• Why Jihad Watch?
  • About Robert Spencer and Staff Writers
  • FAQ
  • Books
  • Muhammad
  • Islam 101
  • Privacy

Jihad Watch

Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Hugh Fitzgerald: The Confusions of Tony Blair, Part II

Dec 16, 2016 7:36 am By Hugh Fitzgerald

Recognizing that something’s wrong with Islam is an advance. Assuming it can be made right smacks of Pollyanna. Tony Blair has said that the educational systems in countries where [Muslim] extremism had taken hold must be overhauled.

And just how will this be done?

We’ve got to use our negotiating power and might with these countries to say, “You’re going to have to reform the education systems that are educating millions of young people day in and day out to a view of the world that’s narrow-minded, bigoted and hostile to those who are different.”

Now why didn’t the rest of us think of that?

This dreamy belief that any Muslim country or people would change its teachings about Islam, because some Infidels consider those teachings “narrow minded, bigoted, and hostile to those who are different” shows a deep miscomprehension of Islam and of Muslims. If Blair thinks pressure from Infidels will force the likes of Saudi Arabia to rewrite its textbooks (which, unsurprisingly, contain the more rigid, Salafi version of Islam, that Salafists believe to properly reflect the time of Muhammad and the two generations of “pious ancestors” that followed him), he misunderstands the hold that Islam has over such adherents. He has only to look at the reports on Western attempts to have the Saudis overhaul their textbooks, to discover how many hopeful tales of Saudi compliance were not supported by what Western investigators subsequently found in the teaching materials that are used not only in Saudi Arabia but all around the Muslim world, and in mosques in the West, where Saudi money, for mosques, for madrasas, for payment of clerics’ salaries, calls the ideological tune.

In a State Department report on the Saudis from 2004, it was clear that despite all the reformist fanfare of former Ambassador Turki al-Faisal and other Saudis, no major overhauling of Saudi textbooks was actually undertaken. And the State Department’s 2016 report, “The State of Tolerance in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,” came to much the same conclusion. In other words, in a dozen years, no progress has been made in the attempt, a very slight one at that, to clean up the Saudi textbooks. Why should Tony Blair think that things will now somehow be different?

Blair simply does not grasp how wide and deep in Islam is the inculcated hostility toward non-Muslims. He seems surprised, even after 15 years of reading the Qur’an “every day,” to discover, as he said on March 27, 2016 , that “many millions of Muslims hold views that are fundamentally incompatible with the modern world.” He talks about the need to change these Muslim minds, but never asks the critical question: are these views so much a part of mainstream Islam that no Muslim will be willing to give them up just in order to placate non-Muslims like Blair? What makes him think that all Muslims want to be part of the modern world, when so many look back to their Golden Age as the time of Muhammad and the Companions? Is it not presumptuous to assume that all peoples want to inhabit the same – i.e. modern, Western – world? Haven’t the Salafis shown that they really mean what they say about spreading the uncompromising Islam of their “pious ancestors”?

All the evidence suggests that they do. But can Tony Blair grasp this, or is his constant reading of the Qur’an getting in the way of his grasping its essential meaning? Is he missing the forest and the trees? He’s a well-pleased pleaser, proud of himself for reading and rereading the Qur’an – he mentions it all the time — but not understanding exactly what it is he is reading, or how Muslims read, take in, understand, believe, and especially, act on the same texts.

Tony Blair has at least made some progress from the period when he would stoutly declare that Islam is “beautiful,” that Muhammad was “an enormously civilizing force,” that “there is not a problem with Islam. For those of us who have studied it, there is no doubt about its true and peaceful nature.” Doubts have crept in to Blair’s description of Islam. He no longer calls it beautiful, or Muhammad an enormous civilizing force, no longer insists there is “no problem with Islam,” or describes its “true and peaceful nature.

Now he is willing to concede that the “violence” and “extremism” in Islam is a big problem, a matter not of a handful but of “millions of Muslims.” But even up to late 2015, Blair blamed a “perversion of Islam” as “the source of a lot of the problems in the Middle East.”

What perversion? He never tells us what the perversion is. Did someone twist the accepted meaning of the Qur’an? Of the Hadith? Whenever this word “perversion” is used about Islam, we have a right to demand that the person making that claim be able to explain to us exactly what is being “perverted” in the texts of Islam. One would like Tony Blair, terminally confused as he has been, to explain how Islam is being “perverted” by, say, the members of the Islamic State, or Al-Qaeda, or the Muslim Brotherhood. He won’t, because he can’t. Nor has anyone else provided an explanation of what such a “perversion of Islam” would look like. The texts so carefully cited by the Islamic State, to justify their every move, are lifted verbatim from the Qur’an and Hadith; no distortion of the texts, no “perversion” of Islam’s teachings, have been necessary.

The majority of people within Islam do not support either the violence or the ideology.

How does Tony Blair know this? Or is it merely what he would like to believe? It’s not “the violence or the ideology” but, rather, the “violence of the ideology” that Tony Blair should be highlighting, but his word choice suggests he doesn’t grasp this. The “violence” is not part of some imagined “extremism,” but is, rather, part of mainstream Islam. The Qur’an and Hadith are overflowing with violence; they are in many ways akin to manuals of war. And it appears from the opinion polls in the West that a great many Muslims do support “the violence,” and that if there is any underreporting, it is surely because some Muslims will deliberately refuse to admit to their support of violence. A polling error in the other direction Muslims claiming to support violence but in truth not doing so – is highly unlikely. Even Blair seems to recognize the popularity of what he calls “extremism” in Islam:

You’ve got these broad ideological strands that lie behind a lot of this extremism. If you take, for example, some of the organizations in the Middle East, some of those clerics that are putting out the most extreme stuff — they’ll have Twitter followings that go into millions of people.

If they have Twitter followers in the many millions, just how can these clerics be labelled as “extremists”?

These people are saying things about Jewish people — about even those in their own religion who are different that we would regard as completely unacceptable — and it’s those waters of extremism in which the violent extremists can swim.

Query: what do “these people” say about Jewish people that is not in the Qur’an or Hadith? Does Tony Blair not know what is written in those Islamic texts about Jews? Or Christians? Or non-Muslims in general?

Blair is certainly inching his way toward a more realistic view of Islam. It’s taking an interminably long time. He’s focusing now on the problems in the Middle East that are the result of Islam; he hasn’t yet taken on the question of what the burgeoning Muslim population in Europe will mean for our civilization. But even if he is less gushing about Islam than he was ten years ago, his confusion will continue as long as he refuses to grasp the inner essence of Islam, an aggressive faith based on an uncompromising division of the world between Believer and Unbeliever, Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb.

And having grasped that, will Blair dare to admit not just to himself, but to those whom, as Prime Minister, he presumed to instruct and protect, but misled so grievously about Islam, what he has learned? Anything is possible; even a Tony Blair can come to understand Islam if he tries to make sense of what he reads, and does not shy, either, from drawing conclusions from the observable behavior of Muslims over the last 1400 years, and states his new understanding without holding anything back in order not to offend Muslim sensibilities. And that, surely, is an outcome, and not just in the case of Tony Blair, devoutly to be wished.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Follow me on Facebook

Filed Under: Featured, Hugh Fitzgerald, Qur'an Tagged With: Tony Blair


Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Comments

  1. moeped says

    Dec 16, 2016 at 7:54 am

    We need to find alternative energies and get out of the middle east. We need to stop importing this ideology.
    Of course there will be strife in the West if we don’t. It’s just a matter of time and numbers. As soon as they have equal numbers, it will start.

    • Hugh Fitzgerald says

      Dec 16, 2016 at 7:57 am

      “As soon as they have equal numbers, it will start.”

      Long, I’m afraid, before then..

      • Hector Archytas says

        Dec 16, 2016 at 10:15 am

        The ratio were they should start the killing is 1 mohamadan for 2 infidels as with the effect of surprise, it is usually enough to win and killed.

        In Spain, they won at 1 mohamadan against 4 wisigoths.

        I am more looking at setting deism as a National religion in France as Robespierre tries in 1794 so as to be again intolerant.

        Our intolerance and the 0 % muslims rules on Christian land applied in XVII century was the source of our success.

        • Muhammad's Ghost says

          Dec 16, 2016 at 11:07 pm

          More like 20% (1 to 5).

          Of course the violence starts much sooner, Europe is already seeing, but the open armed warfare and genocide of non Muslims starts when they hit 20% of total population in any country.

    • Angemon says

      Dec 16, 2016 at 8:10 am

      “ It’s just a matter of time and numbers. As soon as they have equal numbers, it will start.”

      Open war? Yes. The guerilla style, however, comes much sooner, as we’ve seen in France in the last couple of years.

    • Westman says

      Dec 16, 2016 at 10:54 am

      We need to recognize that Islam is a world-level feudal system that compensates for its incompetence by the subjugation and exploitation of humans having the needed talents.

      Literally, from holes in the ground, comes the wealth used to exploit the West and spread the aggressive believers. You could say that most of our multi-national companies and political leaders(like Blair), “don’t know Islam from a hole in the ground”.

      Getting off ME oil is single most viable goal that will impact the reach of Islam. When parked in a freeway traffic jam, we should be asking, “Does this really make economic and rational sense?”

    • gravenimage says

      Dec 18, 2016 at 4:16 pm

      The Muslim population in Europe is still under 10%, and they are mass raping and killing us there–in the US, the number is under 1%, and it has already gotten pretty ugly.

      They start early, especially if they feel emboldened.

  2. G. R. Gunning says

    Dec 16, 2016 at 10:16 am

    What sort of person accepts money from the Middle East to broadcast their false propaganda -Tony Blair and Hillary Clinton – a past P.M. and a narrowly defeated Democrat candidate. How did we get a 3 times Prime Minister who is clearly criminally insane? How come Clinton got multi-millions of votes in a country that is the No. 1 Economy in the world and nearly made it? It’s such a tragedy that the electorate are so damned ignorant of what’s going on – it’s not that difficult to see – you only have to join up the dots. I would like to know what % of the Democrat votes were women. As excellent British journalist Kate Hopkins said “women should not vote with their ovaries.” Having lived in the USA for many years (no more) all the women I knew voted for Clinton – none of them had a clue about the forces at work. Very sad.

    • Carolyne says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 12:45 pm

      I don’t know who you actually know, but I am a woman and I voted for Trump. So did the women I know, including my sister. Maybe the women you know don’t have ovaries.

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 18, 2016 at 12:26 am

        So did many other women here.

      • G. R. Gunning says

        Dec 18, 2016 at 8:05 am

        Well I have never questioned them on that – it’s really not done. But let’s just say they are all in their 60’s & 70’s and just succumb to the media and it’s endless painting Trump as a groper. To them that’s all that matters, my American wife included (a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine). Now add in that his rival was a WOMAN and therefore she must be the one to vote for, regardless of what she stood for.

        I have to tell you that in the 2010 UK General Election, it was reported that many women voted for the utterly useless Liberal Clegg, on the basis that he was the “best looking” of the 3 contenders. Don’t shoot me – I’m just the messenger.

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 18, 2016 at 4:22 pm

          Yes, there were a few women who voted for Bill Clinton because he was considered good looking, and certainly some women who claimed they voted for Hillary because she was a woman (although they probably didn’t vote for McCain, even though he had a female running mate).

          But the idea that it is just women who sometimes vote for silly reasons is just not borne out.

          In fact, this story is about a clueless male. Cluelessness is not a matter of gender, regardless of what you may believe.

  3. Hector Archytas says

    Dec 16, 2016 at 10:16 am

    Even he is from a pastor familly, he does not take relighion seriously or believed that all religion are similar.

  4. Benedict says

    Dec 16, 2016 at 11:45 am

    The problem is that politicians want to prescribe what Islam ought to be in the West in order not to collide with the culture and mentality here, and that their prescription doesn’t fit with the spirit and letter of the written traditions of Islam or the examples of countries where mentality, culture and political institutions are informed by Islam.

    The confusion of Mr. Blair might thus stem from his inability to understand that a square peg doesn’t fit in a round hole, and that the peg demands that it is the hole that has to change so that it can be properly – well, I don’t want to finish the sentence.

    • KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 3:07 am

      “The confusion of Mr. Blair might thus stem from his inability to understand….” You assume he is confused. Assumptions can be very dangerous states of mind. It is much more likely he is a paid shill for islam.

      Surely you are aware that most Politicians, world wide, are the ultimate in corruption? I reckon that bastards such as Blair discover, post “service”, that they must continue to shill…the Payor has resources for retribution in excess of the Payee no longer in power, but compromised.

    • jamesmi says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 3:30 am

      From the quotations of his words, it seems that he is mis-diagnosing a theological and spiritual problem as a diplomatic and political problem. This will not lead to a well-informed understanding of Islam.

  5. avi15 says

    Dec 16, 2016 at 12:13 pm

    The bottom line is that Blair can’t admit that he got everything wrong about Islam. HIt would wreck his business model, which is based on his ‘expertise’.

  6. mccode says

    Dec 16, 2016 at 12:37 pm

    Blair is a buffoon. A dupe with a privileged education who lacks common sense. That makes him, and persons like him who command positions of power and leadership, extremely dangerous.

  7. Dom107 says

    Dec 16, 2016 at 12:44 pm

    The trouble with Islam is that it doesn’t have a figure like the Pope who claims to have a direct line to god (Ha Ha )! and who can bend the rules or say which of the “holy”” books was “inspired”. by god. That’s why there is the Catholic bible. This is a useful mechanism when Science clearly shows old beliefs like the Earth is the centre of the Universe to be nonsense Much has been changed since the scientific enlightenment by the RCC and more will be needed to keep up with true knowledge
    I would hope that Muslims would embrace science and not an archaic, intolerant religion which has a terrible track record of destabilizing their own and other peoples societies. We must protect our own societies by whatever means necessary by halting immigration from Islamic countries including Turkey and banning practices in Western countries which violates our values and freedoms. If Blair thinks we can use our might and negotiating power to change the education system in the offending countries he should talk to Teresa May who in the UKs long held tradition has been kissing the ass of Saudi Arabia in order to sell them British arms now being used in the Yemen.
    Saudis Arabia like Pakistan looks both ways but at the same time inspires and supplies the extremist narrative of Islam worldwide. Only strong and self-confident leadership throughout the West can deal with this and 2017 gives Europe and particularly France, Germany and Sweden the opportunity to save their countries from the impending Islamic catastrophe

  8. Ahem says

    Dec 16, 2016 at 4:39 pm

    Tony Blair’s claim that he has read the koran repeatedly over the last 15 years cannot possibly be true. That leaves three possibilities:

    1. He has absolutely no reading comprehension ability;

    2. He is lying;

    3. He is insane.

    I’m inclined to believe it is a combination of 2 and 3.

    I’m also convinced that he has never, even once, browsed through the evil verses responsible for abrogating over 245 of the “nice” verses in that book of deranged koranic rants and, if he did, he would continue to spout the kind of nonsense derived from 2 and 3 above.

    • Michael Copeland says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 6:14 am

      Memo to Mr. Blair:
      Read Chapter 9.

  9. ibrahim itace muhammed says

    Dec 16, 2016 at 4:40 pm

    mr hugh fitzgerald,you are not even in a position to know how and where salafists/wahhabists as root of terrorism went wrong ,because you are too ignorant about islam and its history of scholarship.if i may educate you a little bit,i want take you back to first crisis on leadership(political islam) in muslim world that caused muslims to divide into 3 camps:sunni,shia and khawarij each supporting its position with scholarly investigation on islam.shia are stunt supporters of ali the causing of prophet muhammad saying he and his descendant were the only right persons to lead muslims.sunni maintained that all companions of the holy prophet muhammad and other muslims who meet the requirements of leadership are qualified to lead muslims.the third group the khawarij are of the view that shia and sunni were on wrong side and were apostates who shall be killed.the extremist khawarajis lost support among muslims and it vanished since then.later one jew called abdulwahhab revive khwariji doctrine of extremism and intolerance to other side’s view and his ideology was adopted by saudi family who are also the descendant of a jew called modakhai who were supported and sustained by wicked christian west to plant discord among muslims to penetrate and steal their resources.when oil was discovered in abundance in saudi kingdom the jewish saudi monarchs used oil incomes to promote and spread wahhabism with support of evil christian west.eg saudi funded taliban in afganistan and pakistan, and these wahhabi elements were used by christian west to fight communist soviet.later the group broke tie with christian west under osama bin laden a wahhabi from saudi arabia. subsequently a splinter group from main wahhabism known as isis emerged with its affiliates. so, mr fitzgerald,you can see that these terrorist groups represent perverted interpretation of islam from khawarijism to wahhabism, not main stream islam.if you want know true version of islam you have to consult standard main sunni and shia books for guidance.note, wahhabist/salafists are claiming to be sunni.they are not:they belong to khawariji camp whose ideology abdulwahhab revived to serve the interest of christian west,which is now backfiring.

    • G. R. Gunning says

      Dec 16, 2016 at 5:37 pm

      What an absolute crock. You people are so far behind the civilized world in your thinking that you are totally isolated from the rest of the world. I strongly recommend that you study for a degree in one of the hard sciences – physics, math, electronics, engineering – you’ll find that all this 7th century, mumbo-jumbo drivel will just melt away into insignificance and you will wonder how on earth you ever thought that way. Only then might you stand a chance of joining the real world.

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 18, 2016 at 4:26 pm

        Good post.

    • gravenimage says

      Dec 16, 2016 at 7:59 pm

      Foul Muslim apologist ibrahim itace muhammed wrote:

      mr (sic) hugh (sic) fitzgerald,you (sic) are not even in a position to know how and where salafists/wahhabists (sic) as root of terrorism went wrong ,because (sic) you are too ignorant about islam (sic) and its history of scholarship.
      ………………………………….

      Notice that muhammed does not say in what way Salafists and Wahhabists are wrong about Islam, nor does he acknowledge that the hideous violence of Islam is *hardly* limited to Salafists and Wahhabists, but is intrinsic to Islam itself. The odd thing is that muhammed himself has confirmed this.

      More:

      if (sic) i (sic) may educate you a little bit,i (sic) want take you back to first crisis on leadership(political islam (sic)) in muslim (sic) world that caused muslims (sic) to divide into 3 camps:sunni,shia (sic) and khawarij each supporting its position with scholarly investigation on islam (sic).
      ………………………………….

      Well, this is just ridiculous. Pious Muslims of the sects in question do indeed identify as Sunni and Shia; but “Khawarij” was an *insult* used against those who abandoned Ali’s army. In the last couple of years, it has been used as an insult by those who take issue with being labeled Takfir by pious Muslims like those in ISIS.

      There is no such thing as a Khawarij sect of Islam. Is muhammed ignorant, or does he just believe that we are?

      More:

      shia (sic) are stunt (sic) supporters of ali (sic) the causing of prophet muhammad (sic) saying he and his descendant (sic) were the only right persons to lead muslims.sunni (sic) maintained that all companions of the holy prophet muhammad (sic) and other muslims (sic) who meet the requirements of leadership are qualified to lead muslims (sic).
      ………………………………….

      Anyone with the least knowledge of the bloody internecine spatting of Mohammedans is familiar with this. Why would muhammed feel the need to lecture the learned Hugh Fitzgerald on this tedious stupidity?

      More:

      the (sic) third group the khawarij (sic) are of the view that shia (sic) and sunni (sic) were on wrong side and were apostates who shall be killed.the (sic) extremist khawarajis (sic) lost support among muslims (sic) and it vanished since then.
      ………………………………….

      “Khawaraji” initially just referred to those who abandoned the army of Ali. This was not then and never has been a sect of Islam.

      More:

      later (sic) one jew (sic) called abdulwahhab (sic) revive khwariji (sic) doctrine of extremism and intolerance to other side’s view and his ideology was adopted by saudi (sic) family who are also the descendant of a jew (sic) called modakhai (sic) who were supported and sustained by wicked christian (sic) west (sic) to plant discord among muslims (sic) to penetrate and steal their resources.
      ………………………………….

      Where to start? Firstly, there is no such thing as “khwariji doctrine”–Takfir is mainstream Islam, and the concept dates back to the days of the “Prophet”.

      Then muhammed has made the ludicrous claim before that the purveyors of orthodox Islam, including Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, are “Jewish”, which makes no sense.

      The idea that the Saudis are Jewish is equally ridiculous.

      I imagine muhammed means this in the Muslim sense that anything pious Mohammedans have a problem with must be “Jewish”. Muslims, in fact, are always accusing each other of being “Jews”.

      As for the rest, the West had absolutely no presence or influence in Arabia during the 18th century, and except for incense and few other equally minor things, Arabia basically had no resources.

      It would not be until the 20th century that they Infidel invention of the internal-combustion engine made oil useful. Until then, it had no use at all.

      More:

      when (sic) oil was discovered in abundance in saudi (sic) kingdom the jewish (sic) saudi (sic) monarchs used oil incomes to promote and spread wahhabism (sic) with support of evil christian (sic) west.eg saudi (sic) funded taliban (sic) in afganistan (sic) and pakistan (sic), and these wahhabi (sic) elements were used by christian (sic) west to fight communist soviet.later (sic) the group broke tie with christian (sic) west under osama (sic) bin laden (sic) a wahhabi (sic) from saudi (sic) arabia (sic). subsequently a splinter group from main wahhabism (sic) known as isis (sic) emerged with its affiliates.
      ………………………………….

      muhammed is *still* not able to say in what way any of this orthodox Islam is anything but, well, orthodox Islam.

      It is especially hilarious that he is ranting about ‘filthy christians’ and ‘evil jews’ while (supposedly) decrying ‘extremism’. He does not say how this “extremism” is in any way different from what he himself is on about.

      More:

      so, mr (sic) fitzgerald,you (sic) can see that these terrorist groups represent perverted interpretation of islam (sic) from khawarijism (sic) to wahhabism (sic), not main stream islam (sic).
      ………………………………….

      Of course, muhammed here has not made a cogent case that Jihad terrorism is not mainstream Islam–because it cannot be done.

      He also does not say how it is to the advantage of the Christian West to have ravening Muslims invading our civilized nations and waging violent Jihad here.

      More:

      if (sic) you want know true version of islam (sic) you have to consult standard main sunni (sic) and shia (sic) books for guidance.note (sic), wahhabist/salafists (sic) are claiming to be sunni.they (sic) are not:they (sic) belong to khawariji (sic) camp whose ideology abdulwahhab (sic) revived to serve the interest of christian (sic) west,which is now backfiring.
      ………………………………….

      Standard Sunni and Shia books? OK then. Here is the venerable Ayatollah Khomeini on how to abuse animals in a Halal manner in his iconic Little Green Book:

      “A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm.He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village, but selling the meat to a neighbouring village is reasonable.
      If one commits the act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrement become impure and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed as quickly as possible and burned.”

      Well, that is just appalling. What does he have to say about pedophilia?

      “A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate vaginally, but sodomising the child is acceptable. If a man does penetrate and damage the child then, he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl will not count as one of his four permanent wives and the man will not be eligible to marry the girl’s sister… It is better for a girl to marry at such a time when she would begin menstruation at her husband’s house, rather than her father’s home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven.”

      Well, that’s *sickening*!

      What about the Sunnis? This, from the canonical compendium of orthodox Sunni jurisprudence Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller), which has the seal of approval from Al-Azhar:

      “According to Sharia, when a child or woman is taken captive by Muslims, they become slaves by the mere fact of their capture. A captured woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.”

      Well, that’s just horrifying!

      There’s lots more ugliness, of course–and muhammed doesn’t consider any of this “extreme”…

      • jamesmi says

        Dec 17, 2016 at 3:59 am

        The Ayatollah makes it abundantly clear that

        “Muslims have no alternative, if they wish to correct the political balance of society, and force those in power to conform to the laws and principles of Islam, to an armed Jihad against profane governments.

        Though you may not have the means to prevent heresy or fight corruption, nevertheless, you must not remain silent. If they hit you in the head, protest! Resigning yourself to oppression is more immoral than oppression itself. Argue, denounce, oppose, shout. Spread the truth – that Islamic justice is not what they say it is.

        Jihad means the conquest of all non-Muslim territories. Such a war may well be declared after the formation of an Islamic government worthy of that name, at the direction of the Imam or under his orders. It will then be the duty of every able-bodied adult male to volunteer for this war of conquest, the final aim of which is to put Qur’anic law in power from one end of the earth to the other. But the whole world should understand that the universal supremacy of Islam is considerably different from the hegemony of other conquerors. It is therefore necessary for the Islamic government first to be created under the authority of the Imam in order that he may undertake this conquest, which will be distinguishable from all other wars of conquest, which are unjust and tyrannical and disregard the moral and civilizing principles of Islam.”

        [pages 1-2]

        The politicians and suchlike to wake up.

        • jamesmi says

          Dec 17, 2016 at 4:01 am

          I forgot to give a link to the book, so here it is: https://archive.org/details/TheLittleGreenBook–AyatollahKhomeini

        • gravenimage says

          Dec 18, 2016 at 12:30 am

          I’m trying to do my part to wake people up, James.

    • Muhammad's Ghost says

      Dec 16, 2016 at 11:14 pm

      There you go. Just like a true Muhammadan you find a way to blame the Jews for all your woes.

      The idea that Wahabism was started by the Jews to ruin Islam is complete tinfoil hat conspiracy nonsense.

      Islam’s unofficial credo: When in doubt blame the Jews.

    • KABOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 3:41 am

      Eff off you stupid muzz retard. How do I know you are a retard? Easy – you have the word muhammed in your name. By the way, I was chatting wif allah last night.The topic of mad m0’s hatred of dogs came up. I asked why m0 hated dogs. allah explained it this way:

      m0 was taking a dump (defecating) out in the desert one day. A curious dog (allah said it was black in colour which is why most muzz hate black people) was wandering past and attracted by m0’s divine stench went over for a sniff. m0 smacked the dog on the snout as it was investigating and the dog in response bit m0’s action sack, badly damaging one of his ballz. I enquired of allah if m0’s damaged action sack effected his mental condition. allah hedged a bit on this but grudgingly acknowledged it might have been wot turned him into a pedophile.

      I was also able to convince allah to become an early investor in my Virgin Re-cycling business. I launched this innovative disruptive concept in response to the huge uptick in the number of newly minted “Holy Warrior” martyrs requiring their 72 virgins and the rapidly dwindling supply of said virgins. He purchased a franchise for Jannah and also the rights of first refusal on all interplanetary franchises. That allah feller aint stupid.

    • Carolyne says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 12:50 pm

      Ibrahim, it’s time you understand that you are insane and in need of treatment and/or medication. You are not living in reality.

    • Jack Diamond says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 2:28 pm

      Your problem is that the founder of Islamic terrorism is Muhammad, unless you think the sunnah, the words and deeds of Muhammad, are also “khawarij.” Muhammad and his Companions, the “best of Muslims” would be right at home with bin Laden and al-Baghdadi, because they set the example for them. Care to prove otherwise? Not to mention, Muslims found guilty of “kufr” have been dutifully pronounced apostate since the beginning of Islam, death penalty attached. Where is the perversion of Islam? Or that Muslim cannibalism also goes back to the origins, from the murders of the early Caliphs by equally pious Muslims till now. Muslims fighting and killing other Muslims does not make them “khawarij.” It is just business as usual.

      Remember, al-fitnah (discord, ‘corruption’of Islam, opposition or resistance to Islam,the ‘persecution’ of Muslims from disbelief, kufr, and “shirk”–polytheism) is worse than making a slaughter (s. 2:191) Or is Allah a “khawarji”? “Kill/slaughter/slay them wherever ye find them…for Fitnah is worse than slaughter.” That “qital”-murder business again, that you haven’t attempted to refute.

      Tafsir Ibn Kathir “Since Jihad involves killing and shedding the blood of men, Allah indicated that these men are committing disbelief in Allah, associating with Him (in the worship) and hindering from His path, and this is a much greater evil and more disastrous than killing…(And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing.) Meaning what you (disbelievers) are committing is much worse than killing…(And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing.) “Shirk (polytheism) is worse than killing…(…and the religion (all and every kind of worship) is for Allah (Alone).) means, `So that the religion of Allah becomes dominant above all other religions.’

      In addition, it is reported in the Two Sahihs: “I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight the people until they proclaim, `None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’. Whoever said it, then he will save his life and property from me, except for cases of the law, and their account will be with Allah.)”

      The donkey-porn collector above must be a Mossad agent, sent here to make Muslims look stupid.
      Isn’t that the correct and inevitable logic, Abraham?

      • gravenimage says

        Dec 18, 2016 at 4:37 pm

        Great post, Jack.

  10. mortimer says

    Dec 17, 2016 at 1:10 am

    Tony Blair is right when he targets education as the source of the problem. Those who don’t study the Koran, hadiths, Sira and classical commentaries of Islam BECOME JIHADISTS. Those who don’t study them do NOT become jihadists.

    At universities, ISLAMIC STUDY GROUPS are major sources of JIHADISTS.

    Conclusion: NO ONE SHOULD STUDY ISLAM’S SOURCE TEXTS if you want to end jihadism.

    • mortimer says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 1:10 am

      Correction: Those who DO study the Koran, hadiths, Sira and classical commentaries of Islam BECOME JIHADISTS. Those who don’t study them do NOT become jihadists.

  11. mortimer says

    Dec 17, 2016 at 1:16 am

    The only way to stop Wahhabism from spreading is to bankrupt Soddy Barbaria so they may no longer EXPORT THEIR POISONOUS IDEOLOGY.

    The world should boycott KSA and take down the financial support for jihadism. At that point, Islam will collapse.

    • Carolyne says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 12:54 pm

      Only yesterday and many times before, Donald Trump said that under his administration we will become completely self-sufficient in energy and have enough to sell to other countries which now rely on Saudi Arabia and Russia. And he named oil, shale, coal, etc. all of which we have in great supply. His plan is to lift the restrictions now in place.

      Tree huggers won’t like it and those who have made billions on the climate change hoax won’t like it, but there it is………………………

  12. sidney penny says

    Dec 17, 2016 at 1:43 am

    “The majority of people within Islam do not support either the violence or the ideology.”-Tony Blair

    “How does Tony Blair know this? Or is it merely what he would like to believe? It’s not “the violence or the ideology” but, rather, the “violence of the ideology”

    It is the violence of the ideology that the authors points out in this book below..

    The question is:

    What behavior pattern arises from what the Quran instils in or teaches to a devoted follower in relation to an infidel( kafir, unbeliever)

    http://voiceofdharma.org/books/tcqp/

    see particular this chapter where the author discusses the judgment.

    THE JUDGMENT MISSES THE MAIN POINT

    ” The real issue raised by the Petition was not what Muslims believe about the Quran but what behaviour pattern the Quran inculcates in its votaries vis-à-vis the unbelievers.”

    • Michael Copeland says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 6:28 am

      What the “majority of people within Islam” support is of no concern in Islam.
      Islam is not a Trade Union.
      Islam requires submission.
      “It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision.”
      Koran 33:36, part of Islamic law.

  13. sidney penny says

    Dec 17, 2016 at 1:51 am

    “Anything is possible; even a Tony Blair can come to understand Islam if he tries to make sense of what he reads, and does not shy, either, from drawing conclusions from the observable behavior of Muslims over the last 1400 years, and states his new understanding without holding anything back in order not to offend Muslim sensibilities.”

    Forget what you read in the texts of Islam.The more important point is drawing conclusions from the observable behavior of Muslims over the last 1400 years,

  14. ibrahim itace muhammed says

    Dec 17, 2016 at 2:43 am

    gravenimage, i can see that whenever you want respond to my comment ,you must have sex with donkey thereby becoming too dull.your response is bellow the standard even in literary criticism of creative writings.why dont you endeavour study some basic textbooks on islamic history?even a secondary school student of islamic history will educate you about khawarijism with its literal and perverted interpretation of islam, and how wahhabists adopted the same method.just read taha mahmood’s book tarikhil islam(islamic history).there is one story about khawarij’s perverted interpretation of islam where they invaded the house of one leading islamic scholar imam hanafi the founder of hanafi school of interpretation with dangerous weapons.they asked him to give them fatwa on two cases.if the answer contradict their ideology they will behead him.the cases are a man took too much intoxicant and he died and a women became pregnant through zina(illicit sex)and she died.they want know the position of these people in islam.are they going to hellfire?note according to khawariji ideology mere committing of sin like taking intoxicant and zina constitutes apostasy and the person goes to hell like unbelievers.the imam refused to give them direct answer for fear of being killed.he only told them that taking someone to hellfire is within the prerogative of allah the creator.this is exactly the ideology of wahhabists of beheading any one who differ with their view.in main stream islam there is nothing like beheading.even animal can only be slaughtered for consumption not be beheaded.and one cannot be killed for mere expression of dissenting view

    • jamesmi says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 4:45 am

      Depends what is meant by “dissenting view”, though.

      “In mainstream Islam there is nothing like beheading”.

      As for beheading, it is based on the Koran, because it is commanded in Sura 47.4:

      “So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens. That [is the command]. And if Allah had willed, He could have taken vengeance upon them [Himself], but [He ordered armed struggle] to test some of you by means of others. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah – never will He waste their deeds”.

      https://quran.com/47/4

      And there is 8.12:

      “[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.”

      quran.com/8/12

      And in the very next verse we are told:

      “That is because they opposed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger – indeed, Allah is severe in penalty”.

      quran.com/8/13

      As if that were not clear enough, 8.14 says:

      “That [is yours], so taste it.” And indeed for the disbelievers is the punishment of the Fire”.

      quran.com/8/14.

      This page shows that beheading is Islamic

      http://www.andrewbostom.org/2014/10/koranic-sanction-for-beheading-infidels-i-e-koran-812474-explained-by-renowned-theologian-s-a-usmani-d-1949/

      The quotations in this article show that beheading is Islamic, and not a perversion:

      jihadwatch.org/2014/08/muslim-cleric-justifies-islamic-state-beheadings-islam-is-a-religion-of-beheading

      This is a sickening subject, but it is necessary to mention these horrible details, in order to destroy the idea that beheading is unIslamic.

    • G. R. Gunning says

      Dec 17, 2016 at 7:06 am

      Your words are not of this century or even this millennia. You live in a bizarre & ancient world of make-believe, indoctrinated by a hundreds of years myth & complete drivel.

    • gravenimage says

      Dec 18, 2016 at 12:58 am

      Yet more from the appalling ibrahim itace muhammed:

      gravenimage, i (sic) can see that whenever you want respond to my comment ,you (sic) must have sex with donkey thereby becoming too dull.your (sic) response is bellow (sic) the standard even in literary criticism of creative writings.
      ………………………………..

      Once again, muhammed is confusing writing critically and engaging in bestiality. How can Muslims be so stunningly ignorant? Perhaps it has to do with their rejection of reason.

      More:

      why (sic) dont you endeavour (sic) study some basic textbooks on islamic history?even (sic) a secondary school student of islamic history will educate you about khawarijism (sic) with its literal and perverted interpretation of islam (sic), and how wahhabists adopted the same method.
      ………………………………..

      What rot. Muslims have been declaring each other Takfir and hence fair game for slaughter ever since the days of the “Prophet”. The idea that this was not practiced between the time of the last “Rightly Guided Caliph” up until the 18th century is either ignorance or Taqiyya.

      More:

      just (sic) read taha (sic) mahmood’s (sic) book tarikhil islam(islamic (sic) history).
      tarikhil islam
      ………………………………..

      Taha Mahmood rejected the concept of abrogation, which means he is considered a “Heretic” by most orthodox Muslims. He was found guilty of apostasy and executed by more orthodox Muslims in 1985 in Sudan.

      The idea that his ideas are so mainstream as to be accepted by every secondary student is patently false.

      More:

      there (sic) is one story about khawarij’s (sic) perverted interpretation of islam (sic) where they invaded the house of one leading islamic (sic) scholar imam (sic) hanafi (sic) the founder of hanafi (sic) school of interpretation…
      ………………………………..

      Well, muhammed is contradicting himself here. He claimed previously that “Khawarij” interpretations were rejected by all Muslims shortly after the death of Ali. But this was in 661 AD, and Abu Hanifa did not die until over a century later–so how can he have been threatened by these people, who supposedly did not exist at the time?

      Never mind that the idea that Abu Hanifa was some sort of “moderate” also quite absurd.

      More:

      this (sic) is exactly the ideology of wahhabists (sic) of beheading any one who differ with their view.in (sic) main stream (sic) islam (sic) there is nothing like beheading.even (sic) animal can only be slaughtered for consumption not be beheaded.and (sic) be cannot be killed for mere expression of dissenting view
      ………………………………..

      What claptrap. The Qur’an and Hadith are full of exhortations to strike off the head of Infidels. Why is muhammed’s deceit so terribly ham-fisted?

  15. elisheva says

    Dec 17, 2016 at 7:16 am

    Money is the root of all biases. He was getting paid to be ignorant of the truth.

  16. Dacritic says

    Dec 18, 2016 at 11:32 am

    Islam itself is a perversion.

FacebookYoutubeTwitterLog in

Subscribe to the Jihad Watch Daily Digest

You will receive a daily mailing containing links to the stories posted at Jihad Watch in the last 24 hours.
Enter your email address to subscribe.

Please wait...

Thank you for signing up!
If you are forwarding to a friend, please remove the unsubscribe buttons first, as they my accidentally click it.

Subscribe to all Jihad Watch posts

You will receive immediate notification.
Enter your email address to subscribe.
Note: This may be up to 15 emails a day.

Donate to JihadWatch
FrontPage Mag

Search Site

Translate

The Team

Robert Spencer in FrontPageMag
Robert Spencer in PJ Media

Articles at Jihad Watch by
Robert Spencer
Hugh Fitzgerald
Christine Douglass-Williams
Andrew Harrod
Jamie Glazov
Daniel Greenfield

Contact Us

Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Archives

  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2019
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2018
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2017
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2016
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2015
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2014
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2013
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2012
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2011
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2010
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2009
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2008
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2007
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2006
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2005
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2004
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • September
    • August
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2003
    • December
    • November
    • October
    • March

All Categories

You Might Like

Learn more about RevenueStripe...

Recent Comments

  • Michael Copeland on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • Michael Copeland on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • Westman on New study reveals that Muslim religiosity strongly linked to hatred towards the West
  • gravenimage on Erdogan: ‘Turks must defend the rights of Jerusalem, even with their lives’ for ‘the honor of the Islamic nation’
  • gravenimage on Erdogan: ‘Turks must defend the rights of Jerusalem, even with their lives’ for ‘the honor of the Islamic nation’

Popular Categories

dhimmitude Sharia Jihad in the U.S ISIS / Islamic State / ISIL Iran Free Speech

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Books by Robert Spencer

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to their respective owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and you do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.

Our mailing address is: David Horowitz Freedom Center, P.O. Box 55089, Sherman Oaks, CA 91499-1964

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.