The Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations, which the United Arab Emirates has just designated a terror organization, says that the beheading of Abdul-Rahman Kassig was “anti-Islamic.”
This AP story doesn’t explain what they’re basing that claim upon, and Hamas-linked CAIR probably didn’t explain. It could be several things. They could be trying to get away with claiming that Islam forbids or condemns beheadings, counting on Americans not knowing that the Qur’an says, “When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks” (47:4), and that Muhammad beheaded between 600 and 900 men of the Jewish Qurayzah tribe.
Or they could be basing it upon the Qur’an’s prohibition of Muslims killing other Muslims (4:92). Yet while Abdul-Rahman Kassig was indeed a convert to Islam, he was a former U.S. Army Ranger. The video of his beheading made mention of his service in the U.S. military and called him an “American Crusader.” A Muslim who fights against other Muslims is to be put to death according to Islamic law, and that’s what the Islamic State did.
The third possibility is that terror org CAIR thinks the beheading “anti-Islamic” because it makes their job of deceiving Americans into thinking that the Qur’an and Sunnah are benign and peaceful, and that Americans need not be concerned about Sharia, all the harder.
“CAIR condemns ‘barbaric murder’ of US aid worker,” Associated Press, November 16, 2014 (thanks to Kenneth):
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Council on American-Islamic Relations has condemned what it calls the “barbaric murder” of an American aid worker who was apparently beheaded by Islamic State group militants.
The Washington, D.C.-based Muslim advocacy organization issued a statement Sunday denouncing the purported killing of 26-year-old Peter Kassig and other civilians.
CAIR says it repudiates “the anti-Islamic ideology that produces such brutality.”…
Joginder Singh says
Is it me or do I detect the wriggling of the CAIR worm trying to get of the hook of its fellow muslims and avoid being eaten by the fish of truth
pumbar says
Lol, nice analogy!
I think CAIR is more of a maggot than a worm though.
manuel-rafael says
CAIR IS THE MARKETING BRANCH FOR HAMAS AND FATAH THESE ARE REDUNDANT “AGENCIES” OF TAQIYYA AND DECEIT, THE STEALTH JIHAD OPERATIONS CONCEIVED IN THE 1928 CHARTER OF THE AL’IKHWAN AL’ MOOSLIMEEN. THEY ARE ALL THE BROTHERHOOD, NAZI OR ISLAM CAIR’S ONLY FUNCTION IS TO MISINFORM, DISTRACT AND REDEFINE THE FACTS. NOTHING COMPLICATED IT IS A SIMPLE FACT ONLY THE MULTIPLICITY OF FRANCHISES THE OBJECT OF WHICH IS TO CONFUSE THE FACTS, THEY ARE BEHIND THE GENOCIDE THEY ARE ISIS // IL AND AL’QAEDA’S DEATH SQUADS.
jihad3tracker says
To repeat what I wrote ( as the beheading of James Foley and Steven Sotloff occurred ) CAIR is extremely pissed off at the FFMs — Fully Faithful Muslims — who actually DO clear pure jihad.
They say effectively cowards Ibe Hooper, Nihad Awad, & fellow pansy-ass sissies who don’t want to get their lovely suits dirty or risk combat death, “F*ck you all and that stealthy timetable.”
Jan Sobieski says
Beheading UnIslamic? Nope. Not at all:
http://www.onepeterfive.com/practice-beheading-justified-islam/
Joseph says
Beheading UnIslamic? Nope. Not at all.
http://www.onepeterfive.com/practice-beheading-justified-islam/
Salah says
Yesterday the grand mufti of Egypt said that these terrorists are misusing 50 verses of the Qur’an in orfer to justify their violence.
And just like CAIR, he didn’t explain how!
More and more Muslims are condemning these atrocities as un-Islamic, yet none is able to say how.
Slowly but surely they are discovering that the only possible logical conclusion is: violence *is* Islamic.
ISIS is doing a great service to humanity, especially to Muslims; ISIS is destroying Islam.
The beast of Islam *is* dying but, in its last gasp, it is becoming more and more dangerous.
AnneM says
Tayyqia on full display from CAIR.
RonaldB says
What’s really in the minds of the CAIR officials?
I think they have “gone native” in the sense that they enjoy the American, Western ambiance, while working towards it’s demise. Like the turncoats Hillary and Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Cameron, they are perfectly aware that the end game for their actions is the loss of our freedoms and culture, but figure they, and possibly their children, will still enjoy the benefits of the West before the hammer strikes.
So, the condemnation of the beheadings is a sincere, although muddled, response. The CAIR officials, in their expensive suits and taking an occasional drink under the table, are well aware that if ISIS should ever get hold of them, their heads would be used as basketballs as well. They’re simply too identified with the infidel West.
The really scary thing about Islam is that it’s intellectual constraints are so self-reinforcing. In general, a Muslim will end up either leaving Islam, or reacting from the hip, without intellectual engagement with the issues.
For example, see the website of Irshad Manji, whose minor claim to fame is the book “The Trouble with Islam.” If you look at her website, http://irshadmanji.com/ you will not find a mention of Islam at all, good or bad. She has completely bypassed the question of whether allowing an increased presence of Muslims will deteriorate freedom. So, she doesn’t have the moral courage to either defend Islam in detail or leave it, but instead ignores it. Just like CAIR, by coincidence.
jihad3tracker says
Hello RonaldB — Sorry for responding 3++ hours late . . . You nail down the deceptions of CAIR’s comfortable American Muslims, but their condemnation of beheadings is NOT sincere, IMHO. Maybe a better word is expeditious.
Self-reinforcing intellectual constraints ? http://www.citizenwarrior.com / http://www.inquiryintoislam.com. Muhammad devised a “cannot get out once you jump in” trap — give pathological credit to him.
And for new readers, other paths : http://www.barenakedislam.com / http://www.thereligionofpeace.com / http://www.pamelageller.com.
Jay Boo says
Now, Now – Let’s be fair.
Just because it is in the Qur’an, a book that Muslims claim is the immutable and infallible literal word of the Islamic inspired godhead figure (Allah), that doesn’t necessarily mean that Muslims actually consider the Qur’an part of Islam.
Jay Boo says
Obama and Hillary condemned the murder of 4 Americans in Libya. So what?
What difference does it make?
Didn’t Obama and Hillary essentially take part in their murders by aiding and abetting the Muslim Brotherhood beforehand and with the later attempted (apology to Muslims about a film) cover-up ?
Why hasn’t Obama declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization.
Michael Copeland says
“Then the Messenger of Allah [Muhammad] commanded that ditches should be dug, so they were dug in the earth, and they [the Qurayza Jews]were brought tied by their shoulders and were beheaded. There were between seven hundred and eight hundred of them” (Ibn Kathir).
Mohammed must have been “anti-Islamic”, to use CAIR’s term.
RonaldB says
“Why hasn’t Obama declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization.”
That’s an excellent, excellent question, Jay Boo.
The lines are becoming muddled. Egypt has condemned the Muslim Brotherhood, but the Obama administration is actively hostile to the Egyptian government, primarily for deposing its Muslim Brotherhood president.
The Saudis have condemned the Muslim Brotherhood, which is more interesting. Their best operative in the US, Huma Abedin, has strong ties to both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Saudi government. The Saudis have funded Muslim Brotherhood activities, such as al-qaeda, for decades. More interesting, Qatar now condemns the Muslim Brotherhood, and a more jihad-compliant government than Qatar’s, you won’t find.
There is absolutely no question that if George Bush were still the President, the US government would condemn the Muslim Brotherhood. Saudi Arabia has bought and sold the George Bush family, particularly George Bush, the last President, who was bailed out of his failed business venture by Saudi funding. Wouldn’t you love to see the secret Saudi files on George Bush?
Likely, the Saudis and the Qataris remember the Reign of Terror from the French Revolution, where everyone, left, right, and middle, lost his head…literally. Should ISIS gain control over Qatar, Saudi Arabia, or any other wealthy government in the Middle East, their heads would be rolling. There’s entirely too much fervor there, and the Islamic rulers there are not so Islamic, unlike, say the Amadiyyas, that they will willingly put their own necks on the chopping block.
This still begs the question of why the Obama administration has not declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. Obama has bowed to the Saudis, partnered with Qatar, and kowtowed to Iran, all of whom are deadly enemies of the Muslim Brotherhood. At least on paper.
Let’s do a cost-benefit analysis of condemning the Muslim Brotherhood. If the Obama administration were to condemn the Muslim Brotherhood, it would open the door to widespread examination of Muslim Brotherhood fronts, such as CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America, Muslim Student Association, and numerous other fronts. I don’t care how compliant the mainstream media are; this would be too juicy for them to ignore. The trail would lead to numerous White House contacts, past and present. The administration would end up with another major black eye, equivalent to the Obamacare imbroglio.
On the other hand, what would the Obama administration gain by condemning the Muslim Brotherhood? Absolutely nothing. No one will vote for them who wouldn’t have voted for them before. There will be no hearings on why they didn’t condemn the Brotherhood. True, condemning the Brotherhood by name would be a very positive step for the security and integrity of the country as a whole, but when has that ever been a consideration for the Obama administration?
I guess the short answer is, the Obama administration doesn’t condemn the Muslim Brotherhood because they stand to gain nothing by doing so, and stand to undergo some embarrassment. So, they view it as a net negative for them.
Western Canadian says
You make it obvious who you hate, and it just isn’t devout muslims.
Ronald Fox says
Let’s say I hate Islam. You can hate Islam and its enabling, without hating Muslims.
duh_swami says
Who is CAIR’s target audience? Stupid kuffar who need reassurances or ISIS that needs correcting?
Harvey Nextman says
CAIR uses the specific word “anti-islamic”. “Anti-” in latin means opposed to or against. It’s interesting that CAIR would cite this behavior as against Islam. Rather than use the prefix “un-” which would be “not” islamic. Why would CAIR choose to use this prefix? Probably because they know that it IS islamic behavior, but giving islam a bad name…and they won’t become targets of the islamic state themselves.
andrew Eth says
I don’t know how Muslims dare to say Islam is a religion of peace. Islam doesn’t allow democracy, Islam claims the right to live, Islam is Selfish. Islam is taking the world back to its darkest age.
we are in the 21st century but they are yet in the 15th century. Oops! they are late for the advanced world.
If a religion says it is the only true religion, that may be is correct. But, if it forces others to follow it, then it is selfish which is the character of devil!!!
God has shown as the way. But, if we didn’t follow him, he is the one to punish but not us to punish others.
andrew Eth says
this is amazing… going to heaven and marry 72 girls for killing.
Dwight Hannah says
Now I was born at night but not last night….If Muslims can lie to anyone not Muslim how can anything said by them be taken as truth. They shake hands under the table so all think everything is swell and then cut your throat when the time is appropriate. The religion of satan (against Christ) needs to be washed from all lands except muslim lands. Any real Muslim cannot live within the boundaries of a moral christian state.
K Brock says
The beheading was “anti-islamic” because they “didn’t do it right!” (Sarcasm)
D.C. Watson says
Why is Jihad Nihad holding up a drawing of that brown-toothed slob Muqtada al-Sadr?