Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a board member of Harvard International Review and president of the International American Council on the Middle East; he is also the author of the extraordinary book A God Who Hates Women: A woman’s journey through oppression and another, Peaceful Reformation in Iran’s Islam: A life story of struggle and poverty, which is just as riveting.
In this extraordinary Gatestone Institute article, he buttresses what I have noted for years, that most of today’s prominent “moderate” Muslim spokesmen are primarily interested in making sure that no one thinks that jihad terror and Sharia oppression have anything to do with Islam, and thus do more harm than good to the effort of trying to inform the public of the true nature and magnitude of the threat we face. Also, they mislead the uninformed public into thinking that the vast majority of Muslims think just as they do, when if they renounce jihad and Sharia they’re actually quite non-traditional Muslims, and so even at best, they mislead people into complacency.
The “moderate” Muslim picture of Islamic theology and history is generally enormously inaccurate. Click here to preorder my forthcoming book The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS to see how prominent “moderate Islam” has been in the history of the religion.
“The ‘Moderate’ Muslim Scholar Industry,” by Majid Rafizadeh, Gatestone Institute, April 3, 2018:
…There is a huge industry of so-called “moderate” Muslim scholars, who are actually apologists for Islam. This industry began to grow after the catastrophe of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and from there, expanded….The West, unfortunately, encourages these “moderate” Muslim apologists to keep on advancing these false views: that one must not blame extremists, that nothing is the fault of the Islamic teachings, that all of these radical and that Islamist terrorist attacks “have nothing to do with Islam.” More doors and opportunities keep opening for these apologists to get cash. The Muslim apologists are handed megaphones, invited to international forums, handed book deals, given scholarships, and offered jobs with elite but false titles such as “Islam and Counter-Terrorism Expert.” With such incentives, why would anyone ever stop?
Meanwhile the real scholars of Islam, such as Robert Spencer, who are trying to warn the public about these apologists, are called “Islamophobes,” poisoned, often fired from work, censored on social media and barred from entering democratic countries such as Great Britain….
Read the whole thing here.
Lebel says
” that one must not blame extremists, that nothing is the fault of the Islamic teachings, that all of these radical and that Islamist terrorist attacks “have nothing to do with Islam.”
Who are these scholars? can we get some names?
I think what we really mean here is that most of those scholars are unwilling to call Islam evil and the prophet a disgusting pedophile. They are also unwilling to say that Muslims who condemn terrorism are likely using Taqqiya and that one can thus never trust a Muslim.
In other words, they are not bigots. They are balanced, which is what really annoys you.
Andy says
Tell Trudeau government to stop playing politics with military donations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X60rlCZ1dM
Ex-Muslim who tore up Koran condemned — while Muslim “hate preachers” ignored
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLla5cM-HKE
Andy says
We need more people like this Lady!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlbXaSNtivs
Andy says
UN Propaganda Encourages Mass Migration to Europe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69NhRXvPy2c
Andy says
IQ & The Health of Civilizations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrcnZS-gbK0
Wellington says
No, Lebel, they are not balanced because as Robert Spencer has noted many times, and as Majid Rafizadeh notes in this article of his, such apologists for Islam (people like Esposito and Armstrong come foremost to mind but there are many others) soothingly try to convey to the ignorant that jihad terror, numerous draconian Sharia dictates, and oppression of women and non-Muslims have nothing to do with the noble, peaceful, enlightened religion which is Islam.
This is complete and total bullshit when you consider such things as 1) over 60% of the Koran is about waging war against non-Muslims or despising them; 2) every major school of Islamic theology, Sunni or Shiite, to this very day, for instance the four main Sunni schools, the Hanafi, Hanbali, Shafi and Maliki, are perfectly fine with death for apostasy and death or at least severe bodily harm for any criticism or mockery of Islam, the Koran or Mohammed; 3) the hadiths and sira area full of examples of the brutal pathological character of Mohammed; 4) there are six kinds of deception promoted by Islam, taqqiya, kitman and muruna being three of them; 5) Islam, alone among the major (or minor for that matter) religions of the world actually sanctions rape; and 6) everywhere Islam dominates it sets up a Jim Crow system based not on race but on belief with non-Muslims pure second-class citizens if even this.
So, these “scholars” are anything but balanced but it comes as no surprise that you would think they are. You are either a liar or an ignoramus. There is no third option here.
Wellington says
“…..3) the hadiths and sira are…..” and not “3) …..the hadiths and sira area……”
Lebel says
btw Wellington, and this is an honest question (Taqqiya alert!), can you point me to an Islamic book (not a book about Islam, not a footnote) that mentions taqqiya (by name) as well as kitman etc ? I’m asking because honestly, I have never read this in an Islamic book. I AM NOT SAYING it does not exist because I have not read all Islamic books so it is entirely possible.
Again, please not books about Islam but an Islamic book for Muslims. Should be easy enough since taqqiya is foundational and central to Islam and its teachings.
Lebel says
OK lets start with Esposito. Find me an article of his and let’s demonstrate this
I found one here (from 1994) but you are welcome to bring an alternative:
http://www.iium.edu.my/deed/articles/espo.html
mortimer says
OK, Lebel… you are lazy … there are a LOT OF BOOKS that describe TAQIYYA for Muslim readers:
Reference 1
Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti in his book, “al-Durr al-Manthoor Fi al-Tafsir al- Ma’athoor,”narrates Ibn Abbas’, the most renowned and trusted narrator of tradition in the sight of the Sunnis, opinion regarding al-Taqiyya in the Qur’anic verse: “Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, (they) shall have no relation left with Allah except by way of precaution (“tat-taqooh”), that ye may guard yourselves (“tooqatan”) from them….(3:28)”that Ibn Abbas said:
“al-Taqiyya is with the tongue only; he who has been coerced into saying that which angers Allah (SWT), and his heart is comfortable (i.e., his TRUE faith has not been shaken.), then (saying that which he has been coerced to say) will not harm him (at all); (because) al- Taqiyya is with the tongue only, (not the heart).”
Note: The two words “tat-taqooh”and “tooqatan,”as mentioned in the Arabic Qur’an, are BOTH from the same root of “al-Taqiyya.”
Note Also: The “heart”as referred to above and in later occurrences refers to the center of faith in an individual’s existence. It is mentioned many times in the Qur’an.
Reference 2
Ibn Abbas also commented on the above verse, as narrated in Sunan al- Bayhaqi and Mustadrak al-Hakim, by saying:
“al-Taqiyya is the uttering of the tongue, while the heart is comfortable with faith.”
Note: The meaning is that the tongue is permitted to utter anything in a time of need, as long as the heart is not affected; and one is still comfortable with faith.
Reference 3
Abu Bakr al-Razi in his book, “Ahkam al-Qur’an,”v2, p10, has explained the aforementioned verse “…except by way of precaution (“tat-taqooh”), that ye may guard yourselves (“tooqatan”) from them….(3:28)”by affirming that al-Taqiyya should be used when one is afraid for life and/or limb. In addition, he has narrated that Qutadah said with regards to the above verse:
“It is permissible to speak words of unbelief when al-Taqiyya is mandatory.”
Reference 4
It has been narrated by Abd al-Razak, Ibn Sa’d, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Mardawayh, al-Bayhaqi in his book “al- Dala-il,”and it was corrected by al-Hakim in his book “al- Mustadrak”that:
“The nonbelievers arrested `Ammar Ibn Yasir (ra) and (tortured him until) he (ra) uttered foul words about the Prophet (S), and praised their gods (idols); and when they released him (ra), he (ra) went straight to the Prophet (S). The Prophet (S) said: “Is there something on your mind?”`Ammar Ibn Yasir (ra) said: “Bad (news)! They would not release me until I defamed you (S) and praised their gods!”The Prophet (S) said: “How do you find your heart to be?”`Ammar (ra) answered: “Comfortable with faith.”So the Prophet (S) said: “Then if they come back for you, then do the same thing all over again.”Allah (SWT) at that moment revealed the verse: “….except under compulsion, his heart remaining firm in faith…(16:106)”
Note: The full verse that was quoted partially as part of the tradition above, is:
“Anyone who, after accepting Faith in Allah, utters unbelief, EXCEPT UNDER COMPULSION, his heart remaining firm in faith — but such as open their breast to unbelief, — on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs will be a dreadful Chastisement (16:106).”
mortimer says
More for Lebel:
Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari (d. 923), author of a standard and authoritative Qur’an commentary, explains verse 3:28 as follows:
“If you [Muslims] are under their [non-Muslims’] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them with your tongue while harboring inner animosity for them … [know that] God has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels rather than other believers—except when infidels are above them [in authority]. Should that be the case, let them act friendly towards them while preserving their religion.
Source: Abu Ja’far Muhammad at-Tabari, Jami’ al-Bayan ‘an ta’wil ayi’l-Qur’an al-Ma’ruf: Tafsir at-Tabari (Beirut: Dar Ihya’ at-Turath al-‘Arabi, 2001), vol. 3, p. 267, author’s translation.
mortimer says
A BOOK ALL ABOUT TAQIYYA: “At-Taqiyya fi ‘l-Islam” (London: Mu’assisat at-Turath ad-Druzi, 2004) by Sami Mukaram.
-“The ulema agree that deception during warfare is legitimate … deception is a form of art in war.” – Ahmad Mahmud Karima, quoted in “Al-Jihad fi’l Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina” (Cairo: Al-Azhar, 2003), p. 304, author’s translation.
– according to Mukaram: “Taqiyya in order to dupe the enemy is permissible.”
-Source: Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi ‘l-Islam, p. 32.
“Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible…and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.”
— Abu Hammid Ghazali
“Allah’s Apostle said, “Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). “The Prophet said, “You may say it.”
– Hadith Bukhari 5.59.369
The principle and uses of skillful lying
The root word “taqiyya” means to protect against or conceal. As you might gather from the quotes above, the principle of al-Taqiyya is the Islamic justification for lying and deceiving. Al-Taqiyya is drawn explicitly from the words of Muhammad, and from the examples he and his successors set.
The Qur’an and other Islamic books condone lying, but they also praise truth-telling. Assuming for the moment these contradictory exhortations intend some salient point (a true assumption considering the principle in question), and assuming one principle hasn’t abrogated the other, approved lying must have a context. That is exactly what Islamic scholars say is the case.
Situations or purposes for which Islamic scholars collectively judge it to be permissible to lie include the following: to reconcile arguments, to settle family disputes, to settle arguments specifically with wives or women, to safeguard one’s “innocent” life (i.e., not for criminals on trial), to protect the lives of other Muslims, to defend one’s honor, to succeed in jihad or combat, and to spread the practice of Islam.
With the admission that Muslims may lie under many circumstances, trusting a Muslim involves a higher than average degree of risk. We’ll get into that later, but recognize that statements like the following only affirm that impression:
“It is not mandatory to practice it (al-Taqiyya) at all times; on the contrary, it is permissible, and sometimes necessary, to abandon it (al-Taqiyya) altogether; as in the case where revealing the truth will further the cause of the religion, and provide a direct service to Islam;”
– al-Shaykh Muhammad Ridha al-Mudhaffar
Wellington says
Lebel: The article by Esposito you provided a link to is replete with standard nonsense (e.g., Islam in our age becoming nuanced, blah, blah, blah) but I will confine the rest of my comment here to Esposito’s opening sentence because his first sentence alone shows either the incompetence of the man or his deceptive inclinations. Here it is:
“To equate Islam and Islamic fundamentalism is to judge Islam only by those who wreak havoc——a standard not applied to Judaism and Christianity.”
I have many times here at JW averred that an ideology should always be judged by what it says and NEVER on the basis that many adherents of this or that ideology don’t fully implement its tenets (or wrongly do so). Islamic ideology (and to draw a distinction, as Esposito does, between Islam and Islamic fundamentalism is as bogus as drawing a distinction between Islam and radical Islam or Islam and Islamism), as opposed to Judaic and Christian ideology, calls for war to be made upon the peoples of the earth “until all religion is with Allah.” {Sura 8:39} Islam also in its theological blueprint mandates that Muslims are “the best of peoples” {Sura 3:110} and considers non-Muslims the equivalent of human waste, thus leading wherever Islam dominates to a Jim Crow system being established based not on race but on belief. Islamic ideology additionally allows for other barbaric things like death for apostasy and rape. Judaism and Christianity in their theological blueprints don’t have any of this barbaric crap in them (yes, in the Old Testament there is some sanctioning of violence but it is for one time and place and not a paradigm for action for all time, contra the Koran).
So, you see, Lebel, Esposito right off the bat in his article would have you believe that the actions by Muslims who wreak havoc have nothing to do with Islam. But they do. These actions most surely do, contra Christianity and Judaism. Thus, when Christians in the past used force to spread Christianity, or in some way acted badly in the name of Christianity, they were violating the tenets of their religion as opposed to Muslims using force to spread their faith and acting badly. The difference could not be greater but Esposito would have you think otherwise. Well, I don’t think otherwise and I know that the Islamic theological blueprint is a recipe for all kinds of terrible things, including being a mortal enemy of liberty, while the theological blueprints of Judaism and Christianity are not recipes for sundry heinous actions as Islam most certainly is and neither is a threat to freedom. Indeed, because Christianity and Judaism place such an emphasis on the dignity and worth of the individual and have a Golden Rule for all, which Islam surely does not have, they are a boon to liberty.
Thus, so what if many Muslims don’t “wreak havoc” in the name of their religion? They’re just lazy Muslims. What matters is that their religion requires them to do so. This is what is key. Shame on Esposito either for not knowing this or hiding this.
gravenimage says
Fine work, Mortimer. Thank you.
Wellington says
Thank you, mortimer. Your responses to Lebel about taqiyya are so thorough that any comment by me on this particular matter would be superfluous.
Lebel says
LOL , reprinting verbatim from anti-Muslim sites. I guess I got my “ass kicked” again.
can you link me to an actual book? I don’t want what people say is in a book but the book itself.
THE FUCKING BOOK ITSELF!! not what anti-islamic sites reproduce among themselves. Do you guys ever check sources for yourself?
Lebel says
by the way, if anyone want to have fun – run some of the stuff pasted by mortimer on google and see the sites that come up. Start with this
“It is not mandatory to practice it (al-Taqiyya) at all times; on the contrary, it is permissible, and sometimes necessary, to abandon it (al-Taqiyya) altogether; as in the case where revealing the truth will further the cause of the religion, and provide a direct service to Islam;”
– al-Shaykh Muhammad Ridha al-Mudhaffar”
Wellington says
Mortimer, Lebel, did reference actual Islamic books, complete with quotes from them, for instance those by Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti and Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari. What more do you want?
I detect Muslimthink from you.
Ray Jarman says
Remind me never to pick an argument with you guys. I thought I knew a lot about the cult but reading your opinions have taught me how little I knew. Thanks for the insightful information viz. the usual nonsense written by many others.
mortimer says
LEBEL, SHARIA LAW IS THE MOST AUTHORITATIVE “BOOK. in Islam that COMMANDS the use of TAQIYYA … there is no better ‘BOOK’ about taqiyya …
SHARIA LAW PERMITS TAQIYYA TO ACHIEVE A WORTHY GOAL:
Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746 – 8.2) – “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory… it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression…
“One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie.”
So if a “GOAL” is to impose SHARIA LAW over the KUFAAR by DECEIVING WESTERN POLITICIANS about SHARIA… then the USE OF TAQIYYA is “OBLIGATORY”.
LEBEL, do you think you are deceiving anyone?
gravenimage says
Lebel wrote:
by the way, if anyone want to have fun – run some of the stuff pasted by mortimer on google and see the sites that come up. Start with this
“It is not mandatory to practice it (al-Taqiyya) at all times; on the contrary, it is permissible, and sometimes necessary, to abandon it (al-Taqiyya) altogether; as in the case where revealing the truth will further the cause of the religion, and provide a direct service to Islam;”
– al-Shaykh Muhammad Ridha al-Mudhaffar”
…………………………
I decided to take Lebel up on this. The first site I found was this bunch of Islamophobes:
https://www.al-islam.org/faith-imamiyyah-shiah-shaykh-muhammad-ridha-al-mudhaffar
Oh…wait…al Islam.org is not Islamophobic–it is an Islamic site.
mortimer says
WELLINGTON, LEBEL is SHIFTING THE GOALPOSTS … defined as …
“Moving the Goalpost”: A fallacy of logos, demanding a certain degree of proof or evidence, and then, when this is offered, demanding EVEN MORE, different or better evidence in order to validate an argument or establish a fact.
The following volume is a MAGISTERIAL treatment of TAQIYYA:
*Sami Mukaram*, “At-Taqiyya fi ‘l-Islam” (London: Mu’assisat at-Turath ad-Druzi, 2004).
(transl. “Taqiyya in Islam”)
LEBEL, WE SEE YOU ARE USING TAQIYYA, KITMAN, and TAWRIYA.
Do you think we are neophytes?
mortimer says
LEBEL, HERE FOR ALL TO SEE YOUR DECEIT:
“Allah’s Apostle said, “Who is willing to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, “O Allah’s Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?” The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). “The Prophet said, “You may say it.”
– Hadith Bukhari 5.59.369
Note: TAQIYYA is approved to LULL A KAFIR INTO A SENSE OF SECURITY before he is ATTACKED AND MURDERED BY MUSLIMS.
Are you betraying KAFIRS in the same way? You are, are you not?
Wellington says
I agree with you entirely mortimer that Lebel shifted the goal posts, as my own 3:12 P.M. comment below asserted, using as I did the very word, “shifted.”
Mark Swan says
Lebel—people who are deceived—do not know they are deceived.
Most Muslims are just like all people who have grown-up with the religion
that was dominant in their area—although many can recite some gibberish
popular with that religion—most have not read their own Holy Book.
Now you know full well Islam is evil and its prophet disgusting—
but the people who are submerged in Islam are just people—
if they practice what is in Islam’s Quran and do not repent,
then they practice evil.
You know who a lot of Islam’s apologist are—you are certainly one.
But the question you should ask yourself is why?
Do you expect anyone who is not a Muslim, but has read the
Quran, to understand, how someone who knows what is in the
Quran, can keep Saying they are Muslim?
Do you feel anyone who can read and has read the Quran
and is ok with it, can be something other than Muslim?
Buraq says
@ Lebel
Your post simply parrots what any one of these ‘moderates’ would say. But you want a name… yeah? What about Tariq Ramadan? He’s a ‘moderate’, isn’t he? Well …. isn’t he?
Carol (the 1st) says
Look at Ramadan’s facial expressions toward Ayaan Hirsi Ali in this 2013 video. What a sleazeball he is, full of disdainful, useless gibberish (and don’t think he doesn’t know it):
Tariq Ramadan and Ayaan Hirsi Ali – Debate (1/3)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35ZxQgVGWOQ
Terry Gain says
Islam embraces pedophilia. Those of us who are willing to point this out occupy the high ground. Calling us bigots from the sewer you occupy is ironic.
gravenimage says
Yes–sneering at those who take issue with the rape of a nine-year-old child, and this being taken as a model for all time, is just sick.
Jaladhi says
These “moderate” Muslims are no only apologists for Islam, they are just as radical as any other radical Muslim since by definition of Islam there is nothing moderate in Islam and there are no moderate Muslims. Islam is a murderous cult and all Muslims follow it!!
Savvy Kafir says
Some Muslims approach their religion in a careless, half-ass fashion, without knowing anything about its central tenets.
Many former Muslims have written about how they finally read the Qur’an, and were horrified by what they found there — then had a crisis of faith, and decided they would rather be decent people than good Muslims.
Ashley says
It is refreshing to see that Harvard is affiliated with Dr. Rafizadeh. Perhaps Stanford should take note…
Impressive scholar:
https://scholar.harvard.edu/majidrafizadeh/biocv
Jaladhi says
Oops a typo: These “moderate” Muslims are not only apologists for Islam, they are just as radical as any other radical Muslim since by definition of Islam there is nothing moderate in Islam and there are no moderate Muslims. Islam is a murderous cult and all Muslims follow it!!
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Mr Spencer, you and this idiot Iranian have misunderstood jîhad and sharia. Jihad fighting is a means of resistance against oppression, while sharia is a code of conduct for a muslim, Spiritual and mundane. Islam is never oppresssive to women because they are part of the society as mothers, sisters and wives,It protects their digity as human beings, not as mère sex object.
Ashley says
Islam is never oppresssive to women because they are part of the society as mothers, sisters and wives,It protects their digity as human beings, not as mère sex object.
___________________________
Not even you can believe the crap you post here, Ibrahim.
Bear says
I’m sure that Mr. Rafizadeh would agree that being called an idiot by an idiot is not a disparagement but is in fact a compliment. But more relevant, name-calling by itself without thoughtful critic of the issues/ premise/ treatise is the fodder of blind ignorance and adolescent response.
Ashley says
+1
Mr. Rafizadeh an “idiot Iranian” eh, Ibrahim?
Mr. Rafizadeh has proposed a challenge. I bet you would shit your pants if you attempted to give it a shot:
https://myislam.dk/articles/en/rafizadeh%20why-i-renounced-islam-allah-and-muhammad.php
Terry Gain says
Ahley
Shit his pants? He won’t take that chance. Ibrahim prefers to shit on the site.
Thank you for the link.
Buraq says
@ Ibrahim itace Muhamed
Time to knock you off your lying perch, Habibi! The following analysis of Islam’s core texts show how it’s not possible to be a ‘moderate’.
The issue of the Muslim’s relationship with the infidel is one of the most important in Islam. The amount of attention devoted to the infidel is huge: 64% of the total Qur’an addresses that relationship while 81% of the Sira (chronological biographies of Muhammad) and 37% of the Hadith (sayings attributed to Muhammad) focus on this as well. In sum, nearly two thirds of Shari’a (Islamic law) is devoted to the infidel.
What comes through clearly by examining this subject is that Islam is not about universal brotherhood, as is often claimed, but about the brotherhood of believers, members of the Umma. The flip-side of this is a total denunciation of the “other.” There are more than 400 verses in the Qur’an alone that describe the torment in hell that Allah has prepared for the infidel. The Qur’an dehumanizes infidels: They are vile animals and beasts, the worst of creatures and demons; perverted transgressors and partners of Satan to be fought until religion is Allah’s alone. They are to be beheaded; terrorized, annihilated, crucified, punished, and expelled and plotted against by deceit. Believers must be in a constant state of war with the infidel.
According to Ibn Taymiya: Since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is entirely for Allah [2:189, 8:39] and the word of Allah is uppermost [9:40], therefore, according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.
You’re a lying clown, Ibe!
Ibrahim itace muhammed says
Buraq, Islam recognises friendly relationship with non Muslims Who are not hostile to muslims.
Ashley says
Allow me to translate.
&**((^%^%%%$$ vagina. ((&&$$##@() penis. (**&&^%%% HELP ME!
Sound about right, Ibrahim?
FYI says
It’s a shame the political establishment in the West do not take seriously Mr Spencer’s warnings about Jihadism and the methods being used by adherents of islam to undermine freedom and democracy,especially in the UK,Canada..
As a defender of free expression and a scholarly expert in the field,it is simply unbelieveable that, for example,Mr Spencer is not welcome in the UK since the UK could do with someone advising them on the security nightmare cause by this pandering to islam!!
Honestly,he should have a chestfull of medals by now,bestowed upon him by grateful nations:but alas,the (usually) leftie mindset,dhimmi Jewish rabbis and dhimmi Christian clergy,Quisling politicans etc prefer to deny the reality of what is going on with horrific,everyday societal consequences.
It is far easier for the dhimmiwits {of,for example the SPLC}to have a go at Mr Spenser using the faux “islamophobia” trick to silence the truth… than it is for them to deal with the virulent,koranic-inspired , islamic anti-Semitism that Mr Spencer and JW have being fighting against(and which the SPLC appear to have difficulty addressing)
Terry Gain says
FYI
Hear hear!!! Robert Spencer is today’s Churchill.
JM says
To: Terry
“Robert Spencer is today’s Churchill.” Agreed. A few excerpts on Islam by Winston Churchill might be instructive for our Muslim visitors on JW:
“…Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men…No stronger retrograde force exists in the world…”
– Winston S. Churchill, The River War
“…Seizing their weapons, they become Ghazis—as dangerous and as sensible as mad dogs: fit only to be treated as such. While the more generous spirits among the tribesmen become convulsed in an ecstasy of religious bloodthirstiness, poorer and more material souls derive additional impulses from the influence of others, the hopes of plunder and the joy of fighting. Thus whole nations are roused to arms…”
– Winston S. Churchill, The Story of the Malakand Field Force
Lebel says
Regarding Taqqiya, can you guys NOT reprint verbatim from anti-Muslim sites about Taqqiya but link me to the actual book? the book itself, not what people say is in the book. Thanks, L.
Wellington says
Actual book: “Al-Durr Al-Manthur Fi Tafsir Bil Ma’thur,” which mortimer quoted directly from concerning Sura 3:28
Lebel says
Yes and I have not found anything yet:
Can someone give a page number or a clearer reference?
http://www.maktabah.org/en/item/541-tafsir-suyuti—–
Mark Swan says
Lebel—your insincerity is obvious—read the Quran—there is a book—you know this.
Bear says
So you can’t do your own basic research? Weird. The truth is out there for anyone to seek it. One should not rely on others regarding what is ‘truth’; one should seek it for themselves. Of course it’s all predicated on whether one is ‘truly’ seeking the truth or not. Get off your ass and find out for yourself.
Mark Swan says
Absolutely Bear.
Davegreybeard says
Lebel asks for the troublesome trees to be cleared away so he can more clearly view the forest.
Here you go Lebel, the “fucking book” is the Quran and the applicable verse is 3:28
“Let not the believers take disbelievers as Auliya (supporters, helpers) instead of the believers, and whoever does that, will never be helped by Allah in any way, EXCEPT IF YOU INDEED FEAR A DANGER FROM THEM.”
You know all this of course and only pretend to deny it because you are a lying Muslim.
And lying is the one thing that Muslims are really, really good at.
All us Kuffar should keep this in foremost in mind, at all times, when dealing with Muslims or Islam.
Lebel says
“Here you go Lebel, the “fucking book” is the Quran and the applicable verse is 3:28
“Let not the believers take disbelievers as Auliya (supporters, helpers) instead of the believers, and whoever does that, will never be helped by Allah in any way, EXCEPT IF YOU INDEED FEAR A DANGER FROM THEM.””
Here we go, now you will note that there is no mention of Taqqiya. What I suggest is that we look for recognized interpretations of this verse. Is that OK?
Lebel says
“You know all this of course and only pretend to deny it because you are a lying Muslim.”
Yes it’s called taqqiya about taqqiya. You guys are very predictable.
Lebel says
@Wellington
Here are al-Suyuti’s books, I have found nothing yet: Can someone give a page number or a clearer reference?
http://www.maktabah.org/en/item/541-tafsir-suyuti—–
Wellington says
Ah, now you have shifted from an actual book to a page number or a clear reference. Well, do you think mortimer was just making up the many quotes he provided you?
You are prevaricating and dissembling. But, here I will shift the topic on you, to wit, what about death for apostasy, the sanctioning of rape and punishment for any criticism of Islam, the Koran or Mohammed? Are these also just lies told by non-Muslims to smear Islam? And what of the fact that over 60% of the Koran (wretched work, highly repetitive and dumb too) deals with either making war upon non-Muslims or despising them?
My God, man, there is so much rot in Islam that it is hard to keep up with at times. And just look at the Islamic world. It is a massively unfree, dysfunctional mess. Who the hell wants to move to an Islamic country?
Yep, Islam sucks and I wouldn’t say that about any other major religion. It is a burden to mankind like no other.
Lebel says
“Ah, now you have shifted from an actual book to a page number or a clear reference. Well, do you think mortimer was just making up the many quotes he provided you?”
yes, he copied and pasted from anti-Islamic sites. Don’t believe me, copy one of his paragraphs and google it.
No one provides a citation, they just say what is in the book. So example: Robert Spencer said he wants to kill all Muslims in his book “The truth about Muhammad” – yes I need a page or something. Why is that weird?
“. But, here I will shift the topic on you, to wit, what about death for apostasy, the sanctioning of rape and punishment for any criticism of Islam, the Koran or Mohammed? Are these also just lies told by non-Muslims to smear Islam?”
No, there is a clear line of scholarship in Islam which takes this view. When have I said otherwise?
“And what of the fact that over 60% of the Koran (wretched work, highly repetitive and dumb too) deals with either making war upon non-Muslims or despising them?”
I would be much more reticent about that factoid. Lets see the methodology.
“And just look at the Islamic world. It is a massively unfree, dysfunctional mess. Who the hell wants to move to an Islamic country?”
Have you been to Malaysia? how about the UAE? Indonesia? plenty of non-Muslims live and MOVE there. Kuala Lumpur is basically one giant party place for Westerners.
Where are you based?
Wellington says
Mortimer’s most recent posts above have also given you page numbers, Lebel. Gee, I wonder what prevarication (taqiyya?) you will engage in next?
And as for that “clear line of scholarship in Islam which takes this view,” you have effectively admitted how heinous Islam is and what a dire threat to freedom it poses. The sanctioning of rape by the sick faith which is Islam is enough alone for any sensible person to consign Islam to the trash heap of history. But, of course, so many other iniquities exist in Islam (all of Islam and not some bogus distinction between Islam and Islamism or Islam and radical Islam or Islam and fundamentalist Islam), death for apostasy being one of them.
As for countries like Malaysia, the UAE and Indonesia, as many, including Robert Spencer, have detailed, while they are not as strict in enforcing Sharia dictates as certain other Muslim countries are (e.g., Saudi Arabia and Iran), they are still bad enough and there is no true equality under the law in these nations or any real freedom. You know this or should know it. And plenty of non-Muslims move to Malaysia, the UAE and Indonesia? Really? Cite your sources and with page numbers.
As to where I am based, I am based in a country that the Islamic world could NEVER have founded, being the mortal enemy of liberty which Islam certainly is. I am based in America, which nation Islam would effectively destroy, would shred its Constitution (especially the First and Fourteenth Amendments) and make into another Islamic shithole if only given the chance. Islam must NEVER be given this chance.
Islam sucks, Lebel. This is the long and short of it and more people across the world are coming to this conclusion with every passing year. Count on it. A positive view of Islam has zero chance of increasing worldwide as year after year goes on. Quite the contrary in fact.
End PC says
This IMO is an important article. This industry I suspect can be fairly lucrative: people tend to want to hear pleasant narratives, like that Islam is not really as horrible as a first investigation makes it seem.
Davegreybeard says
Me:
“You know all this of course and only pretend to deny it because you are a lying Muslim.”
Lebel:
“Yes it’s called taqqiya about taqqiya.”
I quite agree, you are lying about lying. And what makes it such hilariously great fun is that you know that you are lying and I know that you are lying and everyone reading this knows that you are lying.
Lebel:
“You guys are very predictable.”
Ha ha ha ha ha ha! You make a little joke Lebel?!
You from that tribe of barbarians who have been following EXACTLY, the same little book of hate for FOURTEEN HUNDRED YEARS!!
Ha ha ha ha ha
Yes, “very predictable!”
Lebel, you are so much fun!
JM says
To Mortimer and Wellington,
Nice job.
+1 million
Davegreybeard says
I second that +1million.
Terrific job as usual mortimer and Wellington.
dumbledoresarmy says
it’s called “goodcop/ badcop”.
The Ummah plays it to perfection.
Someone here, years ago, said Islam worked by thuggery + image management.
The out-and-out jihadis – like the 9/11 hijackers – dish out the thuggery; then along come the besuited sleek and smiling imams, or the doe-eyed hijabettees (usually fluttering their eyelashes and whining about how people are looking at them funny on the bus, or how somebody was meaaaan to them and tried to pull off their Slave Rag/ Sharia Badge), and pour on the image management, spin by the bucketload.
dumbledoresarmy says
Raymond Ibrahim – Coptic American, born to Egyptian Christians who fled Islamic Egypt for freedom in the USA – is fluent in Arabic.
And he can read the original texts. And he has written *several* articles about Deception, in Islam.
Here’s one.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/48292
Thursday, 28 March 2013
Raymond Ibrahim: Religiously-Sanctioned Deception And Betrayal
Here’s another, one that he wrote for Jane’s, back in the day.
Islam’s doctrines of deception
by Raymond Ibrahim,
Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst
October 2008
Another article – http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war
“How Taqiyya Alters Islam’s Rules of War: Defeating Jihadist Terrorism,” Raymond Ibrahim in the Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2010.
And finally:
http://www.meforum.org/2066/war-and-peace-and-deceit-in-islam
“War and Peace – and Deceit – in Islam”
by Raymond Ibrahim
Pajamas Media
February 12, 2009
Editor’s note: Substantial portions of the following essay made up part of Mr. Ibrahim’s written testimony that was presented to Congress on February 12, 2009.
dumbledoresarmy says
And *another* article by Raymond Ibrahim – fluent in Arabic, who translated the texts that comprise “The Al-Qaeda Reader”.
“The Taqiyya Factor”.
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/taqiyya-about-taqiyya/
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/in-the-media/the-taqiyya-factor/
The Taqiyya Factor
by Raymond Ibrahim on November 12, 2015
It isn’t just taqiyya, though, it’s mudarat and muruna and taysir and tawriyya… all sorts of different ways of deflecting/ concealing/ obscuring – in those places and at those times where the kuffar are just a bit too strong and numerous and the ummah not yet powerful enough to do as it pleases – the raw and ugly fact that Muslims are out to *destroy* and to subjugate and lay waste to the entire human world, the whole planet. That’s their end-game. To kill us or force us to Submit, whether joining the Murder-Robbery-and-Rape Gang, as Muslims, or living as exploited, abused, humilated and degraded Dhimmis, under the ghastly and cruel protection racket that is the Dhimma system.
dumbledoresarmy says
Yet another article on Islamic deception.
A brief and convenient summary of *some* of the categories of deceit historically deployed by mohammedans, the mohammedans of whom John Quincy Adams astutely observed, way back in 1829 – “The precept of the koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.”
Note well that last sentence – “the commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force”.
And John Quincy Adams, in his essays, discusses various then-contemporary or recently-historic examples of mohammedan malevolent duplicity.
dumbledoresarmy says
I omitted the link.
It is here.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_direct_link.cfm/blog_id/64329/Lies%2DDamned%2DLies%2Dand%2Dthe%2DReligion%2Dof%2DPeace
Friday, 13 May 2016
Lies, Damned Lies, and the Religion of Peace
Davegreybeard says
Excellent links DDA.
I think we tend to discount Islam’s most potent weapon, deceit.
shacktruth says
The absolute deceit and evil that lies at the root of efforts to convince the world that Islam is protective of women has aa precedent in American history. In the antebellum south, those who supported SLAVERY utilized nearly identical arguments: First, anyone who opposed SLAVERY was accused of being insensitive to the south’s “tradition.”; Second, Proponents of SLAVERY conducted what was sometimes referred to as the “happy slave defense.” Plantation owners would trot out their slaves before the media (which at the time was limited to newspapers and magazines) and argue that their SLAVES were actually “happy,” well cared for. The poor, unfortunate, intilectually-defecient Black people were “protected” by the institution of slavery. This is nearly identical to the argumen that Muslim women actually WANT to cover their hair with the hijab, or even DESIRE to have their virtual identity as human beings obliterated by other Islamic forms of dress – like the burqua. Many Muslim women have been braainwashed to the extent that they will go before cameras and testify that they are “happy” being told to cover their hair; that they are “happy” being relegated to second-class citizenship. I do not believe that any more than I believe the South had “happy slaves.” :.
gravenimage says
Iranian scholar: “There is a huge industry of so-called ‘moderate’ Muslim scholars, who are actually apologists for Islam”
…………………….
Very true.