutb, the father of modern jihad theory. He sharpened his distaste for the West while living in the United States from November 1948 to August 1950. While hospitalized for a respiratory ailment in Washington, D.C., in February 1949, he heard of the assassination of al-Banna, an event which, he later claimed implausibly, set the hospital staff to open rejoicing.
His disgust with the gaudy materialism of postwar America was intense. He wrote to an Egyptian friend of his loneliness: "How much do I need someone to talk to about topics other than money, movie stars and car models." Moving to Greeley, Colorado, he was impressed by the number of churches in the city, but not with the piety they engendered: "Nobody goes to church as often as Americans do. . . . Yet no one is as distant as they are from the spiritual aspect of religion." He was thoroughly scandalized by a dance after an evening service at a local church: "The dancing intensified. . . . The hall swarmed with legs . . . Arms circled arms, lips met lips, chests met chests, and the atmosphere was full of love." The pastor further scandalized Qutb by dimming the lights, creating "a romantic, dreamy effect," and playing a popular record of the day: "Baby, It's Cold Outside." He regarded American popular music in general with a gimlet eye: "Jazz is the favorite music [of America]. It is a type of music invented by [American] Blacks to please their primitive tendencies and desire for noise."
Ultimately he concluded: "I fear that when the wheel of life has turned and the file on history has closed, America will not have contributed anything." He didn't find American prosperity to be matched by a corresponding wealth of spirit. "I am afraid that there is no correlation between the greatness of the American material civilization and the men who created it. . . . In both feeling and conduct the American is primitive (bida'a)."
When he returned to Egypt, he characterized the influence of the West in the Muslim world as an unmitigated evil. He derided "American Islam," a counterfeit of the religion that was designed only to combat Communism in Egypt. (In this he may have been referring to the Egyptian dictator Nasser's 1964 overtures to the Muslim Brotherhood, which he hoped would join an anticommunist alliance.) Even before his stay in the United States he cautioned that "Islam is a comprehensive philosophy and an homogeneous unity, and to introduce into it any foreign element would mean ruining it. It is like a delicate and perfect piece of machinery that may be completely ruined by the presence of an alien component."
This chief alien component was secularism. Qutb regarded Western secularism not as the solution to the problems of the Islamic world (as many have proposed) but as the chief source of the problem: it destroyed the fundamental unity of Islam by separating the religious sphere from that of daily life.
Qutb saw the West's two dominant political and social philosophies, capitalism and Communism, as bankrupt and valueless. With notable and often moving passion and vigor, Qutb's influential book Milestones explicitly positions Islam as the true source of societal and personal order, as opposed to both capitalism and Communism. "Mankind today is on the brink of a precipice," he asserted in this Cold War-era manifesto, "not because of the danger of complete annihilation which is hanging over its head -- this being just a symptom and not the real disease -- but because humanity is devoid of those vital values which are necessary not only for its healthy development but also for its real progress." Perhaps with his time in America in mind, he went on: "Even the Western world realizes that Western civilization is unable to present any healthy values for the guidance of mankind. It knows that it does not possess anything which will satisfy its own conscience and justify its existence."
To Qutb, both capitalism and Communism were spent forces: "Democracy in the West has become infertile to such an extent that it is borrowing from the systems of the Eastern bloc, especially in the economic system, under the name of socialism. It is the same with the Eastern bloc. Its social theories, foremost among which is Marxism, in the beginning attracted not only a large number of people from the East but also from the West, as it was a way of life based on a creed."
With admirable prescience for a man writing in 1964, when Marxism looked to many observers to be still positioned at the vanguard of history, Qutb proclaimed that "now Marxism is defeated on the plane of thought, and if it is stated that not a single nation in the world is truly Marxist, it will not be an exaggeration." He asserted that Marxism was doomed to fail because "on the whole this theory conflicts with man's nature and its needs. This ideology prospers only in a degenerate society or in a society which has become cowed as a result of some form of prolonged dictatorship." A quarter-century before the fall of the Soviet Union, he described "the failure of the system of collective farming" as just part of "the failure of a system which is against human nature."
Qutb concludes: "It is essential for mankind to have new leadership!"
That new leadership would come from Islam. To Qutb, what the Muslim umma needed was a restoration of Islam in its fullness and purity, including all the rules of the Sharia for regulating society. "If we look at the sources and foundations of modern ways of living, it becomes clear that the whole world is steeped in Jahiliyyah [Ignorance of the Divine guidance], and all the marvelous material comforts and high-level inventions do not diminish this ignorance. This Jahiliyyah is based on rebellion against God's sovereignty on earth. It transfers to man one of the greatest attributes of God, namely sovereignty, and makes some men lords over others."
True freedom could come to man only by restoring the divine sovereignty -- that is, the Sharia. To further this end he formally joined the Muslim Brotherhood shortly after his return to Egypt from the United States.
In articulating his vision for a resurgent Islam that would lead the way to a restoration of civilization and true values in the world, he made one great departure from the thought of other Muslim intellectuals of his day: he classified not only non-Muslim lands but also large portions of the Muslim world as lands of jahiliyyah, the Muslim term for the pre-Islamic period of unbelief, ignorance, and darkness. He based this assessment on the fact that most Muslim lands did not follow the Sharia either in whole or part, writing in Milestones that "it is necessary to revive that Muslim community which is buried under the debris of the man-made traditions of several generations, and which is crushed under the weight of those false laws and customs which are not even remotely related to the Islamic teachings, and which, in spite of all this, calls itself the 'world of Islam.'"
He advances Islam as "a challenge to all kinds and forms of systems which are based on the concept of the sovereignty of man; in other words, where man has usurped the Divine attribute. Any system in which the final decisions are referred to human beings, and in which the sources of all authority are human, deifies human beings by designating others than God as lords over men."
Islam, says Qutb, in response to this wrongful deification of human beings, must "proclaim the authority and sovereignty of God" and thereby "eliminate all human kingship and to announce the rule of the Sustainer of the universe over the entire earth. In the words of the Qur'an: 'He alone is God in the heavens and in the earth.' (43:84) 'The command belongs to God alone. He commands you not to worship anyone except Him. This is the right way of life.' (12: 40)"
In practice, this meant implementation of the Sharia. Qutb therefore despised democracy for subjecting society to manmade laws that were the product of deliberation by the electorate or the legislature. The laws of Allah were not a matter for majority vote. He advocated active and all-encompassing resistance to governments in Muslim lands that did not implement the Sharia. He insisted: "We must also free ourselves from the clutches of jahili society" -- that is, society ordered according to human laws (literally, those of ignorance) rather than divine ones -- "jahili concepts, jahili traditions and jahili leadership. Our mission is not to compromise with the practices of jahili society, nor can we be loyal to it. Jahili society, because of its jahili characteristics, is not worthy to be compromised with. Our aim is first to change ourselves so that we may later change the society."
This resistance must be international, in accord with the traditional Islamic view that religion transcends nationality: "A Muslim has no country except that part of the earth where the Shari'ah of God is established and human relationships are based on the foundation of relationship with God; a Muslim has no nationality except his belief, which makes him a member of the Muslim community in Dar-ul-Islam; a Muslim has no relatives except those who share the belief in God, and thus a bond is established between him and other Believers through their relationship with God."
The idea that Muslim governments lose their legitimacy if they don't enforce the Sharia has recurred throughout Islamic history. The famous medieval scholar Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328) "declared that a ruler who fails to enforce the shari'a rigorously in all aspects, including the conduct of jihad (and is therefore insufficiently Muslim), forfeits his right to rule." Nevertheless, such a view was relatively unheard-of among the secularized, Western-influenced Muslims of Qutb's day; thus it has led numerous analysts of Islamic radicalism to label him an innovator and contrast his views with those of "traditional Islam."
But Qutb's views of the Sharia were not innovative at all. And he argued that they were not extremist, but simply the rule of Islamic law. "The way to establish God's rule on earth is not that some consecrated people -- the priests -- be given the authority to rule, as was the case with the rule of the Church, nor that some spokesmen of God become rulers, as is the case in a 'theocracy'. To establish God's rule means that His laws be enforced and that the final decision in all affairs be according to these laws."
"Insight: In Egypt, ideas of a radical Islamist make comeback," by Tom Perry and Abdelrahman Youssef for Reuters, December 2:
ALEXANDRIA/CAIRO (Reuters) - Young Egyptian Islamists seeking a way to confront the military-led state are turning to the ideas of a radical ideologue who waged the same struggle half a century ago and later became a source of inspiration for al Qaeda.
The revolutionary ideas of Sayyid Qutb, a Muslim Brotherhood leader executed in 1966, are spreading among Islamists who see themselves in an all-out struggle with generals who deposed President Mohamed Mursi in July.
Their radical conclusions underline the risks facing a nation more divided than ever in its modern history: after Mursi's downfall, the state killed hundreds of Islamists, and attacks on the security forces have become commonplace.
Qutb's writing, much of it produced while a prisoner in President Gamal Abdel Nasser's jails, has supplied ideological fuel for militancy in Egypt and beyond for decades.
He has been cited as a source of inspiration by Ayman al-Zawahri, the Egyptian doctor who was Osama bin Laden's deputy as leader of al Qaeda and took over the militant network after bin Laden's death in 2009.
Within the Brotherhood itself, which decades ago declared itself opposed to violence, Qutb's writings were widely respected but his revolutionary approach took a back seat as the 85-year-old movement focused on seeking power within the system.
Not any more, said Omar Magdy, 23, a Brotherhood activist who likens the crackdown on Islamists today with Nasser's.
"The era in which Sayyid Qutb wrote his work resembles the one we are in now, so his ideas are being revived," Magdy explained in a seafront cafe in Alexandria. "Sayyid Qutb embodies the revolutionary Islamist idea. I support it."
After the fall of Hosni Mubarak in 2011, the Brotherhood pursued its agenda through the ballot box, relying on its organizational muscle to win two parliamentary elections, a presidential vote and two constitutional referenda.
But that all ended in July, when the military, responding to mass demonstrations against Mursi, toppled Egypt's first freely elected leader and launched a crackdown on his followers.
Thousands have been rounded up and many hundreds killed, particularly in the storming of a pro-Mursi protest camp which Islamists see as a massacre that proved the generals wanted to eradicate the Brotherhood once and for all.
Since Mursi's downfall, the Brotherhood has experienced an ideological crisis. For many youths, the ideas of democracy - and even the very concept of the nation state itself - have been discredited.
Magdy, 23, said his uncle was among those shot dead by police. He evokes Qutb by likening Egypt with the Jahiliya - the period before the emergence of Islam in 7th century Arabia.
"Does society have the features of the Jahiliya? Yes it does," he said.
Qutb was one of thousands of Islamists tortured in jail under Nasser. He was eventually tried and executed for calling for the overthrow of the state.
The Brotherhood's leader, Mohamed Badie, served jail time with Qutb in the 1960s, as did Mahmoud Ezzat, a highly influential figure and one of the few Brotherhood leaders yet to be caught. Qutb has been cited as a major influence over both.
His main political work, "Milestones", was banned in Egypt until the 1990s. After its publication, Egypt's official Islamic establishment declared some of Qutb's ideas blasphemous. His writing also stirred controversy within the Brotherhood itself.
Magdy said Qutb's work is more widely discussed than before by Islamists who, with the benefit of hindsight, now believe the Brotherhood was mistaken to focus on gradual change.
"Mursi was waging the battle to reform the state. I see that we must wage the battle to break up the institutions of state," Magdy said. Asked how, Magdy echoes the Brotherhood's position: "Popular, peaceful activism against military rule".
But other Islamists are more openly following the revolutionary logic through to more extreme conclusions: that violence is the way forward.
"The idea is now discussed," said another Islamist activist, also in his mid-20s, who asked not to be identified. "Even thinking about it before was scary. But now, to a degree, it is acceptable."...
"Is there really a Brother out there who still believes ... democracy is the way to Islamic government?" one Brotherhood activist asked in a recent discussion on Facebook with other Brotherhood members....
Gavin McInnes recounts a conversation I had with him in the lobby of The Breakers during Restoration Weekend a couple of weeks ago. "Stuck in the Past," by Gavin McInnes, November 22:
I just flew back from Restoration Weekend in Palm Beach, and boy are my arms tired of the old narrative. I was on a panel with James O’Keefe and Sonnie Johnson called “Changing the Narrative,” and we all talked about how dangerous it is for the GOP to remain stuck in the past.
The speakers at this conference bore impressive pedigrees and included Ann Coulter, Ted Cruz, Pamela Gellar [sic], Dr. Benjamin Carson, Bill Whittle, Robert Spencer, and conference founder David Horowitz. Just as New York City is an island of lunacy surrounded by hundreds of miles of reality, walking around The Breakers Palm Beach Hotel felt like a wee bit of sanity in a world gone mad.
While trying to register, I strolled by Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer, who was sitting in the lobby checking his email. After a brief introduction, I asked some totally predictable questions like, “Do you ever think of quitting?” and “Do you have bulletproof windows?”
“If I stopped doing what I do, I wouldn’t suddenly become immortal,” he replied.
I told him of a recent revelation where I realized it’s not a choice between “Do they hate us because they’re inbred?” or “Do they hate us because of Israel?”
It’s both. They hate us because they’re inbred and also because of Israel.
He disagreed and said it was neither. “It’s because the book says to kill us and they think God wrote the book.” We then talked about seemingly random attacks on Vancouver and Glasgow and how little our foreign policy in Israel has to do with terrorism in the Philippines right now. The conversation ended with both of us agreeing that nobody kills more Muslims than Muslims do....
Only greasy Islamophobes would believe that these statements have anything to do with Islam, but it would be refreshing for some Muslim spokesman in the West who insists that Islam doesn't call for any of this hatred and slaughter to explain on Islamic grounds how this al-Qaeda operative is getting Islam all wrong. But that is one thing we never, ever see.
"Al-Qaeda in Syrian School: Infidels Must Be Slaughtered; Obama, World Leaders Are Infidels," from MEMRI, n.d.:
Following are excerpts from a video featuring an ISIS operative at a Syrian school, which was posted on the Internet on November 26, 2013:
Al-Qaeda operative: The mujahideen are coming here, to Syria. They come from Egypt, from Chechnya, from Morocco, from the U.S., from Belgium, from China, from Russia, from Cameroon... Who unites them?
School children: Allah.
Al-Qaeda operative: Why did they gather here?
School children: For the sake of Islam.
Al-Qaeda operative: Islam unites everyone under one word, with no distinction between skin color, nationality, or anything. The entire Earth belongs to Allah. Islam elevates the Muslims and humiliates the infidels. The "Crusaders" – who are the Christians – are they Muslims or infidels?
School children: They are infidels.
Al-Qaeda operative: Allah said: "Those who say that Jesus son of Mary is God have disbelieved." Allah said: "Those who say that God is the third of three have disbelieved." They cross themselves like this. Allah said:"Those who say that God is the third of three have disbelieved." Whoever says that God is three is an infidel.
He is paraphrasing Qur'an 5:72-3.
Whoever says that God is two and that Jesus is His son is an infidel as well. Whoever says that Jesus is God is also an infidel.
Is Bashar Al-Assad a Muslim or an infidel?
School children: An infidel.
Al-Qaeda operative: Who likes Bashar? Whoever likes Bashar – raise your hand. Why do you hate him?
School children: Because he is an infidel.
Al-Qaeda operative: Imagine we had here with us an Alawite, from Al-Assad's family or religion. Would you like him?
School children: No.
Al-Qaeda operative: What would you do to him?
School children: Slaughter him.
Al-Qaeda operative: Slaughter him. Right. Because he is an infidel.
Anyone who does not believe in Islam is an infidel. Is Obama a Muslim or an infidel?
School children: An infidel.
Al-Qaeda operative: What about the president of Russia?
School children: An infidel.
Al-Qaeda operative: What about the president of China?
School children: An infidel.
“Fight those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden -- such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book -- until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.” -- Qu'ran 9:29
The green birds reference below is from this hadith:
It has been narrated on the authority of Masruq Who said: We asked 'Abdullah about the Qur'anic verse:" Think not of those who are slain in Allah's way as dead. Nay, they are alive, finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord.." (iii. 169). He said: We asked the meaning of the verse (from the Holy Prophet) who said: The souls of the martyrs live in the bodies of green birds who have their nests in chandeliers hung from the throne of the Almighty. They eat the fruits of Paradise from wherever they like and then nestle in these chandeliers. Once their Lord cast a glance at them and said: Do ye want anything? They said: What more shall we desire? We eat the fruit of Paradise from wherever we like. Their Lord asked them the same question thrice. When they saw that they will continue to be asked and not left (without answering the question). they said: O Lord, we wish that Thou mayest return our souls to our bodies so that we may be slain in Thy way once again. When He (Allah) saw that they had no need, they were left (to their joy in heaven). -- Muslim 4651
Given the Daily Mail's track record, there is no certainty that this is the full text, but it is revealing enough in any case.
"Adebolajo's Note: Woolwich Suspect Handed Letter To Witness," from the Daily Mail (scroll down), November 29:
Before Adebolajo, 28, and his accomplice Michael Adebowale, 22, right, were gunned down by armed officers, jurors were told he passed a handwritten note to a bystander.
It read: 'To my beloved children know that to fight Allah's enemies is an obligation. The proofs of which are so numerous that but a handful of any of them cuts out the bewitching tongues of the Munafiqeen [hypocrites].
'Do not spend your days in endless dispute with the cowardly and foolish if it means it will delay you meeting Allah's enemies on the battlefield.
'Sometimes the cowardly and foolish could be those dearest to you so be prepared to turn away from them.
'When you set out on this path do not look left or right.
'Seek Shaheedala [martyrdom] oh my sons so that you might be raised together and if its Allah's decree that you are not to be in the hearts of green birds.
'Then be ready for to enter the University of Joosuf. Sijn. Be patient there and be firm there and inshallah you will meet your Lord with him pleased with you.
'Verily Allah is with those who are patient.
'If I live beyond this day and you find me talking other than this then know that perhaps Allah has left me to stray.
'If you find yourself curious as to why carnage is reaching your own towns then know its simply retaliation for your oppression in our towns.
'Many of your people are aristocrats that directly benefit from invasion of our lands without material loss.
'Whereas the average Joe Bloggs working class man loses his sons when they are killed by our brothers.
'When the heat of battle reaches YOUR local street its unlikely that any of your so called politicians will be at risk or caught in the crossfire so I suggest you remove them.
'Remove them and replace them with people who will secure your safety by the immediate withdrawal from the affairs of the Muslims.
'Muslims will trade with you on fair terms but understand that the days of your international armed robbery is drawing to a close.
'To humble yourselves willingly is better for you.
'May Allah guide your nation to the truth'.
No one would even be interested in this question were it not for the abundant evidence to the contrary: the daily record of jihad violence carried out by Muslims who point to Islam and the Qur'an to justify their actions, including many who are burning churches and terrorizing Christians in Nigeria, Egypt, Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere. It is because of them that Pope Francis, David Cameron and others feel compelled to insist that, contrary to what we see happening every day, Islam is really peaceful. The question is whether they are doing the victims of jihad any real service by insisting this.
"Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium of the Holy Father Francis to the Bishops, Clergy, Consecrated Persons and the Lay Faithful On the Proclamation of the Gospel In Today's World," from Vatican.va, November 24:
253. In order to sustain dialogue with Islam, suitable training is essential for all involved, not only so that they can be solidly and joyfully grounded in their own identity, but so that they can also acknowledge the values of others, appreciate the concerns underlying their demands and shed light on shared beliefs. We Christians should embrace with affection and respect Muslim immigrants to our countries in the same way that we hope and ask to be received and respected in countries of Islamic tradition. I ask and I humbly entreat those countries to grant Christians freedom to worship and to practice their faith, in light of the freedom which followers of Islam enjoy in Western countries! Faced with disconcerting episodes of violent fundamentalism, our respect for true followers of Islam should lead us to avoid hateful generalisations, for authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Koran are opposed to every form of violence.
The Bishop of Rome, by virtue of his position as successor of St. Peter, can, according to Catholic teaching, speak authoritatively about Catholic doctrine: he has the authority to delineate what is authentic Catholicism. This, however, is a statement about "authentic Islam." It would be interesting to know how he came to this conclusion, since the Pope of Rome has no counterpart within the Islamic world: there is no Muslim authority to which he can appeal in order to discover what "authentic Islam" consists of, and many Muslim authorities would disagree with his statement that "authentic Islam" is "opposed to every form of violence." To take just one of many available examples, I recently debated the Islamic apologist Shadid Lewis, who insisted (falsely) during the debate that Islam had no doctrine of offensive jihad, and that all jihad was defensive. However, he repeated several times that Islam was not a pacifistic religion, and that it did sanction and even mandate warfare under certain circumstances. This position is by no means unique to Lewis; it is quite common among Muslims, most of whom would freely acknowledge that Islam sanctions warfare in defense of the Muslim community or against "oppression." But it contradicts the contention that Islam is opposed to "every form" of violence.
Among the modern-day Muslims (and some from the recent past) who would disagree with Pope Francis's statement about "authentic Islam" are these:
“Jihad was a way of life for the Pious Predecessors (Salaf-us-Salih), and the Prophet (SAWS) was a master of the Mujahideen and a model for fortunate inexperienced people. The total number of military excursions which he (SAWS) accompanied was 27. He himself fought in nine of these; namely Badr; Uhud, Al-Muraysi, The Trench, Qurayzah, Khaybar, The Conquest of Makkah, Hunayn and Taif . . . This means that the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) used to go out on military expeditions or send out an army at least every two months.” -- Abdullah Azzam, co-founder of al-Qaeda, Join the Caravan, p. 30
"If we follow the rules of interpretation developed from the classical science of Koranic interpretation, it is not possible to condemn terrorism in religious terms. It remains completely true to the classical rules in its evolution of sanctity for its own justification. This is where the secret of its theological strength lies." -- Egyptian scholar Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd
"Many thanks to God, for his kind gesture, and choosing us to perform the act of Jihad for his cause and to defend Islam and Muslims. Therefore, killing you and fighting you, destroying you and terrorizing you, responding back to your attacks, are all considered to be great legitimate duty in our religion." -- Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his fellow 9/11 defendants
"Allah on 480 occasions in the Holy Koran extols Muslims to wage jihad. We only fulfil God's orders. Only jihad can bring peace to the world." -- Taliban terrorist Baitullah Mehsud
"Jihad, holy fighting in Allah's course, with full force of numbers and weaponry, is given the utmost importance in Islam....By jihad, Islam is established....By abandoning jihad, may Allah protect us from that, Islam is destroyed, and Muslims go into inferior position, their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligation and duty in Islam on every Muslim." -- Times Square car bomb terrorist Faisal Shahzad
"So step by step I became a religiously devout Muslim, Mujahid -- meaning one who participates in jihad." -- Little Rock, Arkansas terrorist murder Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad
"And now, after mastering the English language, learning how to build explosives, and continuous planning to target the infidel Americans, it is time for Jihad." -- Texas terrorist bomber Khalid Aldawsari
All of these, of course, may be dismissed as "extremists," although they were also all devout Muslims who were determined to follow their religion properly. One finds the same thing, however, when one turns to the authoritative sources in Sunni Islam, the schools of Sunni jurisprudence (madhahib):
Baroness Warsi's argument is extremely common and extremely disingenuous. The West Wing scene is clever, but ultimately hollow: both Judaism and Christianity have developed interpretative traditions that have in various ways moved away from the literal interpretation of the cited Biblical passages. Among Muslims, by contrast, there are armed jihad groups justifying violence by referring to the Qur'an and Sunnah all over the world. To dismiss any necessity to do anything about that by pointing to Biblical passages that no one is acting upon is such a flagrant exercise in deflection that it raises serious questions about the "moderation" of Baroness Warsi.
"Ukip Peer Warns Of Muslim 'Dark Side', Gets Hit With Rebuttal From 'The West Wing,'" by Ned Simons for the Huffington Post, November 20:
Former Ukip leader Lord Pearson told the House of Lords on Tuesday that there was a growing "dark side" within British Muslims. He was met with a critique from a fictional American president.
Lord Pearson, who is perhaps best known for getting caught out not having read his own party's manifesto while leader at the 2010 election, used a debate he tabled yesterday to warn of the particular dangers of terrorism from Islam.
"I fear that the dark side is moving strongly within Islam," he said. "If we come home to the United Kingdom, we see large and growing Muslim communities which are set against integration with the rest of us; we see thousands of home-grown potential terrorists; we see Sharia law running de facto in our land; and we see a birth rate several times higher than ours, to which our democracy is already exposed."
In his speech, Lord Pearson said "part of Islam’s problem" were sections of the Koran that "commands the faithful to kill the unbelievers".
Baroness Warsi, Britain's most senior Muslim politician, was given the job of responding to Lord Pearson for the government. The Foreign Office minister decided to turn to political drama The West Wing to make her point. The Tory peer quoted from an episode in which President Bartlet slaps down a right-wing Christian radio presenter for her anti-gay views.President Bartlet:"I like your show. I like how you call homosexuality an abomination”.
The TV presenter: "I don’t say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President. The Bible does”.
President Bartlet: “Yes it does. Leviticus 18:22. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I have you here.
"I’m interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She’s a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be?.
"While thinking about that, can I ask you another question? My Chief of Staff, Leo McGarry, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?
"Here’s one that’s really important because we’ve got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?
"Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? Think about those questions, would you?".
Baroness Warsi told the Lords: "I could not make this point more clearly. These texts from the Old Testament could so easily be manipulated to cause mischief and indeed have been manipulated in the past. But being religious means making choices and understanding the central values of your faith. It also means considering the context in which that faith was formed."...
And yet the dominant view in the West, the one that guides public policy, is that Jaman and others like him, despite their devotion to Islam, have drastically misunderstood and twisted its teachings, and that there is no doctrine of warfare against Infidels in Islam. Indeed, I was banned from Britain for saying that there was such a doctrine, while those Muslims who know there is such a doctrine and are acting upon that knowledge by traveling from Britain to wage jihad in Syria will have no problem being admitted back into the country. More on this story. "Briton 'doing his duty' by fighting for group linked to al-Qaeda in Syria," by Richard Watson for the BBC, November 20:
A British man in Syria has told the BBC why he is fighting for a group linked to al-Qaeda.
Ifthekar Jaman, 23, from Southsea, Hampshire, told Newsnight the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) was engaged in a jihad to establish a state based on Islamic religious law.
He said it was his "duty" because Muslims were "being slaughtered".
Mr Jaman, whose family come from Bangladesh, is believed to have left the UK in spring of this year.
His exact location inside Syria is unclear. Newsnight managed to speak to him via an internet video call, with the help of his brother in the UK.
"I am ISIS. This is the group I am with. We are trying to establish the law of God, the law of Allah," he said.
"This is the duty on me... all these people are suffering. Muslims are being slaughtered."
Meanwhile, the Foreign Office said it was looking into reports in the Times newspaper that four Britons had been killed in Syria in recent weeks while fighting against government forces.
In a statement, it said: "The UK has advised against all travel to Syria. Anyone who does travel is putting themselves in considerable danger.
"And moderate Syrians have been explicit that they want aid, not foreign fighters. The best way for the public to help is to donate to registered charities that have ongoing relief operations."
Mr Jaman's brother, Mustakim, said his family understood the reasons for joining the jihad - a holy war or struggle, to establish a caliphate, a state based on Sharia, Islamic religious law - in Syria.
He said: "If he dies in his cause, then he's not died in vain, has he? He's doing a good deed."
Mustakim Jaman said he had watched his brother become radicalised over a long period of time.
He said: "He was always trying harder and harder to practise [Islam]. He was always trying to be as strict as he can, he wanted to be the best Muslim."
A link Mr Jaman posted on his Twitter feed before he left for Syria shows he was interested in the teachings of Anwar Awlaki - an Islamic preacher killed in Yemen 2011, who encouraged his followers to attack Western targets.
Mr Jaman has continued posting from Syria, and has more than 2,000 Twitter followers.
In one recent entry, he explains how he "came to answer the call of the oppressed".
MI5 says the number of British fighters in Syria is in the "low hundreds" and has expressed fears they could return home and pose a security threat.
But Mr Jaman told Newsnight he did not pose a threat to the UK - as he had no plans to return home.
He refused to say whether he thought Britain should be run by Islamic law, adding only: "It's the best religion for mankind."
In May, ISIS won control of the Syrian city of Raqqa, and marked the victory by publicly killing three men it said were Alawites, members of the same sect as President Bashar al-Assad.
Since then, activists who have fled the city say opponents of ISIS have been beaten, the sale of alcohol has been banned and women made to wear Islamic dress....
"It wasn't taught to me that Islam is peace and there's no fighting." Why not? We are forced to believe that on pain of charges of "hate" -- so how did he happen to miss this all-important lesson?
Pamela Geller has excerpts:
I was already a jihadi [while in the UK] I understood I was on the jihadi path. Where it all began? It began from the book. And I read this and in there you see what jihad is about.
I used to be scared of the word jihad, I once went to my sister when I was young I said to her, I saw it in the book and it said fighting. And my sister said to me jihad means what you have in your heart, what you did in your heart.
This is what I was taught. It wasn't taught to me that Islam is peace and there's no fighting.
It is peace but it requires fighting.
The duty of a Muslim is to love jihad.
One of the sayings of the prophet peace be upon him whoever does not go jihad or doesn't even talk about it dies with the characteristic of of hypocrisy.
I am actually a Muslim following the way I should be.
Video thanks to Pamela Geller.
Asmatullah Muawiya thinks that the Qur'an is calling upon Muslims to wage war? He better be careful: that kind of talk could get him banned from Britain -- oh, no, wait, that would only be if he opposed that warfare, not if he is calling on Muslims to engage in it.
"Junood-e-Hafsa Chief To Pakistani Youth: 'Oh, The Youth, The Koran Asks You To Enter The Battles Of Jihad For Allah's Faith, Get Your Body Cut, Shed Your Blood And Sacrifice Your Lives,'" from MEMRI, November 2 (thanks to Pamela Geller):
Urging Pakistani youth to abandon the internet, cricket and satellite television and calling on them to take part in jihad, Asmatullah Muawiya, the emir of militant group known as Junood-e-Hafsa, claims in a new video that the number of his fighters has increased substantially over the past few years.
"Oh, the youth, the Koran asks you to enter the battles of jihad for Allah's faith, get your body cut, shed your blood and sacrifice your lives. This path leads to honor, to glory and love to Allah, to enter paradise and to fulfill your promise to the prophet of Allah," says Muawiya, who is also the emir of Tehreek-e-Taliban Punjab, an offshoot of the Hakimullah Mehsud-led Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (The Movement of the Pakistani Taliban).
In a sane society, Tsarnaev's statement would trigger a full investigation of what is being taught in mosques, and a demand that those mosques institute programs to teach against this understanding of Islam. Instead, it will probably herald more hand-wringing about "Islamophobia."
BOSTON (WHDH) -- For the first time new information about what Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s went through between the race and his arrest has been released.
An 18-page document was given to the Director of the Bureau of Federal Prisons.
Prosecutors argue Tsarnaev's special restrictions are necessary considering what happened before, during, and after the Boston marathon attack.
They say he's so dangerous, his contacts with the outside world should be severely limited.
"During the days following the attacks Tsarnaev and his brother made additional bombs," according to the new paperwork.
There is now new information, according to NBC, about lines he wrote while hiding out in a boat in Watertown.
"[Muslims] are beginning to rise. ... Know you are fighting men who look into the barrel of your gun and see heaven, how can you complete [sic] with that? We are promised victory and we will surely get it," a report says Tsarnaev wrote.
"Tsarnaev reaffirmed his commitment to jihad and expressed hope that his actions would inspire others to engage in violent jihad,” according to prosecutors....
It's jihad, innit?
"Remember when your Lord inspired to the angels, "I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike them upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip." -- Qur'an 8:12
"So when you meet those who disbelieve, strike their necks..." -- Qur'an 47:4
Good thing they banned Pamela Geller and me from Britain. If we had been admitted, young Muslims like Talha might have grown enraged, and gone to wage jihad against Infidels.
"Tower Hamlets terrorist calls for ‘jihad’ from beyond the grave," by Adam Barnett for the Docklands & East London Advertiser, October 23:
A Tower Hamlets-born terrorist “martyr” has been shown inciting Muslims in the borough to “cut the necks of disbelievers” and join a “jihad” (holy war) in Somalia in a video message from beyond the grave.
The man, known only as Talha, appears in a new video released by al-Qaeda linked Somali terror group al–Shabab, which describes him as a “martyr” who died fighting for its cause.
Police have also contacted several well-known British Muslims who are threatened in the video for speaking out against the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich earlier this year.
The British-sounding narrator of the film claims Talha was killed in a raid by British and American forces in November 2012. The government declined to comment on the claim.
In the video, Talha says: “I call upon you today all the Muslim men in Britain, especially the people of Tower Hamlets, in the city I was born in… I call upon you to come to jihad, and raise the banner, humiliate the disbelievers, cut the necks of the disbelievers, and establish the dar-al-Islam (house of Islam).”
One of the people threatened in the video is Ajmal Masroor, a former Lib Dem candidate for Bethnal Green and Bow in 2010.
The release of the video comes after al-Shabab claimed responsibility for the attack on Westgate shopping centre in Kenya last month, which saw 67 people killed, including four Britons.
Dr Usama Hasan, another of the Muslims threatened in the video, said: “Al-Shabab are trying to recruit based on grievances and victimhood, and Muslims in London need to not give in to that.”
Dr Hasan works with the group Quilliam, which recently persuaded the leader of the English Defence League to step down.
He said: “That video uses fascist language to refer to all non-believers and Muslims who disagree with them.
“I refuse to be intimidated by these people. We will continue to engage with their arguments until they are quashed.”
...while heaping smear charges of "Islamophobia" and "bigotry" upon all the genuine foes of jihad terror, and refusing steadfastly to engage with their arguments.
This article makes a great many true and accurate observations. After detailing a number of recent jihad attacks, the author says, "The West is deluding itself when it says that 'this is not the real Islam.' Indeed, what is the real Islam? Since terrorists and Salafists say they are Muslims and acting in favour of Islam, only a violent Islam has taken central stage." He asks: "why is it that these masses of moderates never protest? Why is it that no Muslim association or group has ever been created to condemn Salafist violence and terrorists who kill themselves to become 'martyrs for Islam'?
But he does so in a very apologetic and hesitant way, going on to affirm his commitment to a "dialogue" that has in every instance proved spurious and chimerical, and saying: "I just want to make sure that people in Italy will not come to accept what Domenico Quirico, La Stampa envoy to Syria, said. Held captive for months by Islamic guerrillas, he wrote, 'We refuse to realise that moderate Islam does not exist, that the Arab Spring is over and that its new phase involves an Islamist and jihadist plan to build the Great Islamic Caliphate, a political plan that is being implemented starting in Syria with weapons, armies, and money.'" Why does he not want people in Italy to accept that? What if it's true? Is he really doing a favor to the people of Italy (or anywhere else) or furthering any genuine "dialogue" by pretending that things are not as they are?
"Anti-Christian violence and the silence of 'moderate' Muslims," by Piero Gheddo for Asia News, October 22 (thanks to C. Cantoni):
Milan (AsiaNews) - An Italian man, who recently came back from the Philippines, told me that on the big island of Mindanao, hundreds of extremists came at night from the island's interior and from smaller islands to attack a suburb of the city of Zamboanga, looting and burning houses and huts. They retreated taking dozens of hostages, leaving behind dead and wounded victims. The Italian said that targeted killings and kidnappings are frequent, but perhaps this is the first time that such a large-scale attack on Christians was carried out. Fear of new attacks has spread and nothing will be as before. The government is bound to send in the army and more fighting, revenge attacks and destruction are to be expected. Those who can have fled to other parts of the country, as people's lives and the economy are on hold. From Gulf countries, money is being sent to ulemas, mosques and Qur'anic schools to train young people to fight and accept to become "martyrs for Islam" against the Christian state. Salafists want an autonomous region for the Muslim minority on the island of Mindanao, which would join Malaya and Malaysian Borneo to form a single Islamic state.
"She proudly told how she is blessed to have had a holy warrior husband who 'gave his all to Allah' and 'lived a life of terrorising the disbelievers.'" We all know, of course, on pain of charges of "Islamophobia," that this woman has completely misunderstood Islam, which has nothing, nothing whatsoever, to do with "terrorizing the disbelievers." But then the question becomes, Where did she get this crazy idea? How did Samantha Lewthwaite become a Misunderstander of Islam? Could it have been from reading the Qur'an's command to "strike terror in the hearts of the enemies of Allah" (8:60)? If so, why didn't some benign and insightful Understander of Islam explain to her that she was taking the verse out of context? Why is Samantha Lewthwaite not remotely the only one, but misunderstanding of Islam like this keeps going on, every day, on a global scale?
Our leaders in the West -- Obama, Cameron, and the rest -- all assure us that Islam is peaceful and that it is the height of bigotry to suspect otherwise, and that every single act of violence perpetrated in the name of Islam is done by a Misunderstander. And I know they are wise, judicious people, who have pondered this issue deeply and carefully formulated their position on it. So they couldn't possibly be wrong. No doubt they are correct also that people like Samantha Lewthwaite arise from poverty and despair, so this problem will be solved in a trice by throwing a few million dollars and/or pounds at it. I am so glad we are in such capable hands. I'm going bowling.
"White Widow Samatha Lewthwaite's love poem to Osama Bin Laden found on computer during police raid," from the Mirror, October 22 (thanks to all who sent this in):
White Widow Samantha Lewthwaite wrote a love poem to Osama Bin Laden during her time on the run, it emerged today.
Police discovered the 'Ode to Osama' on a computer during a search of the British terror suspect's apartment in Kenya.
Lewthwaite is the world's most wanted woman following last month’s horrific terror attack in a Nairobi shopping mall, which killed more than 70 people, including five Brits, by Islamic extremists al-Shabaab....
The Daily Mirror also uncovered a diary which reveals Lewthwaite's horrific ambition for her sons, Abdullah, nine and Abdur-Rahman, to become suicide bombers.
The nine-page manuscript tells of grooming sessions encouraging them to follow the barbaric example of her first husband, 7/7 terrorist Germaine Lindsay.
Lewthwaite, from Aylesbury, Bucks, wrote that tales of holy war make the best bedtime reading for her little ones, gave advice on being the wife of a “mujahid” (Islamic holy warrior), and attempted to “incite” others to fight against “non-believers”.
She planned to write six chapters, including: “Guidance to Jihad/Islam” and “Your reasons for fighting and leaving all you love behind”.
She proudly told how she is blessed to have had a holy warrior husband who “gave his all to Allah” and “lived a life of terrorising the disbelievers”.
Here's the poem:
Syria is the latest international jihad battleground, attracting jihadis from all over the world. Before Syria it was Iraq and Afghanistan, Chechnya, Bosnia, etc. Yet the mainstream media and government analysts continue to represent these jihads as localized, nationalistic conflicts.
"Whole families from Kazakhstan travelling to Syria for jihad," from Asia News, October 18 (thanks to C. Cantoni):
Astana (AsiaNews) - A new trend is emerging in Syria's civil war. As hundreds of thousands of Syrians flee the war in their country, outsiders are doing the opposite, coming to the war-torn country on a 'family jihad' with women and children.
In recent months, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) has run virtual "travel agencies" online, offering those who want to go to Syria the opportunity of staying with affiliated groups.
On Monday, the ISIL uploaded a propaganda video titled 'Letters from epic battlefields, the hospitality of a jihadist family' that has gone viral among jihadist social networks.
The video is the first real evidence of a new trend among jihadist groups. Instead of travelling alone or in pairs, thus raising suspicions, jihadists are now moving as families.
The video, which praises one family, shows a group of 150 people who arrived in Syria from Kazakhstan with women and children, in the past few months.
A young man who goes by the nom de guerre 'Abdel-Rahman the Kazakh' explains that he came to Syria "to fulfil his duty as set out by the precepts of Islam". In his mid-teens, he also recites a verse on the glory of martyrs.
The video then moves on to a third jihadist, "Seif al-Din the Kazakh", who explains that "it is every Muslim's duty to join jihad to defend Muslim lands across the world when they come under attack."
He says that it is "every Muslim's duty to join jihad to defend Muslim lands across the world when they come under attack." In Islamic theology, jihad warfare is fard kifaya, an obligation of the community as a whole but not of every individual believer. Jihad becomes fard ayn, obligatory on every individual Muslim to aid in some way, when a Muslim land is attacked.
In another scene, a man, perhaps the head of the family, praises God for "allowing the family to emigrate and to be together in Syria to fulfil its duty of jihad".
A recent Arabic article appearing in Egypt’s Al Ahram newspaper titled “Is Terrorism Jihad?” written by Islamic law expert Dr. Abdul Fatah Idris offers important lessons—from the fact that jihad does involve subjugating non-Muslims to why the Western mentality is still incapable of acknowledging it.
Idris, professor and chairman of Al Azhar University’s Department of Comparative Jurisprudence at the Faculty of Sharia Law, is a well-reputed legal scholar. He begins his article by quoting from various international bodies that correctly define terrorism as violence or threats of violence as a means of coercion.
Idris also mentions how “the Islamic Research Academy, in its report issued on November 4th, 2001, defines terrorism as terrorizing innocent people and the destruction of their properties and their essential elements of living and attacking their finances and their persons and their liberties and their human dignity without right and spreading corruption throughout the land.”
It is interesting to note that, although he quotes from several international bodies, it is only the “Islamic Research Academy” that includes words like “innocent” and “without right,” both of which clearly leave much wiggle room to exonerate terrorist acts committed against those perceived as not being “innocent” or who it is a right to terrorize, which according to many Muslims, includes the West.
At any rate, in the context of the Muslim Brotherhood’s recent terrorist attacks throughout Egypt—including the destruction of over 80 Christian churches—Idris agrees that,
It is therefore correct to define what happened recently [in Egypt] as terrorism and it cannot be called, as some have done [e.g., Muslim Brotherhood, Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, et al.], a jihad or ribat in the path of Allah, for the difference between them is vast. Terrorism is a crime, both according to Sharia and the law; and all international conventions consider it a crime and call on all people to fight against it through all means.
Up until this point, Idris defines and agrees with the international definition of terrorism, and portrays the actions of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (whom he never names) as terrorism.
The pro-jihad site "Descendants of the Sahaba" (companions of Muhammad) has just posted this Qur'anic explication of the necessity to wage jihad against Infidels, attributing it to the slain al-Qaeda jihadist Abu Yahya al-Libi. All the chapter and verse citations are from the Qur'an. Will Muslims who reject this perspective explain how al-Libi misused the Qur'an in this piece? In all these years I have yet to see a direct refutation on Islamic grounds of a jihadist exposition of the Qur'an. If any Muslim refutes this, please alert me to the refutation -- I can be reached at director[at]jihadwatch.org. But in the absence of such a refutation, this kind of Qur'anic exposition will continue to move peaceful Muslims to take up arms in the cause of jihad -- and while they continue to fail to present Muslims with any Islamically coherent alternative, the moderates' protestations that they reject all this will continue to ring hollow.
"It’s either Jihad or Disgrace, so choose!," from Descendants of the Sahaba, October 11:
The Almighty Allah  preordained upon his believing slaves the worship of Jihad, and informed them that it is hateful to them as He said: “Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you.” [2: 216] Thus hardship, illness, striving against the soul’s desires, hunger, thirst, fear, suffering, separation from family and dwelling: all of these features that are attached to this ‘ibaadah are in actuality part of it: “And We will surely test you with something of fear and hunger and a loss of wealth and lives and fruits, but give good tidings to the patient.” [2: 155]
The Almighty said: “It was not [proper] for the people of Madinah and those surrounding them of the bedouins that they remain behind after [the departure of] the Messenger of Allah or that they prefer themselves over his self. That is because they are not afflicted by thirst or fatigue or hunger in the cause of Allah , nor do they tread on any ground that enrages the disbelievers, nor do they inflict upon an enemy any infliction but that is registered for them as a righteous deed. Indeed, Allah does not allow to be lost the reward of the doers of good.” [9: 120]
Due to these features and others Jihad became hateful to the souls that are use to incline on gentleness, containment with comfort and far-removed from dangers. Hence, the requirements of Jihad and the necessities of the soul are in most cases inconsistent as the Almighty said: “O you who have believed, what is [the matter] with you that, when you are told to go forth in the cause of Allah , you adhere heavily to the earth? Are you satisfied with the life of this world rather than the Hereafter? But what is the enjoyment of worldly life compared to the Hereafter except a [very] little.” [9: 38]
He Glory to Him said: “Say, [O Muhammad], “If your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your relatives, wealth which you have obtained, commerce wherein you fear decline, and dwellings with which you are pleased are more beloved to you than Allah and His Messenger and jihad in His cause, then wait until Allah executes His command. And Allah does not guide the defiantly disobedient people.” [9: 24]
And He said: “Have you not seen those who were told, “Restrain your hands [from fighting] and establish prayer and give zakah”? But then when fighting was ordained for them, at once a party of them feared men as they fear Allah or with [even] greater fear. They said, “Our Lord, why have You decreed upon us fighting? If only You had postponed [it for] us for a short time.” Say, The enjoyment of this world is little, and the Hereafter is better for he who fears Allah . And injustice will not be done to you, [even] as much as a thread [inside a date seed].” [4: 77]
Therefore, Jihad demands dedication, rising to lift its loads, bearing its difficulty, and patience in performing it. However, the soul declines that and it lowers itself to the lowest level on earth, clinging to its adornments. It is busy with the enjoyment of this wordily life and is also satisfied with it.
Hence, in fighting there is death and horror in front of the soul and in the present life, behind the soul there is the offspring and fortune. So it is either that the soul backsides to dunya or sets out to Jihad, in spite of the goodness that the soul is undertaking by following this step. however, the souls ois fond of hastiness so it desires everything in cash and does not accept anything on credit.
It’s either Jihad or Disgrace, so choose!
From this saying we learn the secret of our prophet salla Allahu ‘alayhi wasalam’s words:
عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُما قَالَ : سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَقُولُ: إِذَا تَبَايَعْتُمْ بِالْعِينَةِ ، وَأَخَذْتُمْ أَذْنَابَ الْبَقَرِ ، وَرَضِيتُمْ بِالزَّرْعِ ، وَتَرَكْتُمْ الْجِهَادَ ، سَلَّطَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْكُمْ ذُلًّا لَا يَنْزِعُهُ حَتَّى تَرْجِعُوا إِلَى دِينِكُمْ
“When you enter into a transaction, hold the tails of oxen, are pleased with agriculture, and give up conducting Jihad. Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your [original] religion.” 
It can be understood from this hadith that Jihad should always be given priority, and that it is not for anybody to transcend in leaving it trough being busy with a matter from this present-life’s dealings. However, if preforming the ‘Ibaadah of Jihad is possible along with being engaged in farming, cultivation or business then that is different. Otherwise, the ‘Ibaadah of Jihad in which life remains, religion is saved and achievements are protected is given precedence. Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali may Allah have mercy upon him said:
قال الإمام ابن رجب الحنبلي رحمه الله: “ولهذا كره الصحابة رضي الله عنهم الدخول في أرض الخراج للزراعة فإنها تشغل عن الجهاد.” الحكم الجديرة بالإذاعة :14
“And that is why the companions, may Allah be pleased with them, disliked engaging in the taxation of farming land because it distracts from Jihad.” 
The Shahid, Imam ibn an-Nuhaas, may Allah have mercy upon him, said about the aforementioned Hadith:
قال الإمام ابن النحاس رحمه الله: ومعنى الحديث : أن الناس إذا تركوا الجهاد وأقبلوا على الزرع ونحوه تسلط عليهم العدو لعدم تأهبهم له واستعدادهم لنزوله ورضاهم بما هم فيه من الأسباب فأولاهم ذلا وهوانا لا يتخلصون منه حتى يرجعوا إلى ما هو واجب عليهم من جهاد الكفار والإغلاظ عليهم وإقامة الدين ونصرة الإسلام وأهله وإعلاء كلمة الله وإذلال الكفر وأهله
“And the meaning of the Hadith is that if people abandon jihad and engage in farming or such then the enemy will consequently hold sway over them because of their lack of readiness and preparation to confront overwhelming times. It is also because of their acceptance to the conditions which they are in [i.e. luxuries, accommodations, conveniences]. So Allah made disgrace and humiliation prevail over them to the extent that they cannot liberate themselves from that until they return to what is obligatory upon them of fighting the disbelievers, being harsh upon them, establishing the religion, supporting Islam and its people, making Allah’s word the highest and demeaning disbelief and its people. And His saying salla Allahu ‘alayhi wasalam: “Until you return to your [original] religion” indicates that abstaining and turning away from Jihad as well as relying and having confidence in the dunya is in fact leaving off the religion and detaching from it and that’s enough as a sin and a clear wrongdoing.” 
It is not meant by leaving the religion, and Allah knows best, the typo of kufr which takes one outside the fold of the religion as some might understand. I don’t think that anybody from amongst the people of knowledge would day concerning the Muslims who intently leaves Jihad and relies on dunya that by doing so becomes a disbeliever. But, and Allah knows best, the comprehensive meaning is to declare that abandonment of the ‘Ibaadah of Jihad and occupying oneself with the affairs of the dunya which diverts one from it will consequently lead to the dominance of the disbelieving enemies which imposes its mastery over the land of the Muslims. It also leads to the implementation of their blasphemous man-made rulings upon them along with their fighting against the religion and its law out of envy, hatred and enmity towards the truth and its people.
All of that will result in the publicity of corruption, the spreading of disbelief and the weakening of the religion as well as its decline in the people’s hearts; and with the succession of generations that recognize neither a truth nor a religion, a new generation arises on error and disbelief. We seek refuge in Allah, and the best example for that is what took place in Andalusia, which has become forgotten today. This all means that repelling the disbelievers and protecting the lands and the religion of the Muslims is not done except by Jihad in Allah’s Path. Also the aHadith shows that the effort of the Du’aat [scholars] should be aimed at returning to the ‘ibaadah of Jihad and inciting the people to fulfill it. That is because Jihad is the legitimate gateway for matters to be righted and brought back to their original condition, so that the religion is honored, and disbelief is dishonored, Islam is spread and Shirk is restrained.
Some of Imam Abu Abdullah al-Halimi’s statements will be mentioned which emphasizes on this meaning. For this reason, some scholars considered Jihad as a pillar from the religion’s pillars and it is deserving to be so as Imam ibn Qasim al-Hanbali, may Allah have mercy upon him, said in his compilation ‘Ala al-Rawd:
قال الإمام ابن قاسم الحنبلي (رحمه الله) في حاشيته على الروض : وعده بعضهم ركنًا سادسًا لدين الإسلام، فلذا أوردوه بعد أركان الإسلام الخمسة
“And in some regarded it [Jihad] as a sixth pillar for the religion of Islam. That is why they quoted it after the five pillars of Islam.”
Written by the Mujahid Sheikh Abu Yahya al-Libi may Allah accept him among the martyrs.
Now wait a minute. We're constantly told that Islamic jihadists are not really Muslims at all, but "extremists" who have twisted and hijacked what everyone must believe is a religion of peace of tolerance, on pain of charges of "bigotry" and "Islamophobia." And yet young Abdullah says he was brought up to follow the Qur'an -- by one of the religion hijackers, an al-Qaeda terrorist. And indeed, we constantly see jihad terrorists invoking the Qur'an and Sunnah to justify their actions. How could this be? Why are the misunderstanders of Islam so often those who have dedicated themselves most fervently to understanding it and living it out? In the public square we are not allowed to ask such questions. To do so would be "Islamophobic."
"Watching Your Dad Get Kidnapped by America Sucks," by Wil Crisp for Vice, October 11 (thanks to A.M.H.):
It's probably a bit of an understatement to suggest Libya's been going through tough times of late. If it's not militias going rogue and seizing oil fileds or teenage arms dealers making a killing, it's the country's prime minister, Ali Zeidan, being kidnapped from his hotel by an armed militia.
Early on Thursday morning, a large group of armed men raided the Corinthia hotel in the Libyan capital Tripoli, where Zeidan was staying, and whisked him away to an undisclosed location. The circumstances of his kidnapping are so far unclear; initially there were claims that they were acting under orders from the prosecutor general who had issued an arrest warrant for Zeidan but later both the prosecutor and the Justice Ministry denied this. A few hours later, however, Zeidan's release was secured and the country's embattled leader was delivered to his office. The events surrounding his release are unclear – some eyewitnesses say he was released after army forces accompanied by informal militas intervened and stormed the building he was being held in.
One theory for his kidnapping is that it was linked to the other high-profile abduction in Libya this week. On Saturday, Abu Anas al-Libi – one of the men rumoured to be behind the bombing of the US Embassy in Tanazania in 1998 that killed 224 people – was snatched from outside his home by armed men in balaclavas, who bundled him into a car before speeding off. The armed men were said to be working for US special forces, acting on an arrest warrant the US government issued in 2000, and the incident has sparked a major backlash against the Libyan government who have been accused of being complicit in his capture (an allegation they deny).
Since Libi's capture, many groups have vowed revenge against the US and a Libyan government they see as being in cahoots with Obama and co. It's possible that Zeidan's brief kidnapping could have been motivated by his alleged knowledge of the special forces raid.
After Libi's capture, I headed to the scene and managed to secure an interview with his son, Abdullah Nazih al-Ruqaie. Abdullah lived in Manchester between the ages of six and ten but he doesn’t support either City or United. "My father didn’t bring me up to follow football," he says. "I was brought up to follow the Koran."
We’re standing at a leafy junction in Tripoli’s upper class Nufleen district, right at the spot where Abdullah’s father was abducted on Saturday at 6.30AM. It’s sunny and quiet and one of Abdullah’s neighbours is unsuccessfully trying to jumpstart his car in the street. It feels like we could be in an English village on a really hot summer's day, were it not for 21-year-old Abdullah's T-shirt, which bears a slogan that reads in Arabic: "Allah is the only god and Mohammed is his prophet." It fits him snugly, he looks like he lifts weights.
Abdullah is the oldest living son of Abu Anas al-Libi, also known as Nazih Abdulhamad al-Ruqaie, who is accused of being a key intelligence agent for al-Qaeda, helping it to plan and carry out the 1998 embassy bombings in Nairobi as well as the aforementioned attack in Tanzania. In 1999, al-Libi was indicted by the US for his alleged role in the latter bombing and it put a five-million dollar bounty on his head – however, Abdullah insists that his father had no part in the bombings.
He says that his father left Libya in the 80s to go to Afghanistan and fight with the Mujahideen, but that he never forced his way into Osama bin Laden’s inner circle, and was never involved in any terrorist attacks.
I slowly follow Abdullah around as he re-enacts his father’s abduction.
As al-Libi pulls up after morning prayers there are three vehicles waiting for him: three white cars and a Mercedes van with blacked out windows. Then: blam. Another white car rams into his father’s black Hyundai 4x4.
Now Abdullah is holding an imaginary handgun, pointed at his absent father’s head.
Al-Libi is surrounded by men waving guns and shouting at him in Arabic to "get down" and "get out".
They break the driver’s side window. Open the door and drag him onto the bonnet of the car.
Now Abdullah is miming restraining his father over the bonnet of the Hyundai.
His father’s body goes limp, he is bundled into the Mercedes van and all the vehicles speed off.
It all happened just a couple of days ago but already the Hyundai’s window has been replaced and the only signs of the struggle are some small dents in its bumper and a fine dusting of broken glass on the road. Abdullah seems remarkably reasonable about the whole affair, considering his father is a man accused of extreme acts of mass violence – he sounds upset, sure, and he says he’s angry but he’s certainly not enraged. "If the Libyan government knew [about the abduction] then that is a disaster," he says. "If the government didn’t know, then that is an even bigger disaster."
The timing of this covert snatch and grab couldn’t be worse for Libya’s beleaguered Prime Minister, Ali Zeidan. Every day the country’s security crisis deepens and Zeidan seems to have less public support, ceding more ground to radical political groups like the federalists who are demanding autonomy for the east and have taken over Libya’s oil fields. Then there are the Islamic militants – aren't there always? – who have garnered new supporters through charity work and are spreading across the country.
Whether he was involved in al-Libi's abduction or not, it puts Zeidan in a tough and potentially embarrassing situation. If he says his government knew nothing about the operation, it'd make him look weak and incompetent. If he says he cooperated with the US to plot al-Libi's kidnapping, he would in effect be declaring war on Libya’s Islamic militants, some of which are currently employed by the state to provide security.
In the end, Zeidan decided to deny all knowledge and plead ignorance. There have been daily protests by extremist groups in the east of Libya since the snatch. The most vocal have been Ansar al-Sharia, who have openly expressed admiration for al-Qaeda in the past and were linked to the 2012 raid that killed US ambassador Chris Stevens. After the abduction of al-Libi, Ansar al-Sharia released a statement, saying "America is waging a war against Islam." It also accused the US of "arresting whoever they want without accountability" and ignoring "its own corrupt laws when it comes to applying them to Muslims"....
And a Tunisian activist says that more Tunisian girls are involved than has been reported: "It’s a complete network and the Interior Ministry is not being transparent on this issue."
"Few Tunisian women waging sex jihad: official," from Agence France Presse, October 7:
TUNIS: The number of Tunisian women traveling to Syria to wage “sex jihad” by comforting Islamists fighting the regime is very low, a senior Interior Ministry official told AFP Sunday. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, seemed to play down previous statements that suggested “sex jihad” was more widespread.
“At most about 15 Tunisian women went to Syria, most to care for fighters or to do social work,” the official said.
But some of them were forced to have sexual relations with Islamist fighters once they were in the country, the official said.
“Four of them came back from Syria, and one is pregnant,” he added.
“The pregnant woman said that she was caring for fighters and had to have sexual relations with them.”
The official said, however, that women from Chechnya, Egypt, Iraq, France and Germany had traveled to Syria for “sex jihad.”
“They were targeted for indoctrination over the Internet and by foreign sheikhs,” he added, referring to information obtained from Tunisian women returning from Syria.
Interior Minister Lotfi ben Jeddou told the National Constituent Assembly last month that Tunisian women had gone to Syria where “they have sexual relations with 20, 30, 100” militants.
“After the sexual liaisons they have there in the name of ‘jihad al-nikah’ – they come home pregnant,” ben Jeddou said at the time.
Ben Jeddou did not elaborate on how many Tunisian women had returned to the country pregnant with the children of jihadist fighters.
Jihad al-nikah, permitting extramarital sexual relations with multiple partners, is considered by some hard-line Sunni Salafists as a legitimate form of holy war.
Meanwhile the head of the relief association for Tunisians abroad, Badis Koubakji, said “dozens of Tunisian women have come back” from Syria after engaging in jihad al-nikah there and that “hundreds” were still there.
Koubakji said there was a camp for the women in the northwestern Syrian province of Idlib.
“It’s a complete network and the Interior Ministry is not being transparent on this issue,” he said Sunday.
Koubakji said that these young women aged between 17 and 30 would not talk about their experiences because their families wanted to “preserve their honor.”...