It is telling that the Spiritual Directorate of Muslims of Russia recommends that Islamic State members should be killed — apparently it takes for granted the Sharia death penalties for heresy and apostasy. Also, this is still more window dressing to lull the Infidels into complacency, as I show in my comments below. “Russian Muslims denounce ISIS as ‘enemies of Islam,’” RT, March 31, 2015:
A major Russian Muslim group has issued a fatwa against the so-called Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) reviling them as ‘enemies of Islam’ and calling for the punishment of all its members as criminals.
The Spiritual Directorate of Muslims of Russia published the text of the fatwa on its website on Tuesday.
“The members of the Ulama [Islamic scholars] council, on the basis of the Koran and Sunna and other legal sources, have shown and proved that all actions of the organization that calls itself “Islamic State” are contradicting Islam – starting from the creation of the group and calls for resettlement and finishing with their cruelty and public executions,” the document reads.
“From the point of view of the Muslim canon the members of such criminal groups deserve either capital punishment or full lifelong isolation from the society,” the Russian Muslim leaders stated. However, they noted in the fatwa that every suspect must be convicted by a court verdict that would fully exclude all doubts of his or hers complicity in violence, robberies and killings.
“The followers of ISIS are mistakenly interpreting Islam as the religion of brutality and cruelty, of violence, torture and killings of all discontent,” the Russian Muslims stated. In reality, the basic principles of Islam forbid to kill civilians, prisoners and envoys – and journalists and workers of humanitarian missions can be described as the latter, they added.
Where could the Islamic State have possibly gotten the idea that brutality and cruelty and violence had anything do with Islam?
5:33: “This is the recompense of those who fight against Allah and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement.”
“Narrated Abu Qilaba: Anas said, ‘Some people of ‘Ukl or ‘Uraina tribe came to Medina and its climate did not suit them. So the Prophet ordered them to go to the herd of (Milch) camels and to drink their milk and urine (as a medicine). So they went as directed and after they became healthy, they killed the shepherd of the Prophet and drove away all the camels. The news reached the Prophet early in the morning and he sent (men) in their pursuit and they were captured and brought at noon. He then ordered to cut their hands and feet (and it was done), and their eyes were branded with heated pieces of iron, They were put in ‘Al-Harra’ and when they asked for water, no water was given to them.’ Abu Qilaba said, ‘Those people committed theft and murder, became infidels after embracing Islam and fought against Allah and His Apostle.'” (Bukhari 1.4.234)
Most importantly, the creation of a caliphate is only possible by approval of all Muslim communities and otherwise is considered a mutiny. “A single-sided declaration of caliphate would cause numerous competing caliphates to appear and this would cause strife and disagreement between Muslims,” the fatwa reads.
“Most importantly, the creation of a caliphate is only possible by approval of all Muslim communities and otherwise is considered a mutiny.” In that case, the Umayyad, Abbasid, Shi’ite Fatimid, and Ottoman caliphates, as well as the caliphate of the Rightly Guided Caliphs Abu Bakr and Ali ibn Abi Talib, were all “a mutiny.” The Umayyad caliphate was established with violent disapproval from the party of Ali — the Shi’ites. The Abbasids supplanted the Umayyads. The Ottomans declared a caliphate while there was still an Abbasid caliph in Cairo. Abu Bakr was chosen despite the objections of the party of Ali, and Ali’s caliphate was contested by Muawiya.
In December last year, the Russian government listed the Islamic State and the Al-Nusra Front as terrorists, outlawing membership or any support for these organizations under threat of criminal prosecution. In addition, the Russian Foreign Ministry called upon all nations to recognize the two groups as terrorists, noting that such a step would be backed up by UN Security Council resolutions.
In March this year, the head of Russia’s State Security Council, Nikolay Patrushev, called upon the international community to abandon double standards on terrorism and start fighting the threat in line with universally-recognized norms of international law.
Patrushev also told reporters that he and other Russian officials preferred to use the term ‘Islamic State’ in quotation marks to avoid insults to true Muslims who, in his view, had no relation to terrorists and extremists. For the same reason he called to refer to it by its original name – the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant, or ISIL.
Champ says
ISIS are not “enemies of islam”, but are in fact devout muslims whom follow their evil prophet of doom and the unholy quran.
Wellington says
Agreed, Champ. Yes, if only the world at large would comprehend that members of ISIS are actually very good Muslims.
Wellington says
This should be seen as principally done for domestic political consumption because Putin, unlike Obama, is feared and perceived as strong, and the best way of containing Muslims is through the use of fear and strength (just as with those who adhere to some other totalitarian ideology, for instance Marxists).
Unfortunately, Putin is also an enemy of liberty. Many other enemies of liberty, including those who have been even more antagonistic to it than Putin, for instance Saddam Hussein, have also contained Muslims because of fear and strength. Optimally, though, Muslims should be contained by leaders who value liberty, cherish it in fact, but who still know how to recognize and deal with an inveterate foe of it.
Mirren10 says
”This should be seen as principally done for domestic political consumption because Putin, unlike Obama, is feared and perceived as strong, and the best way of containing Muslims is through the use of fear and strength … ”
Excellent point, Wellington.
And, as you say, how absolutely horrifying it is we have to look to a thug like Putin to contain this vile religion.
” Optimally, though, Muslims should be contained by leaders who value liberty, cherish it in fact, but who still know how to recognize and deal with an inveterate foe of it”
The only one I know of in Britain, is Paul Weston, of LibertyGB. We need *many* more.
I hope you’re well, Wellington. As always, I relish your perspicacious comments !
charlieg says
Sigh,………” perspicacious” ….. comments?
That’s only four syllables. Pls. try to keep up with terseness-challenged Wellington.
Avenger says
What is more ” horrifying ” Mirren, Putin supporting Orthodox Christians in the Ukranian civil war created by USA and NATO meddling? Or Obama supporting sunni factions against the legitimate government in the Syrian civil war? The Ukranian unrest has killed about 3,600 on both sides and a civilian passenger airliner, compare the Syrian civil war which is getting close to 300,000 dead and has a ongoing christian genocide.
Conclusion: USA 100x’s more ” horrifying ” than Russia.
Putin is a stateman who loves his country, Obama is a slithering sunni who is subverting the lone remaining Superpower on earth into muslim pandering nightmare.
Greco-Roman culture is dying in the West. Russia and Eastern Europe might be its last safe bastion.
Mirren10 says
”Putin is a stateman who loves his country … ”
Putin is an ex KGB thug, although I agree with your assessment of obama.
I said it was horrifying that we have, at the moment, to depend on thugs like putin, because we have no *statesman* in the West, at the moment, prepared to stand up to islam.
Putin is no rose, and he tolerates a hell of a lot of Islamic supremacism, when it suits his book. Just google ”Islamic prayers in Moscow”.
pdxnag says
At least these Muslims apparently share ISIS’s belief that Islam represents a political collection of folks that have unilateral authority to declare war on others. This should render any treatment of Islam as any sort of revered religious thingy worthy of respect and deference wholly void.
Westman says
The perfect man with the perfect example of the inherent cruelty of Islam.
Bukhari: Volume 8, Book 82, Number 795:
Narrated Anas:
The Prophet cut off the hands and feet of the men belonging to the tribe of ‘Uraina and did not cauterise (their bleeding limbs) till they died.
Kasey says
The SDMR by its statement against ISIS is merely doing an exercise in taqiyya again, as Muslims, deep down [ie Sunnis in this case] are tacit supporters of anything that work towards Islamic dominance of the World. The myth of martyrdom induces them to love death more than life, by believing that in the next life, it will be paradise for them.
They just choose to ignore Koranic verses now as it suits that logic.
Chris says
Taqiyya at work again. Why has it taken so long to discover this? And issue the ” Fatwa “?
Lioness says
I like that Fatwa. It means Muslims killing Muslims, great concept.
Chris says
Its just one big act of Taqiyya, never believe anything a Muslim says, Obama is the worst of all.
Kepha says
I’m sure the eminent Qur’anic scholar Volodya Ibn Vladimir would approve.
citycat says
We peaceful muslims are not happy with ISIS muslims
because ISIS muslims are giving us peaceful muslims a bad name
and making it more difficult for us peaceful muslims to perform stealth jihad.
Mahendra Singh says
Obviously, Putin is above Allah.
Clinton H says
Mahendra, All people are above “allah” as “allah” is merely a black rock contained in a black cube in Mecca.