You are here

Jihad-Is-Islamic

Summary:


The fundamental point about jihad has been well made by Denis MacEoin:

What seems not to be understood about "the religion of peace" is that "peace" comes only after the entire world has been converted to Islam so that a "Dar al-Harb", the "Abode of War," will no longer even exist.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10723/uk-terrorists

Sharia law (Shafi'i school):

"Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada signifying warfare to establish the religion.

Manual of Sharia law: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Reliance-Traveller-Classic-Manual-Islamic/dp/0915957728

Jihad in Sharia Law

From the earliest days Islam has been spread by aggressive jihad as this dynamic timeline shows clearly:
http://www.shariawatch.org.uk/content/jihad-vs-crusades-dynamic-timeline

Consider the track record of Muhammad, the man all Muslims say is the example of a perfect Islamic life:

  • He ordered or supported over 40 instances of killing, including one slaughter of 800 Jews at Banu Qurayza.
  • He kept slaves
  • He fought or ordered over 60 battles
  • Looted trade caravans

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Killings_Ordered_or_Supported_by_Muhammad
http://www.islam-watch.org/books/islamic-jihad-legacy-of-forced-conversion-imperialism-slavery.pdf

https://umdatalsalik.wordpress.com/186-2/

Then we have this from a 14th century respected Islamic scholar when Islam was at the height of its power:

"In the Muslim community, the holy war [jihad] is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force" ...."But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations."


https://asadullahali.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/ibn_khaldun-al_muqaddimah.pdf

Through to the present day plans as they face non-Muslims with powerful armies and weapons. The aim hasn't changed, merely the strategy for achieving it!
http://nypost.com/2015/11/15/the-jihadis-master-plan-to-break-us/

In an article unambiguously titled, "Why We Hate You & Why We Fight You," the Islamic State (ISIS) confessed that "We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers." As for any and all political "grievances," these are "secondary" reasons for the jihad:

What's important to understand here is that although some might argue that your foreign policies are the extent of what drives our hatred, this particular reason for hating you is secondary [...] The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay (the) jizyah and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you [emphasis added].

http://www.meforum.org/7238/is-israel-the-cause-of-jihad

Ayatollah Khomeini devoted his entire life to the study of Islamic doctrine. He became the spiritual and religious leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the foremost religious authority for the entire Shiite world (differences between Shia and Sunni Islam are fairly superficial). Here is what he had to say about Islam and warfare.

“But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those (who say this) are witless.”

 

http://www.johnwalton-is.net/download/Story%20of%20Mohammed%20Islam%20Unveiled.pdf

Ideology behind jihad must be reformed-Imam of Peace

Comparison of ISIS with the Quran:

How the Quran supports tenets of Jihad

Finally Bill Warner PhD: Jihad not Terror He explains that we need to use the word jihad to describe attacks by Muslim jihadis not "terror" because the latter word helps disguise the Islamic nature of these attacks.

  • Summary: 

    The West’s movement towards the truth is remarkably slow. We drag ourselves towards it painfully, inch by inch, after each bloody Islamist assault.

    In France, Britain, Germany, America and nearly every other country in the world it remains government policy to say that any and all attacks carried out in the name of Mohammed have ‘nothing to do with Islam’. It was said by George W. Bush after 9/11, Tony Blair after 7/7 and Tony Abbott after the Sydney attack last month. It is what David Cameron said after two British extremists cut off the head of Drummer Lee Rigby in London, when ‘Jihadi John’ cut off the head of aid worker Alan Henning in the ‘Islamic State’ and when Islamic extremists attacked a Kenyan mall, separated the Muslims from the Christians and shot the latter in the head. And, of course, it is what President François Hollande said after the massacre of journalists and Jews in Paris last week.

    ...

    There may be some positive things to be said about Mohammed, but I thought this was pushing things too far and mentioned just one occasion when Mohammed didn’t welcome a critic. Asma bint Marwan was a female poetess who mocked the ‘Prophet’ and who, as a result, Mohammed had killed. It is in the texts. It is not a problem for me. But I can understand why it is a problem for decent Muslims. The moment I said this, my Muslim colleague went berserk. How dare I say this? I replied that it was in the Hadith and had a respectable chain of transmission (an important debate). He said it was a fabrication which he would not allow to stand. The upshot was that he refused to continue unless all mention of this was wiped from the recording. The BBC team agreed and I was left trying to find another way to express the same point. The broadcast had this ‘offensive’ fact left out.

  • Summary: 
    • Although the internet evidently did play a role in the radicalization process, the study showed that face-to-face encounters were more important, and that dawa, the proselytizing of Islam, played a central role in this process, as the men themselves became missionaries for Islam.

    • The third factor was the establishment of a "them and us" distinction between the radicalized men and the rest of the world, especially the belief that the West is an enemy of the Muslim world. The distinction also involved a rejection of democracy and a commitment to the establishment of a caliphate governed by sharia law, which the men want to bring about either through dawa(proselytizing) or violence (jihad).

    • "The Islamic State is a byproduct of Al Azhar's programs. So can Al Azhar denounce itself as un-Islamic? Al Azhar says there must be a caliphate and that it is an obligation for the Muslim world. Al Azhar teaches the law of apostasy and killing the apostate. Al Azhar is hostile towards religious minorities, and teaches things like not building churches, etc. Al Azhar upholds the institution of jizya [extracting tribute from non-Muslims]. Al Azhar teaches stoning people. So can Al Azhar denounce itself as un-Islamic?" — Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Nasr, scholar of Islamic law, graduate of Egypt's Al Azhar University, explaining why it refused to denounce ISIS as un-Islamic, 2015.

  • Summary: 

    One of the most frequently quoted Quranic verses is chapter 9 verse 5. This verse is known as "The Verse of the Sword." Muslim terrorists cite it to justify their violent jihad. Correspondingly, critics of Islam claim that it commands Muslims to act with offensive aggression towards the non-Muslims of that period, and contributes to Islam’s final theological doctrine of aggression towards all non-Muslims of all times. Apologists for Islam claim that 9:5 is purely defensive. Which side is right?

    As the Islamic source materials are examined it will become evident that verse 9:5 is part of the theology of jihad and is meant to be both offensive and defensive. It is directed against Pagans living both near to and far away from Muhammad.

    Understanding 9:5 in context requires an examination of the passage in which it is found. This passage consists of 29 to 41 verses or so (depending on which scholar’s view you hold). Because of time and space constraints however, I will only review the first 8 or so verses. I believe that they set the passage’s tone and belay its directives.

    Islam’s final theological position regarding the use of violence to further its domain does not rest upon one verse or passage. Rather the entire Quran, other Islamic source materials, and Muhammad’s actions and lifestyle (Sunnah) must be examined and evaluated. We’ll do that with a view toward Sura 9:5.

    I have attempted to keep this article focused on 9:5 within the broad theology of jihad. 9:5 is a foundational stone in the building of jihad and general aspects of jihad must be discussed. There is also the related topic of abrogation, but that has been dealt with elsewhere1, 2, 3, 4.

  • Country: 
    Israel
    News Date: 
    28/11/2018
    Summary: 

    Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shockingly reveals the honest truth about the war taking place today with Gaza and around the world. Other world leaders will hate that he said this but he said the truth. While the rest of the world is still in denial, PM Netanyahu wastes no time in defining today’s war around the world as a religious war with Islam. No Western leader wants to admit that, but PM Netanyahu says it, and boy does he say it. In response to a question from a journalist during a Q&A session, PM Netanyahu just laid the truth right out there.

  • Country: 
    Nigeria
    News Date: 
    18/11/2018
    Summary: 
    • The majority of those 6,000 Christians massacred this year were "mostly children, women and the aged... What is happening in ... Nigeria is pure genocide and must be stopped immediately." — Christian Association of Nigeria.

    • "There is no doubt that the sole purpose of these attacks is aimed at ethnic cleansing, land grabbing and forceful ejection of the Christian natives from their ancestral land and heritage." — Christian Association of Nigeria.

  • Country: 
    Australia
    News Date: 
    12/11/2018
    Summary: 

    n statements made in the wake of Friday’s terror incident in Melbourne the prime minister said radical Islam posed the biggest threat to Australia in terms of religious extremism. “Religious extremism takes many forms around the world and no religion is immune from it. That is the lesson of history and, sadly, modern history as well,” he said. “But here in Australia, we would be kidding ourselves if we did not call out the fact that the greatest threat of religious extremism in this country is the radical and dangerous ideology of extremist Islam.”

  • Country: 
    Australia
    News Date: 
    12/11/2018
    Summary: 

    Shire Ali “ and had his passport cancelled in 2015, it is understood to prevent him travelling to Syria to join Islamic State.” Mental illness? Come on. The family’s claims might carry more weight if they could produce any evidence that Shire Ali was actually being treated for mental illness; so far they’ve just asserted that he was mentally ill.

  • Summary: 
    • If you do not even dare to link terrorism to its source, then surely neither can you prepare for it.

    • No one seems to be holding roundtable talks with non-Muslim communities across the UK to address their legitimate fears and concerns about religiously-motivated terrorism on their lives.

    • Perhaps the main reason that terror victims had nowhere to turn is that even after years of living with Islamic terrorism, British authorities and public services still appear to be more concerned with dealing with perceived "Islamophobia" than with the real, devastating consequences of terrorism.

  • Summary: 

    Precise language is necessary for critical thought. The use of the word "terror" instead of jihad is an example of using the wrong word. Jihad is the word that Islamic texts use and it is accurate. Probably the worst artificial phrase to be minted is "combating violent extremism". It sounds like it is straight from the novel, 1984. We need to use the words that come from Islam to describe Muslims' actions and thoughts.

  • Summary: 

    In light of the Charlie Hebdo Massacre, we reflect on how violence and extremism has been gathering momentum in Europe throughout the years. The UK, France, Holland and many other European countries are suffering a tide of Islamic extremism unprecedented in living memory. Is Europe's culture and way of life in danger? Will the governments wake up and act or continue to bury their heads in the sand, living in denial. Clarions Project's film, The Third Jihad, predicted this tide of violence and extremism now gathering momentum as seen in France, the UK, Holland and across all of Europe.

  • Summary: 

    That there is no compulsion in Islam and that Islam is a religion of peace are common refrains among Muslim activists, academics, officials, and journalists. In an age of terrorism and violent jihad, nowhere, they argue, does the Qur'an allow Muslims to fight non-Muslims solely because they refuse to become Muslim. Proponents of Islamic tolerance point to a number of Qur'anic verses which admonish violence and advocate peace, tolerance, and compromise.

    But not all verses in the Qur'an have the same weight in assessment. Unlike the Old or New Testaments, the Qur'an is not organized by chronology but rather by size of chapters. Even within chapters, chronology can be confused. In sura (chapter) 2, for example, God revealed verses 193, 216, and 217 to Muhammad shortly after he arrived in Medina. God only revealed verses 190, 191, and 192 six years later. This complicates interpretation, all the more when some verses appear to contradict.

    ABROGATION IN THE QUR'AN

    The Qur'an is unique among sacred scriptures in accepting a doctrine of abrogation in which later pronouncements of the Prophet declare null and void his earlier pronouncements. Four verses in the Qu'ran acknowledge or justify abrogation:

    • When we cancel a message, or throw it into oblivion, we replace it with one better or one similar. Do you not know that God has power over all things?
    • When we replace a message with another, and God knows best what he reveals, they say: You have made it up. Yet, most of them do not know.
    • God abrogates or confirms whatsoever he will, for he has with him the Book of the Books.
    • If we pleased, we could take away what we have revealed to you. Then you will not find anyone to plead for it with us.

    ...

    Abrogation occurs not only within the Qur'an, but also by the Qur'an toward earlier revelations, such as those passed on by Jesus or Moses. Sura 2:106 refers to commandments sent to prophets before Muhammad. ‘Abdullah Yusuf ‘Ali, commentator and translator of the Qur'an, interpreted the verse to mean that God's message is the same across time, but its form may differ according to the exigencies of time. ‘Abd al-Majid Daryabadi, a Pakistani Qur'an commentator, suggested, however, that the laws might differ across time but that there should be no shame in the same lawgiver replacing temporary laws with permanent ones.

  • Summary: 

    It is simply false to declare that jihadists represent the “tiny few extremists” who sully the reputation of an otherwise peace-loving and tolerant Muslim faith. In reality, the truth is far more troubling — that jihadists represent the natural and inevitable outgrowth of a faith that is given over to hate on a massive scale, with hundreds of millions of believers holding views that Americans would rightly find revolting. Not all Muslims are hateful, of course, but so many are that it’s not remotely surprising that the world is wracked by wave after wave of jihadist violence.

    To understand the Muslim edifice of hate, imagine it as a pyramid — with broadly-shared bigotry at the bottom, followed by stair steps of escalating radicalism — culminating in jihadist armies that in some instances represent a greater share of their respective populations than does the active-duty military in the United States.

    The base of the pyramid, the most broadly held hatred in the Islamic world, is anti-Semitism, with staggering numbers of Muslims expressing anti-Jewish views. In 2014, the Anti-Defamation League released the results of polling 53,100 people in 102 countries for evidence of anti-Semitic attitudes and beliefs. The numbers from the majority-Muslim world are difficult to believe for those steeped in politically correct rhetoric about Islam. A full , including 92 percent of Iraqis, a whopping 69 percent of relatively secular Turks, and 74 percent of Saudis.

  • Summary: 
    • Egyptian intellectual Dr. Khaled Montaser referred to the "scientific-miraculous" nature of the Quran (i'jaz) as a "great delusion" and "an anesthetic or a nice sedative" for the Arabs and the Muslims.

    • "Where does extremism come from? People, we must admit -- as our president has often said -- that there are elements in our books of heritage that incite to this. We must admit this." — Dr. Khaled Montaser.

    • Montaser's harsh criticism should be understood as a call, similar to that of other caring Muslims "trying to fix this," not to abandon Islam, but to modernize or risk remaining "at the tail end of all the nations."

  • Summary: 
    • I have lived for years in these places in the Middle East and seen with my own eyes the cruelty and abuse that takes place under extremist Islamic law. I have heard the screams of families as their loved ones were tortured and slaughtered for the simplest acts -- singing, dancing, voicing an opinion, or simply being a non-Muslim -- all of which are crimes.

    • If we play the game of misinforming and misleading people about Islamism, by making irrelevant analogies to whitewash the violence and terrorism which are generated by Islamic fundamentalism, we are indoctrinating the literally millions of innocent children who will be either the perpetrators or victims of the next radical Islamic terror attacks -- including Muslims.

    • 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 Britain.

  • Summary: 

    Following last night's London terror attack, Maajid Nawaz wants people to stop disassociating terrorism and religion - because they are undeniably linked.

  • Summary: 

    Muslim demands for non-Muslim “infidels” to pay jizya on pain of death are growing, even as the West fluctuates between having no clue what jizya is and thinking that jizya is an example of “tolerance” in Islam.

    In the video where the Islamic State slaughters some 30 Christian Ethiopians in Libya last April, the spokesman  (which the impoverished Ethiopian migrant workers could not render, nor the 21 Copts before them) is the only way for Christians around the world to safeguard their lives:

    But whoever refuses [to pay jizya] will see nothing from us but the edge of a spear. The men will be killed and the children will be enslaved, and their wealth will be taken as booty. This is the judgment of Allah and His Messenger.

  • Summary: 

    Will Muslim spokesmen in the West denounce this call as un-Islamic, or remain silent about it? I’m betting the latter, in light of passages like these that make it clear that al-Qadi is speaking in complete accord with the Qur’an and Islamic law:

    “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day, and do not forbidden what has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and do not acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

    A hadith depicts Muhammad saying:

    “Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war…When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them…. If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them. (Sahih Muslim 4294)

    , December 17, 2017:

     

    See also:

    From MUQADDIMAH by Abd Ar Rahman bin Muhammed ibn Khaldun (1332-1406)


    In the Muslim community, the holy war [jihad] is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force ... The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the Holy War was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense ... They are merely required to establish their religion among their own people. That is why the Israelites after Moses and Joshua remained unconcerned with royal authority [e.g., a Caliphate]. Their only concern was to establish their religion [not spread it to the nations] … But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.

    A respected and celebrated Islamic scholar, Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), studied Al Qur'an in its original Arabic and other Islamic texts.

     



  • Summary: 
    • "National Security officials are prohibited from developing a factual understanding of Islamic threat doctrines, preferring instead to depend upon 5th column Muslim Brotherhood cultural advisors." — Richard Higgins, NSC official.

    • At the heart of the problem lies the fantasy that Islam must be very similar to other religions, particularly Judaism and Christianity, out of which it was, in fact derived.

    • The use of force, mainly through jihad, is a basic doctrine in the Qur'an, the Prophetic sayings (ahadith), and in all manuals of Islamic law. It is on these sources that fighters from Islamic State, al-Qa'ida, al-Shabaab, and hundreds of other groupings base their preaching and their actions. To say that such people have "nothing to do with Islam" could not be more wrong.

  • Summary: 

    See also: 

    Note: The Hadith reference links have been changed to a new source because UCL have removed their hadith collection from public access.

    As a side note, this statement is a third party report. We do not have the exact words of Muhammad to evaluate them at this point. Yet there is a narration in Sunan Abu Dawud where Muhammad is directly quoted:

    Narrated Rabah ibn Rabi':
    When we were with the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) on an expedition, he saw some people collected together over something and sent a man and said: See, what are these people collected around? He then came and said: They are round a woman who has been killed. He said: This is not one with whom fighting should have taken place. Khalid ibn al-Walid was in charge of the van; so he sent a man and said: Tell Khalid not to kill a woman or a hired servant. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 14, )

    HOWEVER, there are certain other narrations that permit the killing of women and children, specifically during Muslim raids where they attack unsuspecting victims at night:

    Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama:
    The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, )

    I.e., they are all the same—both the women and children are nothing more than pagans! The above narration is repeated in several, different hadith collections:

    Chapter 9: PERMISSIBILITY OF KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE NIGHT RAIDS, PROVIDED IT IS NOT DELIBERATE

    It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019,)

    Keep in mind that the subheading is not part of the narration, it is added by the collector of the hadiths. In other words, the statement regarding the killing of women and children being permissible as long as it isn’t deliberate is not part of the narration. The hadiths do not explicitly say this, and yet the compiler assumed that this was the clear implication and meaning of these narrations.

    It is narrated by Sa'b b. Jaththama that he said (to the Holy Prophet): Messenger of Allah, we kill the children of the polytheists during the night raids. He said: They are from them. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019, )

    Sa'b b. Jaththama has narrated that the Prophet (may peace be upon him) asked: What about the children of polytheists killed by the cavalry during the night raid? He said: They are from them. (Sahih Muslim, Book 019,)

    ...

    Furthermore, Islamic sources provide many examples where Muslims deliberately and brutally killed women and children. Noted Islamic commentator and historian Al-Tabari mentioned one:

    In this year a raiding party led by Zayd b. Harithah set out against Umm Qirfah in the month of Ramadan. During it, Umm Qirfah (Fatimah bt. Rabi‘ah b. Badr) suffered a cruel death. He tied her legs with rope and then tied her between two camels until they split her in two. She was a very old woman.

    Her story is as follows. According to Ibn Humayd – Salamah – Ibn Ishaq – ‘Abdallah b. Abi Bakr, who said: The Messenger of God sent Zayd b. Harithah to Wadi al-Qura, where he encountered the Banu Fazarah. Some of his companions were killed there, and Zayd was carried away wounded from among the slain. One of those killed was Ward b. ‘Amr, one of the Banu Sa‘d b. Hudhaym: he was killed by one of the Banu Badr [b. Fazarah]. When Zayd returned, he vowed that no washing [to cleanse him] from impurity should touch his head until he had raided the Fazarah. After he recovered from his wounds, the Messenger of God sent him with an army against the Banu Fazarah. He met them in Wadi al-Qura and inflicted causalities on them. Qays b. al-Musahhar al-Ya‘muri killed Mas‘adah b. Hakamah b. Malik b. Badr and took Umm Qirfah prisoner. (Her name was Fatimah bt. Rabi‘ah b. Badr. She was married to Malik b. Hudhayfah b. Badr. She was a very old woman.) He also took one of Umm Qirfah’ daughters and ‘Abdallah b. Mas‘adah prisoner. Zayd b. Harithah ordered Qays to kill Umm Qirfah, and he killed her cruelly. He tied each of her legs with a rope and tied the ropes to two camels, and they split her in two. Then they brought Umm Qirfah’s daughter and ‘Abdallah b. Mas‘adah to the Messenger of God. Umm Qirfah’s daughter belonged to Salamah b. ‘Amr b. al-Akwa‘, who had taken her - she was a member of a distinguished family among her people: the Arabs used to say, "Had you been more powerful than Umm Qirfah, you could have done no more." The Messenger of God asked Salamah for her, and Salamah gave her to him. He then gave her to his maternal uncle, Hazn b. Abi Wahb and she bore him ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Hazn. (The History of Al-Tabari: The Victory of Islam, translated by Michael Fishbein [State University of New York Press (SUNY), Albany 1997], Volume VIII, pp. 95-97)

    Al-Tabari also mentioned that Muhammad had the young boys of the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayzah beheaded:

    The Messenger of God had commanded that all of them who had reached puberty should be killed. (The History of Al-Tabari, Volume VIII, p. 38)

    ...

    Not only were the young boys of the tribe beheaded, but the Muslims also beheaded one of their women:

    According to Ibn Ishaq, the conquest of the Banu Qurayzah took place in the month of Dhu al-Qa‘dah or in the beginning of Dhu al-Hijjah. Al-Waqidi, however, said that the Messenger of God attacked them a few days before the end of Dhu al-Qa‘dah. He asserted that the Messenger of God commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the Banu Qurayzah. Then he sat down, and ‘Ali and al-Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence. He asserts that the woman whom the Prophet killed that day was named Bunanah, the wife of al-Hakam al-Qurazi- it was she who had killed Khallad b. Suwayd by throwing a milestone on him. The Messenger of God called for her and beheaded her in retaliation for Khallad b. Suwayd. (The History of Al-Tabari, Volume VIII, pp. 40-41)

    Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
    No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I. I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 15,)

    It doesn’t stop here. When Muhammad conquered Mecca he ordered the murder of a couple of singers solely because they had made fun of him in song!

    Also among them was ‘Abdallah b. Khatal, a member of the Banu Taym b. Ghalib. The Messenger of God ordered that he should be killed only for the following reason: He was a Muslim, and the Messenger of God sent him to collect alms, sending with him one of the Ansar. With him went a mawla of his, also a Muslim, to serve him. He halted at a resting place and commanded the mawla to slaughter him a goat and make him a meal; then he went to sleep. When he woke up, the mawla had done nothing for him; so he attacked him and killed him. He had two singing girls, Fartana and another with her. The two used to sing satire about the Messenger of God; so the latter commanded that the two of them should be killed along with him…

    Also among them were ‘Ikrimah b. Abi Jahl and Sarah, a mawla of one of the sons of ‘Abd al-Muttalib. She was one of those who used to molest the Messenger of God in Mecca…

  • Summary: 
    • The irony, of course, is that so many people, have adopted a way of interpreting human rights and liberal values in a manner that often undermines them.

    • It is time for some home truths. Islam has been at war with the West for some 1,384 years, with very little respite. When Muslim Arab armies invaded Syria in 634, went on to destroy all but a rump of the Christian Byzantine empire (which it finally defeated when the Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople in 1453), took control of Spain, Portugal, Sicily and other lands on the north Mediterranean coast, it was the start of endless jihad wars.

    • Most importantly, we seem unable to understand that Islam is, above all else, a totalitarian project covering all aspects of human life from the spiritual to the material, from law to government to clothing to food to sex to taxation and more. This totalitarianism rejects democracy in the most basic way, as having come from mere humans rather than divinely, from Allah.

    • Unfortunately, concluding that modern terrorism "has nothing to do with Islam" or that "Islam is a religion of peace" visibly contradicts the historical record.

  • Summary: 

    The purpose of this article is to introduce the complex, abstract concept of  to those in the non-Islamic world who are concerned about the apparent rising tide of  associated with Islam.

    After several years of intense study and discussion with colleagues, I have come to believe that fitnah is  motivational component of Islamic theology. It is the cornerstone of an adversarial, confrontational worldview that inevitably leads to a state of  with the non-Islamic world.

    In fact, fighting against the multi-faceted threat of fitnah is such an essential part of a Quran-based worldview that it is both the strategy and tactics and the “” of the , the GIM.

    Removing fitnah from the world is so fundamental to Islamic ideology that every primary source contains extensive references to the concept.

    It also follows, that if fitnah is the gravitational force behind the GIM, then some essential tactical elements, or operative verbs, must also be understood. For this reason, two of these key tactical verbs – qital and kharaj, or “kill/slaughter/slay” and “displace/expel/drive out,” respectively – are discussed in this article.


    Read more at

  • Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law

    Image: 

    Author(s):

    Summary: 

  • Summary: 

    But we need to acknowledge that this is a battle that will not end soon. We are fighting a terrorism that exists through an ideology, and transcends organisations. We aren’t just fighting the Taliban, al-Qaeda and Isis, but the .

    ...

    Most British Muslims are able to healthily integrate being both Muslim and Western, seeing those two identities as compatible and harmonious rather than conflicting. But there are an increasing number of young Muslims who find their sense of belonging and identity elsewhere.

    That comes from Islamophobia, but also portions of the Muslim community refusing to , regarding integration as a compromise of their identity. They push the notion of Britain never being our home, that we will always be hated for being Muslim, that you cannot truly be British and Muslim.

  • Summary: 

    On November 7, Kuwaiti cleric Sheikh Saalim Bin Sa'd At-Taweel published a lecture on his official YouTube channel explaining the concept of Jihad. Sheikh At-Taweel said that while "Jihad" has different meanings, "Jihad for the sake of Allah" means fighting infidels in order to spread Islam. He further explained that slavery is part of Islam and said that Muslims should not try to deny this. In fact, he said, slavery is "one of the virtues of Islam" because it provides infidels with an opportunity to become Muslims and avoid the Hellfire. Over the past decade, Sheikh At-Taweel has made several visits to the United States and was guest lecturer in mosques in Worcester, Massachusetts, Modesto, California, and New York, and elsewhere. In 2016, he participated in the 3rd Annual U.K. National Knowledge Conference.

  • Summary: 

    During the Biafra War of 1967-1969, which was triggered by a massacre by Muslims of Christians, the entire Western world stood by and allowed the Muslims of the North to slaughter the Christian, mainly Ibo, south. These Muslims were aided by outside Muslims, including Egyptian pilots who strafed and bombed Ibo villages, killing tens of thousands — without any opposition, anti-aircraft fire, anything.

    The war was brought on by the Jihad against the Christian Ibo and other Christian peoples of southern Nigeria by the Hausa and Fulani Muslims of the north (Islam itself was spread most recently in the 1804 Jihad declared by Othman Dan Fodio), and by the desperate attempt of the Ibo (Igbo) people to free themselves from Muslim aggression. Tens of thousands of civilians were murdered — by the Egyptian pilots who repeatedly bombed and strafed them.

    Great Britain, France, the United States, all of Europe, did nothing to help the Christians. Col. Ojukwu, in his Ahiara Declaration (for the full text, google “Jihad Watch” and “Posted by Hugh” and “Ahiara Declaration”), said that the Biafrans were fighting off a “Jihad” that was being waged against them — and the word was not being used figuratively.

  • Summary: 

    On November 7, Kuwaiti cleric Sheikh Saalim Bin Sa'd At-Taweel published a lecture on his official YouTube channel explaining the concept of Jihad. Sheikh At-Taweel said that while "Jihad" has different meanings, "Jihad for the sake of Allah" means fighting infidels in order to spread Islam. He further explained that slavery is part of Islam and said that Muslims should not try to deny this. In fact, he said, slavery is "one of the virtues of Islam" because it provides infidels with an opportunity to become Muslims and avoid the Hellfire. Over the past decade, Sheikh At-Taweel has made several visits to the United States and was guest lecturer in mosques in Worcester, Massachusetts, Modesto, California, and New York, and elsewhere. In 2016, he participated in the 3rd Annual U.K. National Knowledge Conference.

     

    Saalim Bin Sa'd At-Taweel: When we speak about Jihad for the sake of Allah, we mean fighting for the sake of Allah. The word "Jihad" has other meanings apart from "fighting." "Fighting" is only one of the meanings of the word "Jihad," but "Jihad for the sake of Allah" refers to "fighting."

  • Country: 
    Kenya
    News Date: 
    23/09/2013
    Summary: 

    On Saturday, Sept. 21, 2013, the Somali militant group al-Shabab carried out an assault on Kenya’s Westgate Mall in one of the worst terrorist attacks in the country’s history. A group of young gunmen stalked the halls and stores of the upscale Nairobi shopping center, and methodically murdered at least 67 people. News of the attack seized the world’s attention, dominating international media coverage for days.

  • Summary: 
    • The practice of substituting political correctness for scholarship, namely educating the public in the West about actual the contents of Islam, has become so prevalent that it is undermining our ability to recognize, let alone rectify, any problems.

    • "Some prominent scientists and philosophers have stated openly that moral and political considerations should influence whether we accept or promulgate scientific theories... [M]isrepresenting findings in science to achieve desirable social goals will ultimately harm both science and society." — Nathan Cofnas, writing in the journal Foundations of Science.

    • Many people who need structure prefer every activity proscribed for them. In addition, many people with sadistic wishes might be lured by being given permission to act on these wishes; and not only that, but they are told that these acts are, indeed, obligatory and good, and that the person acting on them is, in the view of many Islamic tenets, heroic.

  • Summary: 

    Because Islam gets criticized for many things — from hostility to modernity and democracy to calls for theocratic rule, radical “patriarchy,” misogyny, and draconian punishments, to name a few — it is helpful to step back and distinguish between those (many) doctrines that affect Muslim society alone, and those that extend to and affect Western or non-Muslim peoples in general. On doing this, three interrelated doctrines come into sharp focus. They are: 1) total disavowal from, and enmity for, “the infidel,” that is, constant spiritual or metaphysical hostility against the non-Muslim (in Arabic known as al-wala’ w’al bara, or “”); this naturally manifests itself as 2) jihad, that is, physical hostility against and — whenever and wherever possible — attempts to subjugate the non-Muslim); finally, successful jihads lead to 3) dhimmitude, the degrading position of conquered non-Muslims who refuse to forfeit their religious freedom by converting to the victor’s creed.

  • Summary: 
    • In the twentieth century, targets were churches and synagogues; today, they are churches, synagogues, mosques, temples -- wherever there is a faith, even a Muslim one, that these Islamic fundamentalists want to "purify".

    • Radical Islam has declared war on the pillars of the West: modernity, science, rationalism, tolerance, equality under the law, freedom of expression and the dignity of the individual, to name only a few. Many of these ideas are currently under threat in Western Europe.

    • Many Europeans might sentimentally think of the hundreds of thousands of Muslims pouring into Europe as "the new Jews" – even though their culture is virtually opposite to the Jews' -- but perhaps the Europeans should be aware that they have now forced the Jews to flee twice in the modern era.

    • Islamists are erasing civilizations. Is Europe's next?

  • Country: 
    Denmark
    News Date: 
    02/12/2017
    Summary: 

    These people are enemy combatants in a war. They are being treated, however, as if they were individual criminals with no connection to a larger struggle. They are charged, serve some time, and are released. This girl will be out in eight years at the latest, and most likely much sooner. What do authorities think will happen then? That she will become a productive member of Danish society? That’s naivete to the point of madness. She is a jihadi now and will be a jihadi when she gets out.

    Why did she target a Jewish school? Islamic Jew-hatred: it’s in the Qur’an.

  • Summary: 

    Indonesia, the world’s biggest Muslim-majority country, has a constitution that recognizes other major religions, and practices a syncretic form of Islam that draws on not just the faith’s tenets but local spiritual and cultural traditions. As a result, the nation has long been a voice of, and for, moderation in the Islamic world.

    Yet Indonesia is not without its . Though most are on the fringe, they can add up to a significant number given Indonesia’s 260-million population. In the early 2000s, the country was  by  (JI), a homegrown extremist organization allied with al-Qaeda. JI’s deadliest attack was the  that killed 202 people. While JI has been neutralized, ISIS has claimed responsibility for recent, smaller terrorist incidents in the country and has  — Indonesians who could pose a threat when they return home. The country has also seen the rise of hate groups that preach intolerance and violence against local religious and ethnic minorities, which include Shia and Ahmadiya Muslims.

    ....

    Many Western politicians and intellectuals say that Islamist terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. What is your view?

    Western politicians should stop pretending that extremism and terrorism have nothing to do with Islam. There is a clear relationship between fundamentalism, terrorism, and the basic assumptions of Islamic orthodoxy. So long as we lack consensus regarding this matter, we cannot gain victory over fundamentalist violence within Islam.

    Radical Islamic movements are nothing new. They’ve appeared again and again throughout our own history in Indonesia. The West must stop ascribing any and all discussion of these issues to “Islamophobia.” Or do people want to accuse me — an Islamic scholar — of being an Islamophobe too?

    What basic assumptions within traditional Islam are problematic?

    The relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, the relationship of Muslims with the state, and Muslims’ relationship to the prevailing legal system wherever they live … Within the classical tradition, the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims is assumed to be one of segregation and enmity.

    Perhaps there were reasons for this during the Middle Ages, when the tenets of Islamic orthodoxy were established, but in today’s world such a doctrine is unreasonable. To the extent that Muslims adhere to this view of Islam, it renders them incapable of living harmoniously and peacefully within the multi-cultural, multi-religious societies of the 21st century.

    A Western politician would likely be accused of racism for saying what you just said.

    I’m not saying that Islam is the only factor causing Muslim minorities in the West to lead a segregated existence, often isolated from society as a whole. There may be other factors on the part of the host nations, such as racism, which exists everywhere in the world. But traditional Islam — which fosters an attitude of segregation and enmity toward non-Muslims — is an important factor.

    And Muslims and the state?

    Within the Islamic tradition, the state is a single, universal entity that unites all Muslims under the rule of one man who leads them in opposition to, and conflict with, the non-Muslim world.

  • Summary: 

    The narrative we are expected to buy into is that terrorism is nothing to do with Islam and, further, that it is a state of mind imposed upon young and ‘vulnerable’ Muslim men and women by an outside agency — a foreign agency and an agency which, again, has nothing to do with Islam. This is the process of ‘radicalisation’ we keep hearing about and I have never bought into it, having a certain respect for the concept of free will. And, I would contend, a rather less generous view of Islam’s worldwide beneficence and pacific nature than the one we are all enjoined to take.

    And yet here we have a young man taken into the kindly, if somewhat wrinkled, bosom of an English couple who, it may emerge, still ended up trying to terrorise people in the name of his weary God. If the Joneses had been a Muslim family, then the press and the police would be demanding to know what they knew of this process of radicalisation, and what they had done to counter it. But there is nothing to be done. The religion itself sets its people apart from the rest and, in all too many cases, this apartness leads to a hatred. Radicalisation is nothing to do with it.

  • Summary: 

    Most people living in Belgium assume that Islam is a religion like any other, that brings a mostly spiritual message to which each adherent tries to live up as well as possible. They are mistaken. Islam deeply permeates the daily life and social interactions of a Muslim. It is true, as Muslims tend to say, that Islam is an all-encompassing system, that at least includes the following human activities:

     

    q

    CULTURE: the way in which people perform daily routines: e.g. how one should greet the other, who should greet first, personal hygiene (showering, toilet, …), how to eat and drink, how to treat guests, …

     

    q

    SOCIAL SYSTEM: Islam determines the relationship of the Muslim with other Muslims and Muslimas, with those of different religions, with slaves (Islam did not abolish slavery), …  

     

    q

    LEGAL SYSTEM: a good part of what a society needs in legislation, such as family law, inheritance law, property law, transactions, contracts, legislation regarding slaves, … is provided for by the Qur’an and the traditions/Hadith of Muhammad. Believers can only make new laws for matters that are not provided for in the Qur’an and the Hadith.

     

    q

    RELIGION: rules for prayer, fasting, making the pilgrimage to Mecca, almsgiving to the poor, being good to your parents and fellow Muslims, …

     

    q

    MILITARY: The last 10 years of his life, Muhammad was constantly at war. His successors have continued this permanent state of war. So, the Qur’an contains quite a lot of rules pertaining to war, and these are an integral part of Islamic law. The ideology of Jihad, waging war to protect Islam and to spread it, sometimes called “holy war”, is very well-developed and is a part of Islamic law. No other religion has such an elaborate war doctrine as Islam has.

     

    q

    JUDICIAL PROCEDURES: islamic scholars have compiled law books based on the Quran and the traditions of Muhammad. Quite a bit of attention is given to procedures of witnesses. Islam did not bring an organized judicial apparatus with procedures of defence, appeals, ... Muhammad himself was the judge and what he decided was executed. He even had people executed without putting them on trial. His successors have simply continued in the role of being a judge as well. Saudi Arabia tries to copy the situation that Muhammad instituted (or didn’t institute) as much as possible, resulting in a condition where in the 21st century they still don’t have a judiciary where the rights of citizens are protected. And they still carry out punishments that were common in the 7th century, but that are now regarded as abhorrent.

     

    q

    POLITICAL SYSTEM: in an Islamic system there is no separation of powers, all power (political, judicial, military, …) is in the hands of the Caliph or his representative. Citizens in this Islamic system must be unconditionally obedient to the Caliph, unless he deviates from Islamic law. The system of a Caliphate is a continuation of the principle that Muhammad held all power. One of the shortcomings of Muhammad is that he didn’t institute a system with elections or democratic representation, resulting in a lot of problems with his succession, especially the fourth Caliph, Ali. These problems caused the split between the Shiites and Sunnites.

  • Country: 
    Saudi Arabia
    News Date: 
    15/09/2017
    Summary: 

    Jihad Watch recently  about Saudi schools “teaching Muhammad’s statements that Jews and Christians are accursed and Muslims must kill Jews.” Such teachings begin as early as first grade.

  • Country: 
    Indonesia
    News Date: 
    08/09/2017
    Summary: 

    Many Western politicians and intellectuals say that Islamist terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. What is your view?

    Western politicians should stop pretending that extremism and terrorism have nothing to do with Islam. There is a clear relationship between fundamentalism, terrorism, and the basic assumptions of Islamic orthodoxy. So long as we lack consensus regarding this matter, we cannot gain victory over fundamentalist violence within Islam.

  • Summary: 

    And still more and more ‘cats’[Muslims} pour into Europe and into the UK. The grooming has been occasioned because we made this mess for ourselves and have neither the political inclination nor the will to call a halt. And because our politicians are terrified they might be called ‘racist’ if they grasp the nettle. And so we live in a bizarre state of denial. Here’s my bet — Mohammed Khan wins his case.

  • Summary: 
    • One need not go back centuries to the Muslim conquest of the Christian late classical world -- the medieval Barbary corsair raids, the Ottoman yoke in Central and Eastern Europe or the slave markets of Kaffa in Tatar Muslim Crimea -- to understand that this violence clearly predates the European colonial era, the creation of the modern state of Israel, or the issue of climate change.

    • Countries such as China, Nigeria or Kenya that are not Western, not"imperialist", not whatever the excuses that Islamists make, are still spectacularly attacked by similar stabbings. Month on month, there seems almost nowhere that Islamic terror did not strike.

    • Volumes of revered Islamic texts establish in great detail the grounds of violence and oppression of non-believers and those deemed heretical. These supposed grounds -- made alive daily in madrassas and mosques across the world before being acted upon by religiously-trained terrorists -- are childishly dismissed by Western liberals as immaterial.

    • The first step towards a solution is to question the received knowledge tirelessly dished out by media pundits in the West. What is lacking is simply seeing a huge body of evidence of theological justification for Islamist terror.

  • Country: 
    Turkey
    News Date: 
    17/08/2017
    Summary: 
    • Turkey has now become the first and only NATO member state that teaches "jihad" in its schools. Although the Turkish government claims that "jihad" means a "spiritual inner struggle for salvation," the official Turkish dictionary defines it as a "war fought in the name of religion."

  • Summary: 

    When it comes to Islam, I criticize the ideology AND its followers. I can't understand how anyone could take a good look at Islamic texts and tenets and come to the conclusion that they're in any way tolerable let alone great! I don't advocate or condone violence, but I am compelled to call a spade a spade. I don't care if these people are brainwashed -- they should know better. No ideology can be active without adherents. I hold PEOPLE accountable for embracing barbaric ideology.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    26/07/2017
    Summary: 
    • Seyran Ates, female Imam, opened a liberal mosque for all Muslims in 
    • Mosque in Berlin is for women, men, Sunni, Shiite, straight and gay Muslims - the only rule is that the burka or niqab is banned
    • Ms Ates, 54, is in London to find a venue to open 'all welcome' mosque in the UK
  • Summary: 

    Conclusion.

    Starting with the premise that Islamic terrorism “has nothing to do with Islam” we can logically deduce that:

    • The Sharia has nothing to do with Islam.
    • The Sunnah has nothing to do with Islam.
    • Mohammed has nothing to do with Islam.
    • The Quran has nothing to do with Islam.
    • Allah has nothing to do with Islam.

    Thus none of Islam’s foundational texts and personalities actually have anything whatsoever to do with Islam.

    To put this in a nutshell we arrive at the conclusion that: Islam has nothing to do with Islam.

    This is an example of “reductio ad absurdam” (reduction to absurdity). Thus those who peddle this line are either liars or themselves deceived.

  • Modern Islamic Warfare

    Image: 
    Summary: 

    FINALLY, THE TRUTH about Islam. After all of the ahistorical, naively well-meaning but misleading accounts of Islam offered by Western political academics, and the mainstream mass media, finally, in Harold Rhode’s “Modern Islamic Warfare,” we get an historically grounded, sociologically sophisticated, true account of expansionistic Islamic civilization. Understanding the nature of Islam is particularly important because Muslim organizations, in the interests of Muslim expansionism and dominance, often strive to obscure and deny their real intentions and goals. And even when they admit their objectives, as in the Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood charters, Western leaders ignore or deny Muslim intentions. Rhode makes clear the challenge that the West faces; either we take up the Islamic challenge, or lose the West.

  • Summary: 

    In the immediate aftermath of the massacre of civilians in Tunisia David Cameron, the U.K.'s Prime-minister has once again assured the British public and non-Muslims worldwide that the attack was not carried out “in the name of Islam. Islam is a religion of peace.” The killers, rather, “do it in the name of a twisted, perverted ideology.”

    Of course I believe what he says.

    It is a great relief to me that I have such an Islamically educated man as the leader of my Country. Perhaps we should call him Mufti sheikh Imam Ayatollah Cameron to reflect his encyclopaedic knowledge of Islam.

    You think I'm being sarcastic?

    No, listen:

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    02/07/2017
    Summary: 

    A young woman originally from Oldham, who is set to attend Newcastle University, offered up the opinion, based on fact, that Islamic terrorism has its roots in the texts of the Koran. Because she did this, she was contacted by a police officer from Northumbria Police who threatened the lady, Jonaya English of ‘The Insurgents’ You Tube channel, with having her place at Newcastle University removed.

    Here’s Ms English in her own words;

  • Country: 
    Canada
    News Date: 
    23/06/2017
    Summary: 

    “Unfortunately, you cannot disconnect this type of event – terrorism – from Islam in general,” Couillard said in Quebec City when asked if he was worried the attack would fuel anti-Muslim sentiment. He said he shares the position French President Emmanuel Macron expressed this week in a speech to Muslim community leaders.

  • Summary: 

    It is unfortunate and grossly disturbing that the current Mayor of London cannot describe the attackers of London Bridge as “Islamic terrorists”.  The still continuing state of denial of many European leaders about the link between Islamism and terrorism is at the root of a strategy to combat jihadism that falls short of what is required to preserve the safety of their citizens and the security of our societies.

    This is a basic contrast with Israel where authorities and citizens have learnt the hard way who their enemies are, an essential requisite for their survival.

    The second wrong assumption that we must discard as soon as possible is the idea that terrorism is like a natural phenomenon, statistically marginal, unsolvable, that essentially demands of us to find a way to live with it. But terrorism cannot be equated with the casualties from bath drownings, lightning strikes or bee stings, as some of those seeking to minimise it do. 

    Terror is humanly motivated, politically and religiously oriented, has goals and means. Terrorism should and can never be, in the infamous deplorable words of London Mayor Sadiq Khan “part and parcel of living in a great city”. Preparations to respond to attacks in a quick and effective manner are essential, but actions to prevent terrorism are even more significant.

  • Summary: 
    • At the moment, the bar for taking extremists out of circulation is set ridiculously high. People known for their own extremism that reaches pre-terrorist levels should not be walking the streets when they have expressed support for Islamic State (ISIS) or tried to head to Syria or called for the destruction of Britain and other democracies or allied themselves to people already in prison. Their demand for free speech or freedom of belief must never be elevated above the rights of citizens to live safely in their own towns and cities. It is essential for parliament to lower the bar.

    • Is this to be the political landscape for the future, where groups of people demanding death and destruction are given the freedom of the streets whilst those wishing to hold a peaceful celebration are prevented from doing so?

    • To see extremist Islam as a "perversion" of Islam misses an important point. The politically correct insistence that radical versions of Islam somehow pervert an essentially peaceful and tolerant faith forces policy-makers and legislators, church leaders, rabbis, interfaith workers and the public at large to leave to one side an important reality. Flatly, Islam in its original and classic forms has everything to do with today's radicals and the violence they commit. The Qur'an is explicit in its hatred for pagans, Jews and Christians. It calls for the fighting of holy war (jihad) to conquer the non-Muslim world, subdue it, and gradually bring it into the fold of Islam. Islam has been at war with Europe since the seventh century.

Pages

Subscribe to Jihad-Is-Islamic