1) Jihad is the chance for admission to heaven, everlasting paradise as a reward for killing those who don’t comply with Allah. Heaven for Moslems is in fact a porno heaven called Jannat.
2) Jihad is perpetual, and will remain so as long as the porno heaven continues to exist in the minds of Moslems.
Daniel Triplettsays
Right. And what I don’t get is why any woman would buy into Islam. There’s absolutely nothing in it for them.
Islam is a men’s club for felons.
Phil Copsonsays
Same reason why women choose the bully over the nice guy who can’t protect them from the bully.
Benedictsays
Many women have a morbid fascination with savage Muslim men like some people have a morbid fascination with snakes and reptiles. But some day they will get bitten, and that’s the only way they will learn to stay away from these creatures, if they ever will learn.
gravenimagesays
Sometimes Muslim men pretend to be decent human beings in order to fool Infidel women.
Your idea that there are hordes of women impressed with Muslim savagery is mistaken.
Richard Paulsensays
One thing bothering me. Why the honorable writer Robert Spencer was barred from entering UK, while these attackers killing Londoners and others UK citizens being allowed.
Richard Paulsensays
Correction ” and other UK citizens”.
underbed catsays
They didn’t read the book to confirm that Robert is not inaccurate.
Muslims are the most ignorant people about their blind faith called Islam.
underbed catsays
As an opinion, it seems the perversion of Islam that is the definition of terror by May of the attack in London, much to the relief I think, of the Mayor who happens to be a muslim. it may also be true that the perversion of Islam started 1400 years ago, when Medina was attacked by the perversion and they realized that he would have to blame his attack on his victims, or else it is game over. So it is better to silence the speaking about the said” perversion”, that carries on today worldwide and only seen as peaceful, but perverted an example the boko harem attack using children as martyrs, strapped with explosives….instead of what is found in the verses found in a book. So to the leaders you better read that book.
Danforthsays
What is it that these ‘jihadists’ are deathly afraid of? Not dying in the name of Allah or his Prophet, that’s for certain.
What they are afraid of is NOT getting into paradise when killed while committing and act of terror against the infidel unbeliever.
If these ‘martyrs’ knew a bullet tipped with pig’s blood was heading their way, they might rethink their actions.
Just a thought.
BLCsays
Just btw, Jihad means “struggle” and Hitler’s book Mein Kempf also means “(my) struggle”.
In short, it’s nothing we did to them or didn’t do to them. They’re doing this because they are totalitarian fascists. It really has nothing to do with us, except that we didn’t submit to Islam.
sogsays
Unfortunately it has everything to do with us. If their “struggle” is empowerment over other people (and it is) then unfortunately their “struggle” involves all of us to our fascist detriment.
mr spencer you also wrong to say jihad is an expansionist warfare to subjugate non muslims by giving them option of either submission to muslim control or death .the
general rule in Islam is peace with everybody.Hostilities can only be resorted to
where freedom to practice Islam as it is is threatened or for the protection of the oppressed whether Muslims or non muslims
as then Christian Egypt requested Muslims
to come and drive away Oppressor Roman colonisers from Egypt.
m
Jack Diamondsays
Pay attention dummy.
“the duty of jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only…furthermore, there can be no question of genuine peace treaties with these nations; only truces, whose duration ought not, in principle, to exceed ten years, are authorized. But even such truces are precarious, in as much as they can,before they expire, be repudiated unilaterally should it appear more profitable for Islam to resume the conflict.” –Encyclopedia of Islam
“jihad means to war against non-Muslims, it is etymologically derived from the word majahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion (Islam)
1) fighting is prescribed for you (2:216)
2) slay them wherever you find them (4:89)
3) fight the idolaters utterly (9:36)
and such Hadiths as are related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet said ‘I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and perform the prayer and pay zakat. If they say it they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them.”
…the duty of Jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not be attained… ‘until the end of the world’ …the Caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax…moreover, the Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim…if there is no Caliph, Jihad must still be carried out.”
—‘Umdat al-Salik, the shari’a manual endorsed by Al-Azhar
{This war is declared on people based on what they believe or don’t believe regarding Islam. See 9:29.
Fighting (qital, killing, slaughtering) the unbelievers, even Jews & Christians, unless they convert or agree to live as subjugated peoples, humbled and humiliated, and paying a ransom for their lives}.
Why did the Islamic armies ever leave Arabia if Islam were not “expansionist”? They were not threatened by their neighbors. Just the opposite.
“So at first the fighting was prohibited then it was permitted and after that it was made obligatory. Alllah revealed in Surah Nine the order to discard all (treaties) and commanded the Muslims to fight against all the pagans as well as the People of the Book if they do not embrace Islam, till they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.” –Dr. M. Mushinkhan, introduction Sahih Bukhari Medina Islamic University
“Islam has approved war so that the Word of God becomes supreme. Muhammad, therefore, sent his ambassadors to eight kings and princes in the neighborhood of the Arab peninsula to call them to embrace Islam. They rejected his call. Thus, it became incumbent on the Muslims to fight them.”
–Dr. Afifi Abdul-Fattah “The Spirit of Islamic Religion” p.383
“Muhammad had prepared an army to invade the borders of Syria…Abu Bakr ordered Khalid ibn al-Walid to invade Persian land and seize the ports near Iraq. Khalid sent his famous message to Hermez, one of the Iraqi generals: ’embrace Islam or pay the poll-tax or fight.” {The Persians not only had never invaded the Arabs, they had sent them food because of their poverty. Still they were invaded by the Arabs and killed by the tens of thousands}.
–“The Rightly Guided Caliphs” Dr. Abu Zays Shalabi
And so here was Muhammad: “Call them to Islam, if they respond (convert) accept this…if they refuse to accept Islam, demand of them the jizya…if they refuse, seek the aid of Allah and fight them.”
–Sahih Muslim 4294
Caliph Umar invading Iraq said “summon the people to God, those who refuse must pay the poll-tax out of humiliation and lowliness, if they refuse then it is the sword without leniency.”
And so here is bin Laden, centuries later, writing “there are only three choices in Islam: either willing submission or payment of the jizya or the sword.”
Explain again “you also wrong to say jihad is an expansionist warfare to subjugate non muslims by giving them option of either submission to muslim control or death”.
gravenimagesays
Appalling apologist for savagery ibrahim itace muhammed wrote:
mr (sic) spencer (sic) you also wrong to say jihad is an expansionist warfare to subjugate non muslims (sic) by giving them option of either submission to muslim (sic) control or death .the (sic)
general rule in Islam is peace with everybody.Hostilities (sic) can only be resorted to
where freedom to practice Islam as it is is threatened
…………………………
Note that ibrahim itace muhammed has claimed elsewhere that Muslims are not being allowed freedom of religion because they are not allowed to impose brutal Shari’ah law in the West–so he is *admitting* that Muslims demand that all others have to submit to Islam, and that hostilities are always in order except in a Shari’ah state.
More:
or (sic) for the protection of the oppressed whether Muslims or non muslims
(sic) as then Christian Egypt requested Muslims
to come and drive away Oppressor Roman colonisers from Egypt.
…………………………
Muslims have made this ludicrous claim before–and, as here, have never backed it up with any historic proof.
The idea that Egyptian Christians–almost all of whom considered themselves Roman at this point–would entreat a band of barbarian thugs to invade, murder, and oppress them is absurd.
Christians *always* suffer under Islam–are treated as second-class citizens, are not allowed to worship openly, and can be kidnapped, raped, forcibly converted to Islam, or just murdered with impunity.
The idea that Christians *wanted* this is grotesque.
Today, just a remnant of Egyptian Christians survive–most of them were driven out, forcibly convert, or slaughtered long since.
Bensays
A fine presentation.
In future, please don’t display the Time Magazine photo of Mrs. Clinton or any such thing. It takes away from the focus that properly belongs on you. Also, it likely annoys supporters of Mrs. Clinton, gratuitously.
I was reminded of the Woody Allen movie when someone from the Mayo Clinic gives a talk in front of jars of mayo.
Phil Copsonsays
“please don’t display the Time Magazine photo of Mrs. Clinton…..”
———————————————————————————-
That was a bonus actually – Robert’s video first appeared on my screen slightly cropped; the magazine title wasn’t visible, and so he appeared to have the severed head of Hilary Clinton displayed on a shelf.
Take another look and scroll the picture upwards to get the same effect.
After that fool of a comedienne displaying Trump’s head, it seemed quite fitting.
Wellingtonsays
Fine explanation yet again by Robert Spencer. I would ask Mr. Spencer this should he be so inclined to answer: Taking into account the distinction between greater and lesser jihad, where does stealth jihad fit into jihad in general? As an example, the demographic initiative engaged in by Muslims, whereby they often silently but inexorably infiltrate non-Muslim societies and have baby Muslims galore and thus increasing, often exponentially, the Muslim population in a non-Muslim land, as is certainly occurring in many Western nations right now. Yes, where do you place, Mr. Spencer, the very real, though perhaps only de facto, stealth jihad?
Jack Diamondsays
“where does stealth jihad fit into jihad in general? As an example the demographic initiative…”
Not speaking for Robert Spencer but in my understanding Hijra, Islamic migration, is inseparable from jihad, is a prelude to jihad, is a deliberate strategy and a legally binding obligation on Muslims.
Sam Solomon (ex Muslim,15 years a professor of shari’a law) and E Al Maqdisi, from their book “Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration”:
“The primary goal of the Hijra is the establishment of an Islamic State…the spreading of Islam is not simply a missionary activity like that of a church but it is the establishment of a community that would rise up as the soldiers of Allah to establish an Islamic state. The Islamic confession and its declaration ultimately state that the suzerainty of this world and all its governments belongs to Allah and his messenger Muhammad. Therefore, it is Allah and his apostle who are the only rightful legislators…the primary goal of the Islamic migration or Hijra is considered to be, by Muslim scholars from a religious and jurisprudence point of view as the vanguard, a preamble and prelude to jihad…
“It is clearly stated by Sheikh Mansour (Al-Azhar), who says that Qur’anically speaking Hijra is always preceded by faith, and followed by jihad in the cause of Allah. For Hijra and jihad are inseparable companions. Each (is) needed for the survival of the other. Sheikh Halima (Syria): “There can be no empowerment of religion without Hijra or immigration, neither can Islam be demonstrated in the abode of unbelief, if the Muslims were not to immigrate and settle there, nor would the power of Islam be felt if the Muslims were to remain a few, without the increase in their numbers…
“The Hijra from Mecca to Medina is considered to be a jihad for the sake of religion… for the sake of establishing the religion of Allah. For with the Hijra came the establishment of the new Muslim community and with the community came the need for new legislation, then the ushering in of the Islamic state, followed by the principles of war and peace (Shariah as a way of life).
“Sheikh Abdel Khaliq in “The Primaries of the Islamic Mission to the West” concludes that the immigration of the Muslims to non-Muslim countries and especially to the West is to empower and consolidate Islam as a preamble to jihad. All of this is legally binding on all Muslims.”
“I charge you with five of what Allah has charged me with: to assemble, to listen, to obey, to immigrate and to wage Jihad for the sake of Allah.”
–Muhammad, Haidth 2863 Kitab al Amthael reported by Tirmizi
“In equating jihad with immigration, it makes immigration a stepping stone for greater goals, particularly of transforming the existing community into an Islamic one. Transforming an existing community means having it Islamized. This could be achieved by a slow drip, drip, drip effect with constant demands; by conditioning the host community to the supremacy of Islam; by intermarriage (of local girls of the host society)… Jihad may be manifested in various forms but all of it would have one aim and that is to establish the supremacy of Islam:
‘O people, immigrate, holding on to Islam, for Hijra is to continue as long as jihad continues.”
(kenz al Umal 46260, {hadith collection Ali al-Muttaqi})
Wellingtonsays
Thanks for your response, Jack Diamond, detailed as it is. Nevertheless, and for complete accuracy’s sake, is what is referred to by so many as stealth jihad “simply” a prelude to jihad or actually a part of jihad? Either way it is iniquitous, but, for clarity’s sake, is it “merely” a prelude or part of effing jihad?
Jack Diamondsays
My best shot at an answer.
“The Hijra from Mecca to Medina is considered to be a jihad for the sake of religion”
Since hijra is a subset of the wider jihad doctrine, it is part of the effing jihad. It is only a prelude in the sense that it is the first step, with violent jihad the final step (making ready the steeds of war). The sword, or threat of the sword, always being the end game.
A’ jihad bil hijra is what jihad by immigration is called in shari’a.
Islamic migration can only be collective and for this sake, establishing the Islamic state. Because otherwise Muslims are clearly forbidden to live with the infidels (eg. “I am innocent/free of any Muslim that lives among the pagans/non-Muslims”-Muhammad, in a hadith).
All the preparation, the Islamizing, the multiplication of numbers (the most important preparation), that comes with Hijra, culminates in force or the viable threat of force as Muslims consolidate their power, after the host society is sufficiently weakened. This includes the physical elimination of enemies and their actual subjugation, violent jihad.
In the Solomon book there is an illustration depicting Jihad doctrine as the foundation of the inseparable components of Islam: Religion and State. Jihad is the foundation in this diagram because it is considered all-encompassing. Connected to this Jihad foundation are the five pillars of religion and five charges of state, or fealty, which includes both migration and the waging of jihad (in every manifestation).
Jack Diamondsays
And to be clear, ALL hijra is based on that first hijra by Muhammad.
gravenimagesays
Agreed, Jack.
Muslims have *always* practiced stealth Jihad as well as violent Jihad and open warfare and conquest.
I believe stealth Jihad is just a tactic–its purpose is ultimately the same as violent Jihad–getting Infidels to submit to Islam, either as converts to Islam or as conquered dhimmis.
Jack Diamondsays
Exactly right. A tactic based on the relative weakness or strength of the Muslims. The first stealth jihad was that of Muhammad at Yathrib/Medina, preparatory to its takeover.
RickeyGsays
Is that a David Horowitz bobble-head?
Frederick Mewsays
Do yourself (& everyone else) a favor and dump the Madam President book from sight!!! It’s very distracting and leaves a stain very distasteful to many. You can lose many fans by taking sides with political statements… said or unsaid!
Adam Marysays
Peace be with you; God bless you…in name of Jesus Christ, Hallelujah, amen.
An error in the beginning is an error in principle.
Islam’s error was in Mecca at it’s beginnings when formed from offshoot of Christian/Judaeo teaching which had spread throughout the middle east for the 500 years prior to Islam. Several offshoots of Christianity had formed throughout the know world one of which was Arianism which denied the divinity of Jesus Christ; combined with culture and paganism formed what we know as the Koran and Islam.
Annesays
I do wish we had a better word for islamophobia, which too heavily conveys an irrational fear rather than a reasoned and rational dislike or hatred.
Islam is like a poisonous SNAKE with its belly full of lethal VENOM .Hence we could call that ISLAMIC SNAKE-O-PHOBIA..
Phil Copsonsays
“…a better word for islamophobia, which too heavily conveys an irrational fear…”
———————————————————————————————————
Umm…..well, that is why the word was minted in the first place of course – as a weapon to silence anyone speaking out against Islam. It’s just something for Lefties to shout, like “xenophobe” or “homophobe”. “I win because I can shout louder than you.” is how it works.
Have there ever been special words for those who opposed Communism, Nazism*, Maoism etc ? In the past, people were just “aware of the danger of Nazism”.
(*those describing themselves as “anti-Nazi” simply mean that they are a Left-wing thug accusing any opposition of being Nazis.)
I did think of “Islamaware”, but it sounds a bit too much like the sort of unbreakable plastic crockery you might find in a mosque, or maybe a clothing-range at one of our shekel-chasing dhimmi-fied department stores:
(“Check out our sizzling Summer range of Islam-o-Wear in lightweight washable Wahhabi. Available in black, black, and black. Remember: “Black is the new Black – same as it has been for the past 1400 years. And don’t forget our explosive offer on vests – the Semtex special to die for ! One size kills all!”)
I don’t think it needs a word, Anne – giving things special words diminishes them to the level of a consumer item. “I am realistic about the dangers of Islam.” covers it, since anyone replying “What dangers?” or “There aren’t any dangers.” is at least opening the way to an exchange of views.
JW is at least making large numbers of people “Islamoproof”, for which we must be grateful.
Daniel Triplett says
Succinct, illuminating, and persuasive as always.
Great video Sir.
Juhani says
Thanks again for the great video. Shared in FB.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
1) Jihad is the chance for admission to heaven, everlasting paradise as a reward for killing those who don’t comply with Allah. Heaven for Moslems is in fact a porno heaven called Jannat.
2) Jihad is perpetual, and will remain so as long as the porno heaven continues to exist in the minds of Moslems.
Daniel Triplett says
Right. And what I don’t get is why any woman would buy into Islam. There’s absolutely nothing in it for them.
Islam is a men’s club for felons.
Phil Copson says
Same reason why women choose the bully over the nice guy who can’t protect them from the bully.
Benedict says
Many women have a morbid fascination with savage Muslim men like some people have a morbid fascination with snakes and reptiles. But some day they will get bitten, and that’s the only way they will learn to stay away from these creatures, if they ever will learn.
gravenimage says
Sometimes Muslim men pretend to be decent human beings in order to fool Infidel women.
Your idea that there are hordes of women impressed with Muslim savagery is mistaken.
Richard Paulsen says
One thing bothering me. Why the honorable writer Robert Spencer was barred from entering UK, while these attackers killing Londoners and others UK citizens being allowed.
Richard Paulsen says
Correction ” and other UK citizens”.
underbed cat says
They didn’t read the book to confirm that Robert is not inaccurate.
Richard Paulsen says
Probably.
Richard Paulsen says
Supposing so.
balam says
Muslims are the most ignorant people about their blind faith called Islam.
underbed cat says
As an opinion, it seems the perversion of Islam that is the definition of terror by May of the attack in London, much to the relief I think, of the Mayor who happens to be a muslim. it may also be true that the perversion of Islam started 1400 years ago, when Medina was attacked by the perversion and they realized that he would have to blame his attack on his victims, or else it is game over. So it is better to silence the speaking about the said” perversion”, that carries on today worldwide and only seen as peaceful, but perverted an example the boko harem attack using children as martyrs, strapped with explosives….instead of what is found in the verses found in a book. So to the leaders you better read that book.
Danforth says
What is it that these ‘jihadists’ are deathly afraid of? Not dying in the name of Allah or his Prophet, that’s for certain.
What they are afraid of is NOT getting into paradise when killed while committing and act of terror against the infidel unbeliever.
If these ‘martyrs’ knew a bullet tipped with pig’s blood was heading their way, they might rethink their actions.
Just a thought.
BLC says
Just btw, Jihad means “struggle” and Hitler’s book Mein Kempf also means “(my) struggle”.
In short, it’s nothing we did to them or didn’t do to them. They’re doing this because they are totalitarian fascists. It really has nothing to do with us, except that we didn’t submit to Islam.
sog says
Unfortunately it has everything to do with us. If their “struggle” is empowerment over other people (and it is) then unfortunately their “struggle” involves all of us to our fascist detriment.
ibrahim itace muhammed says
mr spencer you also wrong to say jihad is an expansionist warfare to subjugate non muslims by giving them option of either submission to muslim control or death .the
general rule in Islam is peace with everybody.Hostilities can only be resorted to
where freedom to practice Islam as it is is threatened or for the protection of the oppressed whether Muslims or non muslims
as then Christian Egypt requested Muslims
to come and drive away Oppressor Roman colonisers from Egypt.
m
Jack Diamond says
Pay attention dummy.
“the duty of jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only…furthermore, there can be no question of genuine peace treaties with these nations; only truces, whose duration ought not, in principle, to exceed ten years, are authorized. But even such truces are precarious, in as much as they can,before they expire, be repudiated unilaterally should it appear more profitable for Islam to resume the conflict.” –Encyclopedia of Islam
“jihad means to war against non-Muslims, it is etymologically derived from the word majahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion (Islam)
1) fighting is prescribed for you (2:216)
2) slay them wherever you find them (4:89)
3) fight the idolaters utterly (9:36)
and such Hadiths as are related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet said ‘I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and perform the prayer and pay zakat. If they say it they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them.”
…the duty of Jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not be attained… ‘until the end of the world’ …the Caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax…moreover, the Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim…if there is no Caliph, Jihad must still be carried out.”
—‘Umdat al-Salik, the shari’a manual endorsed by Al-Azhar
{This war is declared on people based on what they believe or don’t believe regarding Islam. See 9:29.
Fighting (qital, killing, slaughtering) the unbelievers, even Jews & Christians, unless they convert or agree to live as subjugated peoples, humbled and humiliated, and paying a ransom for their lives}.
Why did the Islamic armies ever leave Arabia if Islam were not “expansionist”? They were not threatened by their neighbors. Just the opposite.
“So at first the fighting was prohibited then it was permitted and after that it was made obligatory. Alllah revealed in Surah Nine the order to discard all (treaties) and commanded the Muslims to fight against all the pagans as well as the People of the Book if they do not embrace Islam, till they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.” –Dr. M. Mushinkhan, introduction Sahih Bukhari Medina Islamic University
“Islam has approved war so that the Word of God becomes supreme. Muhammad, therefore, sent his ambassadors to eight kings and princes in the neighborhood of the Arab peninsula to call them to embrace Islam. They rejected his call. Thus, it became incumbent on the Muslims to fight them.”
–Dr. Afifi Abdul-Fattah “The Spirit of Islamic Religion” p.383
“Muhammad had prepared an army to invade the borders of Syria…Abu Bakr ordered Khalid ibn al-Walid to invade Persian land and seize the ports near Iraq. Khalid sent his famous message to Hermez, one of the Iraqi generals: ’embrace Islam or pay the poll-tax or fight.” {The Persians not only had never invaded the Arabs, they had sent them food because of their poverty. Still they were invaded by the Arabs and killed by the tens of thousands}.
–“The Rightly Guided Caliphs” Dr. Abu Zays Shalabi
And so here was Muhammad: “Call them to Islam, if they respond (convert) accept this…if they refuse to accept Islam, demand of them the jizya…if they refuse, seek the aid of Allah and fight them.”
–Sahih Muslim 4294
Caliph Umar invading Iraq said “summon the people to God, those who refuse must pay the poll-tax out of humiliation and lowliness, if they refuse then it is the sword without leniency.”
And so here is bin Laden, centuries later, writing “there are only three choices in Islam: either willing submission or payment of the jizya or the sword.”
Explain again “you also wrong to say jihad is an expansionist warfare to subjugate non muslims by giving them option of either submission to muslim control or death”.
gravenimage says
Appalling apologist for savagery ibrahim itace muhammed wrote:
mr (sic) spencer (sic) you also wrong to say jihad is an expansionist warfare to subjugate non muslims (sic) by giving them option of either submission to muslim (sic) control or death .the (sic)
general rule in Islam is peace with everybody.Hostilities (sic) can only be resorted to
where freedom to practice Islam as it is is threatened
…………………………
Note that ibrahim itace muhammed has claimed elsewhere that Muslims are not being allowed freedom of religion because they are not allowed to impose brutal Shari’ah law in the West–so he is *admitting* that Muslims demand that all others have to submit to Islam, and that hostilities are always in order except in a Shari’ah state.
More:
or (sic) for the protection of the oppressed whether Muslims or non muslims
(sic) as then Christian Egypt requested Muslims
to come and drive away Oppressor Roman colonisers from Egypt.
…………………………
Muslims have made this ludicrous claim before–and, as here, have never backed it up with any historic proof.
The idea that Egyptian Christians–almost all of whom considered themselves Roman at this point–would entreat a band of barbarian thugs to invade, murder, and oppress them is absurd.
Christians *always* suffer under Islam–are treated as second-class citizens, are not allowed to worship openly, and can be kidnapped, raped, forcibly converted to Islam, or just murdered with impunity.
The idea that Christians *wanted* this is grotesque.
Today, just a remnant of Egyptian Christians survive–most of them were driven out, forcibly convert, or slaughtered long since.
Ben says
A fine presentation.
In future, please don’t display the Time Magazine photo of Mrs. Clinton or any such thing. It takes away from the focus that properly belongs on you. Also, it likely annoys supporters of Mrs. Clinton, gratuitously.
I was reminded of the Woody Allen movie when someone from the Mayo Clinic gives a talk in front of jars of mayo.
Phil Copson says
“please don’t display the Time Magazine photo of Mrs. Clinton…..”
———————————————————————————-
That was a bonus actually – Robert’s video first appeared on my screen slightly cropped; the magazine title wasn’t visible, and so he appeared to have the severed head of Hilary Clinton displayed on a shelf.
Take another look and scroll the picture upwards to get the same effect.
After that fool of a comedienne displaying Trump’s head, it seemed quite fitting.
Wellington says
Fine explanation yet again by Robert Spencer. I would ask Mr. Spencer this should he be so inclined to answer: Taking into account the distinction between greater and lesser jihad, where does stealth jihad fit into jihad in general? As an example, the demographic initiative engaged in by Muslims, whereby they often silently but inexorably infiltrate non-Muslim societies and have baby Muslims galore and thus increasing, often exponentially, the Muslim population in a non-Muslim land, as is certainly occurring in many Western nations right now. Yes, where do you place, Mr. Spencer, the very real, though perhaps only de facto, stealth jihad?
Jack Diamond says
“where does stealth jihad fit into jihad in general? As an example the demographic initiative…”
Not speaking for Robert Spencer but in my understanding Hijra, Islamic migration, is inseparable from jihad, is a prelude to jihad, is a deliberate strategy and a legally binding obligation on Muslims.
Sam Solomon (ex Muslim,15 years a professor of shari’a law) and E Al Maqdisi, from their book “Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration”:
“The primary goal of the Hijra is the establishment of an Islamic State…the spreading of Islam is not simply a missionary activity like that of a church but it is the establishment of a community that would rise up as the soldiers of Allah to establish an Islamic state. The Islamic confession and its declaration ultimately state that the suzerainty of this world and all its governments belongs to Allah and his messenger Muhammad. Therefore, it is Allah and his apostle who are the only rightful legislators…the primary goal of the Islamic migration or Hijra is considered to be, by Muslim scholars from a religious and jurisprudence point of view as the vanguard, a preamble and prelude to jihad…
“It is clearly stated by Sheikh Mansour (Al-Azhar), who says that Qur’anically speaking Hijra is always preceded by faith, and followed by jihad in the cause of Allah. For Hijra and jihad are inseparable companions. Each (is) needed for the survival of the other. Sheikh Halima (Syria): “There can be no empowerment of religion without Hijra or immigration, neither can Islam be demonstrated in the abode of unbelief, if the Muslims were not to immigrate and settle there, nor would the power of Islam be felt if the Muslims were to remain a few, without the increase in their numbers…
“The Hijra from Mecca to Medina is considered to be a jihad for the sake of religion… for the sake of establishing the religion of Allah. For with the Hijra came the establishment of the new Muslim community and with the community came the need for new legislation, then the ushering in of the Islamic state, followed by the principles of war and peace (Shariah as a way of life).
“Sheikh Abdel Khaliq in “The Primaries of the Islamic Mission to the West” concludes that the immigration of the Muslims to non-Muslim countries and especially to the West is to empower and consolidate Islam as a preamble to jihad. All of this is legally binding on all Muslims.”
“I charge you with five of what Allah has charged me with: to assemble, to listen, to obey, to immigrate and to wage Jihad for the sake of Allah.”
–Muhammad, Haidth 2863 Kitab al Amthael reported by Tirmizi
“In equating jihad with immigration, it makes immigration a stepping stone for greater goals, particularly of transforming the existing community into an Islamic one. Transforming an existing community means having it Islamized. This could be achieved by a slow drip, drip, drip effect with constant demands; by conditioning the host community to the supremacy of Islam; by intermarriage (of local girls of the host society)… Jihad may be manifested in various forms but all of it would have one aim and that is to establish the supremacy of Islam:
‘O people, immigrate, holding on to Islam, for Hijra is to continue as long as jihad continues.”
(kenz al Umal 46260, {hadith collection Ali al-Muttaqi})
Wellington says
Thanks for your response, Jack Diamond, detailed as it is. Nevertheless, and for complete accuracy’s sake, is what is referred to by so many as stealth jihad “simply” a prelude to jihad or actually a part of jihad? Either way it is iniquitous, but, for clarity’s sake, is it “merely” a prelude or part of effing jihad?
Jack Diamond says
My best shot at an answer.
“The Hijra from Mecca to Medina is considered to be a jihad for the sake of religion”
Since hijra is a subset of the wider jihad doctrine, it is part of the effing jihad. It is only a prelude in the sense that it is the first step, with violent jihad the final step (making ready the steeds of war). The sword, or threat of the sword, always being the end game.
A’ jihad bil hijra is what jihad by immigration is called in shari’a.
Islamic migration can only be collective and for this sake, establishing the Islamic state. Because otherwise Muslims are clearly forbidden to live with the infidels (eg. “I am innocent/free of any Muslim that lives among the pagans/non-Muslims”-Muhammad, in a hadith).
All the preparation, the Islamizing, the multiplication of numbers (the most important preparation), that comes with Hijra, culminates in force or the viable threat of force as Muslims consolidate their power, after the host society is sufficiently weakened. This includes the physical elimination of enemies and their actual subjugation, violent jihad.
In the Solomon book there is an illustration depicting Jihad doctrine as the foundation of the inseparable components of Islam: Religion and State. Jihad is the foundation in this diagram because it is considered all-encompassing. Connected to this Jihad foundation are the five pillars of religion and five charges of state, or fealty, which includes both migration and the waging of jihad (in every manifestation).
Jack Diamond says
And to be clear, ALL hijra is based on that first hijra by Muhammad.
gravenimage says
Agreed, Jack.
Muslims have *always* practiced stealth Jihad as well as violent Jihad and open warfare and conquest.
I believe stealth Jihad is just a tactic–its purpose is ultimately the same as violent Jihad–getting Infidels to submit to Islam, either as converts to Islam or as conquered dhimmis.
Jack Diamond says
Exactly right. A tactic based on the relative weakness or strength of the Muslims. The first stealth jihad was that of Muhammad at Yathrib/Medina, preparatory to its takeover.
RickeyG says
Is that a David Horowitz bobble-head?
Frederick Mew says
Do yourself (& everyone else) a favor and dump the Madam President book from sight!!! It’s very distracting and leaves a stain very distasteful to many. You can lose many fans by taking sides with political statements… said or unsaid!
Adam Mary says
Peace be with you; God bless you…in name of Jesus Christ, Hallelujah, amen.
An error in the beginning is an error in principle.
Islam’s error was in Mecca at it’s beginnings when formed from offshoot of Christian/Judaeo teaching which had spread throughout the middle east for the 500 years prior to Islam. Several offshoots of Christianity had formed throughout the know world one of which was Arianism which denied the divinity of Jesus Christ; combined with culture and paganism formed what we know as the Koran and Islam.
Anne says
I do wish we had a better word for islamophobia, which too heavily conveys an irrational fear rather than a reasoned and rational dislike or hatred.
balam says
Islam is like a poisonous SNAKE with its belly full of lethal VENOM .Hence we could call that ISLAMIC SNAKE-O-PHOBIA..
Phil Copson says
“…a better word for islamophobia, which too heavily conveys an irrational fear…”
———————————————————————————————————
Umm…..well, that is why the word was minted in the first place of course – as a weapon to silence anyone speaking out against Islam. It’s just something for Lefties to shout, like “xenophobe” or “homophobe”. “I win because I can shout louder than you.” is how it works.
Have there ever been special words for those who opposed Communism, Nazism*, Maoism etc ? In the past, people were just “aware of the danger of Nazism”.
(*those describing themselves as “anti-Nazi” simply mean that they are a Left-wing thug accusing any opposition of being Nazis.)
I did think of “Islamaware”, but it sounds a bit too much like the sort of unbreakable plastic crockery you might find in a mosque, or maybe a clothing-range at one of our shekel-chasing dhimmi-fied department stores:
(“Check out our sizzling Summer range of Islam-o-Wear in lightweight washable Wahhabi. Available in black, black, and black. Remember: “Black is the new Black – same as it has been for the past 1400 years. And don’t forget our explosive offer on vests – the Semtex special to die for ! One size kills all!”)
I don’t think it needs a word, Anne – giving things special words diminishes them to the level of a consumer item. “I am realistic about the dangers of Islam.” covers it, since anyone replying “What dangers?” or “There aren’t any dangers.” is at least opening the way to an exchange of views.
JW is at least making large numbers of people “Islamoproof”, for which we must be grateful.
balam says
Jihad is a form of ISLAMIC TERRORISM by Muslims to bring KUFFAR under their domination and forcibly convert them into the fold of Islam and Mohammad.