“If you want to identify people who are okay with suicide bombing, I can give you a list,” including Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Michigan State University Professor of Religious Studies and Director of Muslim Studies Mohammad Hassan Khalil told me at a September Georgetown University lecture. Khalil theorized before an audience of some thirty people at the Saudi-founded Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU) that Islam’s atheistic critics exaggerate the religion’s role in inciting violence.While ACMCU Professor Jonathan Brown moderated, Khalil’s responses ironically reinforced the critique of Islam he sought to refute. For the record, Qaradawi’s primetime show on Qatar’s Al Jazeera network drew an estimated 60 million viewers. Even had he been the lone cleric promoting suicide bombing — which he was not — the size of his viewership reveals the scope of the problem.
At the Georgetown event, Khalil presented his previously recorded discussion of his new book, Jihad, Radicalism, and the New Atheism, in which he disputes claims of many “New Atheists,” particularly Sam Harris, “that Muslim terrorism can be best explained by Islamic scriptures.” Harris further labels benign interpretations of Islam as “interpretive acrobatics.”
Khalil explained his focus on the so-called New Atheists, in which “[m]any of [his] own colleagues and students have been and continue to be more profoundly impacted by the writings of New Atheists than, say, polemical works by far-right religiously-affiliated critics of Islam.” Correspondingly, he cited Harris’s statement to fellow atheist Bill Maher that “we have to be able to criticize bad ideas, and Islam is the motherlode of bad ideas.”
Although critics such as the ex-Muslim atheists behind the “Awesome Without Allah” campaign would affirm Harris’s observations, Khalil accused Harris of “cherry-picking.” Reiterating his previous analysis of Islamic canons to argue that jihadists such as Osama bin Laden use “interpretative acrobatics” to justify attacks on civilians, Khalil asserted that “Harris’s interpretation of Islam is so obdurate and so extreme that it cannot even be ascribed to the man behind 9/11.”Khalil claimed such jihadists are “on the fringes of the jihad tradition” in Islam, despite ample precedent of jihadists applying distinctly Islamic doctrines to fight non-Muslims. “The attempts of al Qaeda and ISIS to justify terrorism on Islamic grounds typically require the abandonment of both strict literalism and the historically prevailing interpretations of Islamic thought,” Khalil said. “Before the early 1980s, there was no such thing as a Muslim suicide bomber,” Khalil added, although Islamic traditions of suicidal fighting tactics help explain why modern suicide bombing has become such a uniquely Islamic phenomenon.
He next criticized the portrayal of a failed suicide bomber in Harris’s book “The End of Faith.” Instead of accepting Harris’ description of terrorists’ motives as religiously informed, Khalil cited common, debunked tropes of socioeconomic disadvantage driving men to violent jihad. Although Khalil emphasized the jihadist’s biography of poverty and conflict with Israel, many jihadists globally have comfortable backgrounds. Khalil concluded, erroneously, that “in blaming Islam’s foundational texts for contemporary terrorism, while downplaying other factors,” arguments of the New Atheists “are just as facile as those of the apologists they criticize.”
This continues a common trend of denying the Islamist roots of jihadi attacks, even as survey data show that a deeply disturbing minority of Muslim believers support terrorism. As Israeli analyst Shmuel Bar wrote in 2004, in leading Islamic clerical circles, “radical ideology does not represent a marginal and extremist perversion of Islam, but rather a[n] … increasingly mainstream interpretation.”
During the audience question and answer session at Georgetown, moderator Jonathan Brown failed to assuage concerns about the religious nature of jihad, even as he assailed New Atheists as the “most intense representatives of this sort of white, patriarchal ‘West is best’ idea.” He referenced his 2007 Yemen trip, during which he saw cigarette lighters for sale with themes of Bin Laden and Hassan Nasrallah, the terrorist Hezbollah leader. Brown strained believability to dismiss these images as indicating not support for terrorism, but for individuals “who really stuck it to the man” of Western imperialism — as if mass atrocities were mere protest.Khalil stated that he is “obsessed with 9/11 in a dark way,” a transformative event for a Muslim for whom “religion was always what held me back from being violent.” Yet his obsession hardly obviates valid concerns about radical Islamic jihad. Atheists and others – including jihadists themselves – correctly recognize a significant canonical corpus that justifies a long bloody trail of jihadi violence into the present day. In dismissing historically accurate criticisms of radical Islam and Islamism, Muslims such as Khalil undermine their credibility — and, by hosting such apologists, ACMCU reaffirms its place as America’s leading center of Islamist propaganda.
Andrew E. Harrod is a Campus Watch Fellow, freelance researcher, and writer who holds a Ph.D. from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and a J.D. from George Washington University Law School. He is a fellow with the Lawfare Project. Follow him on Twitter at @AEHarrod.
FYI says
muslims are obliged to follow the Sunnah of their self-appointed “prophet” muhammed.
muhammed,by his own admission said..
“I have been made victorious through TERROR”
Sahih Bukhari 4:52:220
Since muhammed ,a mass-murderer of Jews{Abu dawud 4390}is the prophet of islam and muslims are obliged to follow their self-confessed Terrorist prophet’s example,it is clear that islam’s prophet,scripture and ideology are of course the root of islamic terrorism.
Does the prof of muslim studies think we don’t know about islamic dissembling{taqqiya,tawriya,muruna,daurura,taysin,muruna} given that the bearing of FALSE WITNESS to promote islam is after all permitted by the ‘holy’ koran 3:28 along with the 164 Jihadist commands to wage war against us infidels,especially here in the DAR AL HARB which is the West?
Wellington says
Like me and so many other Islamophobes, FYI, whether atheists, agnostics, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, et al. you are, per Khalil, just “cherry-picking.”
Man, there sure are a hell of a lot of “Islamic cherries” out there to pick from, some of which you mentioned, no? I mean we’re talking a vast Islamic forest of cherry trees bearing incalculable tons of “cherries.” Two other such “cherries” that come to mind are Suras 47:4 and 98:6. Oh yeah, lots and lots of “cherries.”
mortimer says
Agree with Wellington. Here is the CHERRY ORCHARD …
The Koran’s 164 Jihad Verses: K 002:178-179, 190-191, 193-194, 216-218, 244; 003:121-126, 140-143, 146, 152-158, 165-167,169, 172-173, 195; 004:071-072, 074-077, 084, 089-091, 094-095,100-104; 005:033, 035, 082; 008:001, 005, 007, 009-010, 012, 015-017, 039-048,057-060, 065-075; 009:005, 012-014, 016, 019-020, 024-026, 029,036, 038-039, 041, 044, 052, 073, 081, 083,086, 088, 092, 111, 120, 122-123; 016:110; 022:039, 058, 078; 024:053, 055; 025:052; 029:006, 069; 033:015, 018, 020, 023, 025-027, 050; 042:039; 047:004, 020, 035; 048:015-024; 049:015; 059:002, 005-008, 014; 060:009; 061:004, 011, 013; 063:004; 064:014; 066:009; 073:020; 076:008.
Jule Bacal says
Freedom of religion does not mean freedom of entry of foreign government.
gravenimage says
Agreed Jule. Many in the West still don’t know what Islam demands.
Robert Donator says
Nice to see a lot of intelligent people taking the correct route to understand Islam, a cult ideology fathered by an illiterate, greedy, ruthless entity in the deserts of Arabia. There cannot be a better way to learn first hand what Islam and Muhammad are than reading for oneself the Koran, Hadiths, Sunnah, Shariah, and above all the biographies of Muhammad who set the ball rolling for wiping out our millennia old civilisation by ensuring that “every hand span of the earth must be covered by the Shariah.” JIHAD WATCH is an ideal place to start this journey of learning the truth that could impact our very existence soon if we don’t realise where we are heading. It is not comforting to learn that Islam is the fastest growing “religion” (political dogma) in the West, copiously helped by suicidal apologists of Islam from the Left-Liberal fraternity among us.
Terry Gain says
Of course this fake religion is the root of most terrorism today. It’s “holy book” mandates terror.
mortimer says
Agree with TG:
THE KORAN is a troop motivator, a Machiavellian hoax concocted by Arab dictators for the benefit of their own emolument and power, a plagiarized text that is self-referentially incoherent, ungrammatical, illogical and unhistorical, incomprehensible in the original text, a racist manifesto of hatred towards non-Arabs, a solicitation of murder, an anti-Semitic hate text, an anti-Christian death warrant, an extortionist’s manual, a justification for slavery, pedophilia, polygamy, rape and violence against women. The Koran appears to be the rantings of a schizophrenic. There isn’t a single useful idea in it, and much that is in it is obviously erroneous, stupid and morally repugnant. It preaches implacable hatred and endless world war against non-Muslims until victory. So long as there is this book, there will be no peace in the world. The viciousness of the Koran cannot be edited out of it for it is alleged to be the perfect, complete and eternal words of Allah, even though these words are absurd, irrational and amoral.
Herb L says
You don’t need a list of Terrorists. All you need is the book that has reared it’s ugly head 1600 years ago and millions follow to the letter of a madman called Muhammad. And that book has shown that everything in it is absolute rubbish. Non can be of any FACT but is all Muslim Truth, false truth from a false Prophet and a false moon god. Most people the read the book from Muhammad and after are brainwashed from birth. If that is all you get when you are young, Terror and killing is the only thing they will learn. It teaches that Allah demands that Jews and people of the book are to submit to Islam or be killed. How would you feel if they bring in Sharia laws that you voted for was executing your whole family of Christians who will not deny Christ and convert to Muslim? How would you like to be the only one left that denies the one true God and has lost his inheritance? Think before you keep voting for Democrats that are using the mass illegal infiltration of OUR free country to keep getting voted in for the Democrats only and the Socialists will fail then the Muslims will kill them also, so there will be the end for humanity.
Chaz says
This guy has completely lost his mind. Will someone, please help him find it?:-) Nevermind, he is a lost cause with a medical disorder called FOS:-)
Walter Sieruk says
It shows wisdom not let them men as professor Khalil fool you, as well as the many other lying apologists for Islam.
For they will endeavor to set up a smokescreen to hide the reality of the truth about the violence and deadly essence of Islam by making the bogus claim that the al Qaeda jihadists who mass murdered on 9/11 were not real Muslims and that they were breaking the laws of the Qu ‘ran by their violence and deadly actions.” The apologists for Islam will further make the totally false claim that “Those terrorists on 9/11 were only criminals who hijacked the peaceful religion of Islam for Politics.” Those outrageously false claims are weak attempt of damage control for the image of Islam to the West. For the “holy book” of Islam the Qu ‘ran. For the Qu ‘ran instruct in Sura 9:111. Muslims who are engaging the jihad that “The believer’s fight in Allah’s Cause, they slay and are slain ,they kill and are killed “ That’s just what happened on September 11, 2001 the jihadists of al Qaeda “killed and were killed” in those 9/11 jihad attacks against both humankind and America. The Quran also teaches in Sura 9:123 to that jihad –minded Muslims behavior towards non-Muslims “let them find harshness in you…” Those Islamic attacks on 9/11 were indeed very “harsh.” As Sura 2:191 instructs “kill the disbeliever wherever you find them.” That’s a very strange kind of “peaceful religion” if there ever was one. Just to site one more out on many from the Qu ‘ran about the instruction of deadly violence is Sura 47:4. Which instructs “Whenever you encounter unbelievers strike off their heads until you make a great slaughter among them …”
Let’s face it, using jet planes a missiles as those jihadist/ Muslims did of September 11, sure made a greater “slaughter among them” then sword can. Wake up West to the actual nature of Islam before it’s too late.
Walter Sieruk says
That deceitful ,lying Muslim professor , Khalil , when he spoke at Georgetown University was engaging in the Islamic doctrine Taqiyya by deliberately attempting to set up a smokescreen to hide the fact of reality that the Muslim/jihadists are following the instruction in the Qu ‘ran when they commit jihad suicide/homicide bombings for Islam.
As most of the readers of this site always know Taqiyya in the Islamic dogma and belief that lying and deception are good thing to do as long an the lies and deception are done for the advancement of Islam.
In this specific case professor Khalil is using Taqiyya as “image damage control ” to protect the image of Islam to the public .
For those deluded jihadist suicide/homicide Muslims terrorists, who was also called a mujahedeen, They are very dangerous and delusional because they are under the spell of Islamic deception, so much so, that those jihadists actually view their murderous attacks as “martyrdom operations.” This is because they firmly believe that they will have a paradise, for themselves, after they die in a jihad attack. This is how strong the influence of the deceptive power of the false religion of Islam can be.
This delusional madness which results in death and destruction,and is, somewhat, explained in the following quotation by a Christian author. “Muslims killed while waging jihad are often honored as martyrs. Also, the prophet Muhammad said that they would be guaranteed passage to paradise. Narrated Abu Huraira in Hadith 9:549: ‘Allah’s Apostle said “Allah guarantees to the person who carries out jihad or His Cause and nothing compelled him to go out but the jihad for His Cause and belief in His Words, that he will either admit him into paradise or return him with the reward or the bounty he has earned to his residence from where he came out.’ [1]
As for the first part of this above quote about a “guarantee’’ of entering into a paradise for a Muslim who dies fighting in the jihad is a falsehood and false doctrine of a “guarantee “. Which a both tragic and sad for many reasons as well as bogus way of God. For Jesus taught not the above but clearly did teach that He is the genuine and only way to heaven. For example, John 14:6 gives the very words of Jesus Which are “I am the way ,the truth, and the life: no one comes to the Father ,but by Me.”
[1] ISLAM AND THE BIBLE: WHY TWO FAITH COLLIDE BY David Goldmann page 122
mortimer says
– “Taqiyya permeates almost all the activities and dealings of Muslims with non-Muslim societies…” – former sheikh Sam Solomon
Rich says
I suggest he read Lawrence Wright’s “The Looming Tower. If he still believes the drivel his is espousing then he has no business being a professor in any college or university. I really think he is just looking for attention and at that point he just becomes another stupid person saying and doing stupid things in an ongoing and seemingly unending attempt to gain such attention that he craves but it is that he does not deserve.
mortimer says
“Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it … We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream … Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.” – Sami Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi ‘l-Islam (London: Mu’assisat at-Turath ad-Druzi, 2004),
mortimer says
Mohammad Hassan Khalil and Jonathan Brown want to convince Westerners that jihadism doesn’t exist. They claimed that Islamo-critics are wrong “in blaming Islam’s foundational texts for contemporary terrorism’. They want to begin Islamic terrorism recently and ignore all the Islamic terrorists in the previous 12 centuries back to Mohammed.
Islam apologist Jonathan Brown claims that Islamic terror is about European imperialism … even if the terrorism is in India or in the Far East … and even if the Islamic terrorists all quote the foundational Islamic texts that motivate them. Khalil and Brown know more about the motives of historical jihad leaders than those historic leaders knew themselves!! Khalil and Brown ‘know’ that Islamic terrorists don’t really mean it when they quote the Koran, Sira and hadiths as their motivation.
Mohammad Hassan Khalil claimed that Islamo-critics are wrong “in blaming Islam’s foundational texts for contemporary terrorism’.
By the same token, the leading Islamic terrorists of the last 1400 years were all wrong about what foundational Islam teaches. Mohammed was wrong about foundational Islam too. Just don’t read the Sira if you believe that ! Don’t read Bukhari if you believe that. You will quickly find hundreds of pages that refute Khalil and Brown.
Khalil and Jonathan Brown can get away with these tricks because have chosen to present them in a polite, stage-managed, small gathering where there will be no challenge to their denial of jihadism.
If Khalil and Jonathan Brown were both not craven cowards, they would defend their ideas in a scheduled debate and then they could be cross-examined on their claims to see if they hold water. But they are unable to defend their ideas outside of stage-managed, sheltered academia. They are throwing mud-pies at people from behind a fence and then they run away when counterchallenged.
Both Khalil and Brown know they are cowards and that they would be beaten in 5 to 10 minutes in a scheduled debate against a real jihadism expert like Robert Spencer.
mortimer says
Academic snipers who won’t come into the arena of debate … because they are incapable for defending their ideas when challenged by someone knowledgeable in the matter of jihad.
Terry Gain says
Are you the same Mortimer who was trying to shut me up yesterday when I was telling the truth about Islam?
underbed cat says
Mortimer, short, true and to the point.
mortimer says
Terry Gain = simplistic, angry, unread, unsourced, spontaneous rants. Skipped the reading list.
Terry Gain says
Mortimer
It’s not my fault that you don’t have what it takes to argue that Islam is not a legitimate religion. You don’t cite your sources, so your criticisms of Islam are attenuated. You have no solutions. You think Islam will collapse on its own. Hillarious. Then why are you here? Is it just to show off? And if Islam doesn’t anger you, you are lacking humanity. Islam is resolute. You seem to be lacking resolve.
underbed cat says
Sheepskin deception. Pulling the wool over one’s mind, believing scholarly diplomas’s equals factual information. We had a very classy, articulate, intelligent diversity example resident of the WH…..who also stated Islam is peaceful, tolerant with a beautiful smile … so he was covered for awhile for some who never heard about abrogation, verses of the sword, true definition of Jihad, hijra travel (migration as refugees and goals for the world and were not inclined to read, other than the plentiful fantasy books in the library front and center about the mystical beauty, that only repeated the few peaceful verses eliminating many. If one wandered further into the religion section of a library you would find Quran, Haddiths, Reliance of the Traveler, and in some libraries the words of Osama bin Ladin …his writings about taking down America, or Quranic Concept of War”…but you would have to really search to find books from Spencer. Then you could sit thru this lecture and say “yep he is protecting the source”….of terrorism, the duty required by the Quran for muslims to “omit , sidetrack and recite preferred verses ” information. What can you say he is in a state that has residents, Imams who teach the Quran who do not like information contrary and will classify it as hate speech, so few did, who wants to be called a racist about pages of a book? To be sure many are not violent but they study and follow a book that is pointing the way, hold a hard heart show a pleasant face, but don’t take as friends and appear without malice, so they can choose what to say only so much and are aligning with the left since they see no problem, that offers accommodation to open borders and promote fantasy. The results are already showing.
mortimer says
Classic ‘appeal to a biased authority’ fallacy.
Bias: The authority is an expert generally on Islam, but not on jihadism. Neither Khalil nor Brown are disinterested. That is, they are biased towards one side of the issue, their positions depend on Arab sponsors and their opinion is thereby untrustworthy.
For example, supposing that a medical scientist testifies that ambient cigarette smoke does not pose a hazard to the health of non-smokers exposed to it. Suppose, further, that it turns out that the scientist is an employee of a cigarette company. Clearly, the scientist has a powerful bias in favor of the position that he is taking which calls into question his objectivity.
Khalil and Brown are in effect employees of a cigarette company selling JIHAD CIGARETTES.
Lotus says
That’s very true, Mortimer. For a long time the Saudis (and Qataris too) have been financing academic positions at Western universities and colleges.
They don’t expect to hear any criticism of Islam from these academics because as far as they are concerned, these people are bought and paid for
Walter Sieruk says
Professor is Khalil is a blatant liar. For jihad murderous violence are indeed part of Islam had be, somewhat explained by a former Muslim, Ibn Warraq in his book which has the title THE ISLAM IN ISLAMIC TERRORISM . For on page 253 he reveals that “Sharia was destined to dominate the world and crush all undesirable elements… Jihad was center, to Islam ,which could not have been successful without it.” The author further expounds of the writing of a militant Muslim writer , Mawdudi . on page 266 For that jihad-minded Muslim scholar wrote “In reality, Islam is a revolutionary ideology and program which seek to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuilt it in conformity with its tenets and ideas. … ‘jihad’ refers to that revolutionary struggle and utmost exertion which the Islamic party beings into play to achieved this objective.”
It may be truthfully said what is called the” Lesser Jihad” which is the violent brutal and murdering jihad is very much alive at practiced by many jihadist/ Muslims in this modern world . This lesser jihad is also termed as “The Jihad of the Sword.”
mortimer says
Well done, Walter !! KHALIL is CONTRADICTING HIMSELF and you have caught him. So which is it?
Quote from “Sharia was destined to DOMINATE the world and CRUSH all undesirable elements…”
How does ‘CRUSH’ not imply violence ? Answer: ‘crush’ implies violence.
Conclusion: KHALIL IS A LIAR WHO CONTRADICTS HIMSELF … OPPORTUNISTICALLY. ACADEMICS SHOULD TAKE NOTE.
Walter Sieruk says
Professor Khalil not only speaks a complete falsehood when says that suicide/homicide bombing are not based on Islam ,but he must also know that he is lying when he gave that lecture at Georgetown University in his hope of deceiving Westerns which he, most likely believes are ignorant about the violent and deadly essence of Islam.
All those heinous jihad suicide/homicide attacker are Islamic murderous and demonic. It now should be made known that this jihad murderous bombing is the outcome of the Islamic doctrine from the Qu‘’ran [the Koran] of a sexual paradise with many virgins, houris , in it for the male Muslim /jihadist who dies fighting in the jihad for the cause of Islam is found in the “holy book” of Islam, the Koran, in Sura 44:54. 55: 56. 78:31.
Also there is the Koranic instruction of Sura 9:111 which teaches “The believers fight in Allah’s Cause, they slay and are slain, they kill and are killed.” Getting back to the origin doctrine of Islam from the Koran of a sex –filled paradise with many houris for the use only by the male jihadist who dies fight for the advancement of Islam. All this started when the founder and prophet of Islam, Muhammad manufactured Islam he put , had stolen, some of sex doctrine of Zoroastrian mythology and a yet smaller bit of Hindu mythological sex teachings along with as well as mixture pagan Arabian folklore and myth plus a heavy dose of Judaism and Christianity . Also some of it apostate “Christianity” For the prophet of Islam, Muhammad, couldn’t discern the difference between genuine Bible based Christianity and bogus “Christianity.”
Those words and teaching Muhammad gathered from many sources, including the virgins /sex place mythology. , and taught as “Divine Truth” were written down on many things then later compiled and then went into the composition of the Koran. So the hoax of the Koran is actually a mixture and fusion Judaism Christianity and mythology of other religions and now the Muslim clerics with the Koranic brainwashing of young Muslims who are thoroughly mind programmed into believing this Islamic/Koranic virgins myth. This deception of false doctrine /myth into the thoughts of some people was predicted in the Bible along with the false teachers who engage in the indoctrination of such a myth /doctrine into the minds and hearts other people . For it is written “For the time will come when they will not stand wholesome teaching, but will follow their own fancy and gather a crown of teachers to tickle their ears. They will stop their ears to the truth and turn to mythology.” Second Timothy 4:3,4. [N.E.B.]
Angemon says
Who could ever imagine an atheist having issues with a religion?!?!?!?!?!
somehistory says
If a cherry tree falls in the orchard, will it make a sound if no one is around to hear it? I have picked cherries professionally. It’s an enjoyable work.
If a moslim beats his wife, if he punches her in the mouth, is it always the **fault** of the wife that the moslim hits her, because she did something so terribly bad that she deserved it , …or is it because he has been instructed to hit her by someone he worships, although dead?
If he beats her with a stick, and breaks her bones, or cuts off her tongue, or her nose, is it not due to the fact that he has been told time and again that it is his “right”? And if he murders his young daughter because she forgot to wear a head-covering, is it not his own slavish devotion to a filthy book that encourages his lust to shed blood, even that of his own child?
Terry Gain says
Congratulations. Not everyone admits that they are a cherry picker.
So in your version of the Koran, Muslim men are instructed by Muhammad to punch their wives in the mouth and Muslim men have a right to break their wives bones and cut off their tongues and noses? Oh my. It seems to me that you have picked cherries outside the Muslim orchard.
It is my understanding that the Koran says Muslim men may lightly beat their wives with a stick and send them to their beds. It is beyond my comprehension how sending a wife to her bed doesn’t punish the husband but then again I’ve never had 3 wives waiting in line to satisfy my animal instincts.
It might be argued that the Koran verse which declares that women are inferior to me is what motivates the atrocities you describe. Query whether an ideology with that tenet can reasonably be described as a religion in a western nation?
But as I’ve only recently learned from the expert I’m not qualified to say anything about Islam. So you need to ask the expert Mortimer whether you have cherry picked. It seems to me to be grimly true that you have. I hope that this comment isn’t too angry.
gravenimage says
Terry, the Qur’an says *nothing* about beating wives “lightly”. This is Taqiyya often told to credulous Infidels, but it is not true.
Here is the Qur’an Corpus, with seven authoritative translations of Qur’an 4:34. Only one mentions “lightly”, and this is put in parentheses–it is a comment, not part of the actual text.
http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=4&verse=34
Terry Gain says
Thank you for correcting my error GI, but as I read those translations 2 say lightly beat and one doesn’t mention beating at all. None refer to breaking bones or cutting off tongues and noses. So were we treated to some-fabricated-history?
Giacomo Latta says
The koran does not say ”take a break” when it comes to wife-beating. It only says ”stop” once she puts out. Nor is there a mention of ”lack of consciousness.”
gravenimage says
Terry, “beating” and “scourging” certainly doesn’t rule out serious injury.
And note that Imams in much of the Muslim world have shot down attempts to outlaw or even curb Muslim’s right to abuse their wives, calling it un-Islamic.
I’m not sure why you are so angry over the mention of Muslim domestic abuse, Really, it is rife.
Terry Gain says
GI
I’m angry? What bloody nonsense. I state my opinions in straightforward language. Accusing me of being angry is a stupid smear. Are you projecting?
Herman Munster (@NooneFanofHER) says
The notion that Islamic attacks perpetrated against non-Muslim unbelievers by Muslims are violent acts of terrorism perpetrated by only a tiny minority of so-called Islamic extremists is nothing but globalist claptrap. The truth instead is all mainstream Muslims in the world are waging a civilizational holy war preemptively against all non-Muslim unbelievers in the world without provocation, per the infamous sword verses of the Koran, in the cause of Allah called a jihad intended to ultimately make the horrible evil scourge of Islam and all of those that follow that very horrible evil scourge of Islam, supreme throughout the world via the eventual worldwide imposition of Sharia.
As there is absolutely no legitimate evidence whatsoever that can possibly substantiate the Islam is a so-called Religion of Peace fairy tale that is forced down all of our respective throats by the globalists that have hijacked and co-opted our society. As that is nothing but a damn phony scam concocted out of whole cloth by the globalists to dupe and deceive the masses so that they can flood millions and millions of stealth demographic jihadists, i.e., enemy Muslim invaders and conquerors, into our respective non-Muslim unbeliever societies and as they have been doing for decades already under completely false premises and as fast as possible for their very own nefarious purposes.
In fact, these are the very same damn globalists that also concocted out of whole cloth the Global Warming/Climate Change scam also for their very own nefarious purposes.
In fact, there is a mountain of very legitimate historical and contemporary hard evidence, on the other hand, that more than IRREFUTABLY proves the indisputable fact far beyond any shadow of a doubt that the horrible evil scourge of Islam and all of those that follow that very horrible evil scourge of Islam, which are all mainstream Muslims in the world, are and have always been a very horrible evil scourge for all non-Muslim unbelievers in the world since the instant that menace to all civilized societies first evolved approximately 1400 years ago.
Furthermore, the very last thing in the world the horrible evil scourge of Islam is in reality is a so-called faith-based religion, much less a so-called faith-based Religion of Peace. Indeed, since the first and foremost fundamental holy obligation of the horrible evil scourge of Islam is the total, complete, and unconditional submission of all Muslims to the infamous “will of Allah” and in which is really Sharia or very draconian Islamic totalitarian law, unlike in all true legitimate faith-based religions, there is no “freedom of conscience” permitted in the horrible evil scourge of Islam.
As Sharia, i.e., the infamous “will of Allah” controls every single aspect of an individual Muslim’s life down to the minutest of details. In fact, the only freedom that Sharia permits is the freedom for Muslims to become more devout slaves and soldiers of Allah.
Moreover, non-compliance with Sharia, i.e., the infamous “will of Allah”, constitutes apostasy. Which in the horrible evil scourge of Islam and in stark contrast to all true legitimate faith-based religions, is an automatic death penalty.
Hence, the very last thing in the world the horrible evil scourge of Islam is again is a so-called Religion of Peace, much less a so-called faith-based Religion of Peace. As it is actually a very totalitarian cult.
Meanwhile, since the very last thing in the world the First Amendment to the Constitution protects is what is and has always been a very horrible evil scourge for all non-Muslim unbelievers in the world since the instant that menace to all civilized societies first evolved, then the horrible evil scourge of Islam must be banned and outlawed in America ASAP.
As the only solution that can possibly save our collective non-Muslim unbeliever societies from the horrible evil scourge of Islam is the total and complete separation of our two fully incompatible societies permanently and forever from one another.
Lydia Church says
It’s the ideology, stupid!
Yes, islam is the root of the terrorism.
It’s all in the koran.
gravenimage says
Michigan State Prof Claims Islam Is Not the Root of Islamic Terrorism
……………………..
Notice that Khalil doesn’t mention that almost all Jihadists cite Islam as the reason for their waging vio9lent Jihad.
More:
Brown strained believability to dismiss these images as indicating not support for terrorism, but for individuals “who really stuck it to the man” of Western imperialism — as if mass atrocities were mere protest.
……………………..
Yes–I have heard this before. Just repulsive.
More:
Khalil stated that he is “obsessed with 9/11 in a dark way,” a transformative event for a Muslim for whom “religion was always what held me back from being violent.”
……………………..
This is *really* bizarre–so he would pull off another 9/11 himself, but is only being held back by Islam? This claim is more disturbing than Khalil probably realizes.
Terry Gain says
It’s amazing what Muslims try to pull off when we concede that Islam is a religion rather than a conquest ideology. We need to put them on the defensive. It’s time to improve our rhetoric.
gravenimage says
Terry, people have lied about and whitewashed creeds that are not religions–your idea that this has only happened with religions is mistaken.
Fascism was presented as efficient and modern, and Communism as egalitarian.
Changing the definition of the word “religion”–you never say how you would do this, since definitions reflect rather than mandate usage–would not change this fact even if it were possible for us to somehow alter our language for Muslims.
Terry Gain says
GI
Where have I ever said that only religions are whitewashed? Why do you make things up?
And when are you going to apologize for your completely false allegation that I “ have railed against the First Amendment many times”.. I have in fact not done so even once. I fully support the First Amendment and have never said I don’t.
You have obviously not understood my argument that Islam should not be entitled to First Amendment protection because obviously it is not a legitimate religion.
Definitions are important. We do not have to accept in America the Muslim definition of religion, especially as it benefits Islam and gives it the ability to destroy our civilization.
Terry Gain says
GI
The meanings of words changes as a result of usage. We can change the meaning of Islam by refraining from referring to it as a religion. It is a conquest ideology. Wellington refers to Islam as a death cult. It cannot both be a death cult or an evil, supremacist, totalitarian, conquest ideology (my preferred description) and yet be entitled to First Amendment protection. The notion that it can be is absurd.
gravenimage says
Terry Gain wrote:
GI
Where have I ever said that only religions are whitewashed? Why do you make things up?
……………………..
Terry, in your post at 6:13 pm, you say this:
It’s amazing what Muslims try to pull off when we concede that Islam is a religion rather than a conquest ideology.
…
This seems to mean that Muslims would not be able to do this if Islam were not a religion. If you mean something else by this, please let me know.
More:
And when are you going to apologize for your completely false allegation that I “ have railed against the First Amendment many times”.. I have in fact not done so even once. I fully support the First Amendment and have never said I don’t.
…………………….
Well, you have mentioned the First Amendment as a supposed problem many times–here is one example:
This is a prescription for conquest. It is richly ironic that this conquest by an ideology that forbids freedom of conscience and religion is aided and abetted by the First Amendment which is supposed to guarantee freedom of religion rather than protect an evil ideology which denies freedom of religion.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/10/us-supreme-court-teacher-who-forced-student-to-say-islamic-conversion-prayer-did-not-violate-establishment-clause#comment-2161716
There are many other examples.
Perhaps you don’t like the term “railed against”? Would you prefer castigate, chide, or lambaste? Certainly, there are other words, as well, if you think one of them would be more accurate.
More:
You have obviously not understood my argument that Islam should not be entitled to First Amendment protection because obviously it is not a legitimate religion.
…………………….
Of course I understood that that is what you were saying–although you never say how you would change the definition of religion. But my noting that people have whitewashed Communism and Fascism and many other ugly creeds was addressing just this–the First Amendment does not just offer protections to the peaceful practice of religions–it defendss free speech regarding any creed.
More:
Definitions are important. We do not have to accept in America the Muslim definition of religion, especially as it benefits Islam and gives it the ability to destroy our civilization.
…………………….
definitions *are* important, That is why I fail to understand your constant demands that someone change the definition of religion. Here is the definition, once again:
A particular system of faith and worship.
and
Belief in or acknowledgement of some superhuman power or powers (esp. a god or gods) which is typically manifested in obedience, reverence, and worship; such a belief as part of a system defining a code of living
and
Action or conduct indicating belief in, obedience to, and reverence for a god, gods, or similar superhuman power; the performance of religious rites or observances.
https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/161944
Other dictionaries are pretty much the same.
Islam is indeed a religion by all these definitions. And definitions follow usage, as well as defining it–so I am at a loss as to how you would try to force these definitions to be changed. Indeed, although I have asked at least a score of times now, you have never said.
Terry Gain says
GI
You misinterpreted or perhaps twisted what I was saying. I wasn’t castigating the First Amendment. I was castigating the notion that Islam is entitled to First Amendment protection because of the (fallacious) belief that it is a religion. That you didn’t understand this is really hard to believe.
Good grief.
Wellington says Islam is a death cult. The notion that a death cult is entitled to First Amendment protection is bizarre. So bizarre that it might be argued that it castigates the First Amendment.
gravenimage says
Terry Gain wrote:
GI
The meanings of words changes as a result of usage.
…………………………..
Well, this is true. If you can get people all over the world to say that Islam is not a religion for a few centuries, then the current meaning of religion would indeed change, and be rendered obsolete in time.
Recall that this is even harder to do with a negative, though–to render the meaning of religion to remain the same save with regard to Islam would be an uphill battle.
More:
We can change the meaning of Islam by refraining from referring to it as a religion. It is a conquest ideology. Wellington refers to Islam as a death cult. It cannot both be a death cult or an evil, supremacist, totalitarian, conquest ideology (my preferred description) and yet be entitled to First Amendment protection. The notion that it can be is absurd.
…………………………..
Even creeds like Fascism and Communism have First Amendment protections. No one who mentions these creeds, even in a positive light, is imprisoned or executed.
The claim that a creed cannot be ugly and yet still have free speech protections is simply not the case.
And as I have noted many times, not all of Islam is protected under the First Amendment–Muslims cannot rape, murder, or impose Shari’ah law under the First Amendment.
MOre:
GI
You misinterpreted or perhaps twisted what I was saying. I wasn’t castigating the First Amendment. I was castigating the notion that Islam is entitled to First Amendment protection because of the (fallacious) belief that it is a religion. That you didn’t understand this is really hard to believe.
…………………………..
You have indeed negatively cited the First Amendment many times. And as I have noted, even if you were to somehow have Islam declared a non-religion (how would that work?), there are still protections under the First Amendment for speech not related to religion.
More:
Good grief.
Wellington says Islam is a death cult. The notion that a death cult is entitled to First Amendment protection is bizarre. So bizarre that it might be argued that it castigates the First Amendment.
…………………………..
Nazism and Stalinism are both death cults (albeit not in the religious use of the term cult–just in the sense of fanaticism), and people have the right to discuss these vicious creeds–even to claim that they are positives. Acknowledging this obvious fact does not in any way castigate the First Amendment.
Giacomo Latta says
As long as we allow Islam to call itself a religion it automatically has the same status as, say, Christianity. This identical status is, of course, absurd. Trash the First Amendment and start all over again, including a status for atheists which cannot be subordinate to whatever religious types want for themselves.
gravenimage says
No, our destroying our greatest freedoms for Muslims would be a grave error.
Terry Gain says
You are of course right and GI is wrong. She refuses to accept the obvious fact that if Islam is deemed to be a religion then it is entitled to First Amendment protectIon and can’t be inhibited. The notion that the founders intended this result is preposterous.
Wellington says
Well said and reasoned, gravenimage.
There is no way a person can reconcile Islam with what is best in humanity. Quite the opposite in fact.
gravenimage says
Thank you, Wellington.
Trick_or_Treat says
Of course the ‘LIST’ starts with the miscreant author of this nasty piece of work that orders the killing of everybody else wherever you find them, and however you can [the qur’an], Mr mohhamed himself.
If his name is not heading the ‘LIST’, then you have already missed one right from the very start.
Trick_or_Treat says
PS:
Re, “Islam Is Not The Root Cause Of Islamic Terrorism” – claims ‘Professor’
Well gee, just what on earth could it possibly be then, that incites and motivates muslims to try and kill all the rest of us in the world wherever they can, whenever they can, and however they can? That claim pretty well throws my theory right out the window then, doesn’t it? Heretofore I had been largely convinced that it had something solidly to do with the hundreds of verses in the qur’an that collectively command muslims to try and kill all the rest of us in the world wherever they can, whenever they can, and however they can!
Where, oh where, does so-called ‘academia’ keep dredging up this never ending supply of BRAIN-DEAD CLOWNS from?
Trying to say that “Islam is not the root cause of islamic terrorism”, is the same as saying that the bus timetable is not the root cause of the first bus arriving at 8.05 am!
Ren says
Michigan State Prof: “Islam Is Not the Root of Islamic Terrorism” even if Muhammad the prophet of islam was a terrorist.
Richard says
I totally agree with the late Christopher Hitchens, (God, I miss him!),
“Islam is a particularly extreme belief, No human being can possibly claim to know that there is a God at all, or that there are, or were, any other Gods to be repudiated. And when these ontological claims have collided, as they must, with their logical limits, it is even further beyond the cognitive capacity of any person to claim without embarrassment that the lord of creation spoke his ultimate words to an unlettered merchant in seventh-century Arabia.
“The prohibition of picturing the prophet is apparently absolute. So is the prohibition on pork or alcohol or, in some muslim societies, music or dancing. Very well then, let a good muslim abstain rigorously from all of these. But if he claims the right to make me abstain as well, he offers the clearest possible warning and proof of an aggressive intent.”
It is this absolutism that Hitchens believed to be so dangerous, due primarily to the fact that muslim authors and even authors of other nationalities and religions would be threatened with injury or even death for speaking out against Islam.
Mr. Hitchens hit the nail on the head. Muslim is PURE deception at every level.
Also,Mr. Hitchens said
“take the risk of thinking for yourself, much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come your way”
gravenimage says
I miss Hitchens, as well. A largely clear eye regarding Islam.
somehistory says
One example from several years ago, of a moslim male “exercising” his islam on his wife in what has been labeled an “honor killing” by some, but was ruled a “suicide” or “accident” by the ME.
“Tampa Police and the Medical Examiners office ruled Fatima Abdallah’s honor killing a “suicide,” saying she beat her own head against a coffee table until she died. Tampa Rescue called the TPD explanation illogical and said that she looked as if someone beat her to death. There was a history of systematic abuse by her family. Fatima was quoted as telling a neighbor that her brother did “unspeakable things to her.”
“beat her own head against a coffee table until she died.”…of a ****fractured skull****
https://floridacorrupshinestate.blogspot.com/
Honor killing cover-up in Florida?
By Pamela Geller
Published June 22, 2011 at 12:00am
A Muslim woman shunned by her devout Muslim family for her “shameful” divorce dies a sudden death after “throwing herself on the floor” in front of her family, and it’s classified an accident. That’s what Florida law enforcement determined. No one was charged in the death of 48-year-old Fatima Abdallah in Florida. But there is evidence that she may have been a victim of Islamic honor killing, and that Tampa authorities are complicit in a cover-up.Even worse, the Tampa Police report claims that Abdallah committed suicide by repeatedly striking her head against a coffee table. The idea defies logic, belies reality.
Jay found that Fatima Abdallah’s “mouth was bloodied by a blow, and at the left corner of her mouth is an angular cut/incision/indentation, which only could have been made by a blow.” Also, “her left eye orbit was broken, and her left eye socket was blackened, suffering a blow causing hemorrhaging of blood about the eye.” And “her right arm had contusions at the front inside of the elbow, and at the shoulder near the front armpit, consistent with being grasped forcibly by human hands.”
“”mouth was bloodied by a blow, “intentionally inflicted to her by another human being, or human beings working in concert to restrain and beat her.”
Rifqa Bary was not 85 miles away, fighting for her life under the same system”
Perhaps the victim’s moslim husband got the idea he could beat his wife in the face and other areas because his ‘prophet’ hit his child rape victim in her chest with his fist. Who can say how many other victims he beat with his fists or other weapons?
It takes a lot of satan’s evil spirit to lie so much and pretend so much when the evidence says otherwise.
This “professor” and all others like him will reap from the lies they are sowing, as will those who terrorize, rape and kill for islam, such as those featured on this site, just in the past few days…noses cut off and tongues cut out, and young non moslim women being hit in the head with fists, etc.
gravenimage says
Yes, Somehistory–wife beating and “Honor Killings” are absolutely rife in Islam.
Or Else! says
I think I understand what Terry is saying re: removing Islam’s “religious protection status” under the First Amendment.
Any new “prophet” coming forward today with a “perfect, unalterable revelation” ordering him to lead a hegemonic movement based on the tenets of supremacism, misogyny, aggressive holy war, homophobia, genocide, suicide/martyrdom, et al….would be labelled psychotic and dangerously delusional.
If his members started acting on those tenets, they’d be arrested and the movement would be quickly shut down, whether or not it had a “book”, a “place of worship”, or any other religious trappings.
Would such a “new” belief/behavioural system be protected, defended, and allowed to expand under the First Amendment?
Hence the absurdity.
Keep fighting the good fight.
gravenimage says
Muslims cannot rape or murder, either. And there are indeed all sorts of silly modern cults that are protected–so long as they do not break the law–under the Constitution.
Jay Lykins says
A REPEAT OF AN OLD TOPIC
Michigan State Prof Claims Islam Is Not the Root of Islamic Terrorism
Many people do not understand the similarities between Christianity and Islam. There are so many. For instance, Islam traces their lineage back to Adam and Eve; (Âdam or Aadam (Arabic: آدم, romanized: ʾĀdam) is believed to have been the first human and nabi (Arabic: نَـبِي, prophet) on Earth, in Islam. Adam’s role as the father of the human race is looked upon by Muslims with reverence. Muslims also refer to his wife, Haawa (Arabic: حَـواء, Eve), as the “mother of mankind.” Muslims see Adam as the first Muslim on Earth, as the Quran states that all the Prophets preached the same faith of Islam (Arabic: إِسـلام, ‘Submission’ (to God)). In the Qur’an Adam is given the name by God known as the (Adam-I-Safi) or The Chosen One.) they believe Adam, Eve, Moses, Abraham, Jesus and others are all prophets of Islam; Abraham’s first son, Ishmael, is to Muslims as Isaac is to Christians and Jews; Muslims believe in seven years of tribulation – some believe it started in 2014-15 and will end with the coming of their savior, al-Mahdi, a descendent of Mohammad, in 2022, the end of their tribulation.
There are two main denominations in Islam – Sunni (85-95 percent – a figure that seems to constantly change) and Shi’a (5-15 percent – ditto, on changing figures); in all, there are over 40 Islamic denominations (and hundreds of sects within these denominations), which are left with a very small percentage of the Islamic population, currently at 1.8 billion Muslims.
The Sunni and Shi’a have been at odds with one another since the death of Mohammad. However, current events reveal that they in fact may be very strange bed-fellows. Iran, which is Shi’a, and contains the majority of Shi’ite believers (Yemen holds much of the rest), is led by the Grand Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Hosseini Khamenei. Khamenei has stated that the seven years of tribulation began in 2014-2015. He has also said than the Mahdi will appear by 2022. Hence, their seven years of tribulation.
The leader of ISIS, born Ibrahim Awad Ibrahim Ali al-Badri al-Samarrai, but also known as Abū Bakr al-Baghdadi, has recently said the same thing. Why is this interesting? ISIS is essentially, Sunni, following its Wahhabi roots.
Here we have Sunni and Shi’a leaderships making similar statements about the eschatology of Islam. Muslims also believe that at the end of their tribulation they will occupy the world and Shari’a will be the law of the land. This is a time that their savior, al-Mahdi, will return, setting the stage for the final battle on earth . . . Armageddon.
This now brings us to present day – Iran is trying to go nuclear; Saudi Arabia wanting to go nuclear; Turkey not only wants to go nuclear, but as a member of NATO, hasnuclear devices stored inside its borders; Israel is an unconfirmed nuclear nation. There are also other, some smaller, countries in the Middle-East who just tend to be aggravating everyone else – Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar. Not to be left out, are Jordan and Egypt. Any one of these countries could be waving the black flag of radical Islam one minute, and switching sides the next minute.
Are we moving closer to Armageddon?
The underlying direction of Islam, from its inception to present day has been towards world domination, one religion, that of Islam, ruled by Shari’a, and ending with Armageddon. Islam is not a religion of peace. That perhaps has been the big lie throughout history. One need only look at their final destination to know that Islam is a religion of JIHAD, and is racing, either by mass immigration throughout Europe or by terrorism in other parts of the West. Why the race? Because, if the world has not been dominated by Islam at the end of their tribulation (2022 according to the above), their savior (al-Mahdi), will not return – no Mahdi, no salvation.
This Michigan State Prof should read and study up a bit more of the true Islam.
TattooedMan77 says
An unbiased opinion?
Give those dirty kaffirs a touch of Taqir/Islamophobia/Victimhood. That will close any debate on the TRUE TEACHINGS of Islam and Mohammed.