You are here

Jihad-Is-Islamic

  • Summary: 

    As I have said quite a few times before, it is simply wrong to say that Islam and Christianity have much the same view of war and peace. Judging from its founding texts, Christianity is a pacifist religion, for its founder rejected violence. Islam’s founder was a warlord.

    As I have also said quite a few times before, the real issue is not violence or terrorism but theocracy. Islamist violence stems from anger that Islam’s theocratic potential is being thwarted. Again, it is Christianity that is different: its founding texts reject theocracy.  For many centuries this was obscured, but then it was gradually understood and put into practice – which entailed the invention of modern politics, as I explain in my new book God Created Humanism.

  • Summary: 

    We see jihad take two forms, based on the relative strength of the Muslim population in an area. Where non-Muslims rule, the attempt is to gain control over the levers of power, and to be in charge. The aim is to overthrow kafir rule. There is no direct attempt to convert, but the war is a war for territory. Where Muslims rule, the aim is to apply Shari'a in its entirety. The hope or end state is for a pious, just, ruler who can make Muslims strong and rich and who can end their divisions. The end state of both is however a global caliphate. The Caliph rules over all the peoples of the world and implements Shari'a law in its entirety.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    24/03/2017
    Summary: 

    A former Labour Party foreign minister has implied the government of Tony Blair was wrong to ignore the religious roots of Islamist terror, urging authorities to ‘take on’ the ideology to defeat terror. Kim Howells, who oversaw the work of MI5 and MI6 during the Blair and Brown years, said Islamist violence is distinct from other forms of terror and Western values such as democracy must be defended. “I was part of a Government that said: ‘Well, we don’t do God.’ But you can’t afford not to do God on this one, I think,” he 

  • Summary: 

    Last July, after the truck attack in Nice, the French Prime Minister Manuel Valls declared that France ‘must learn to live with terrorism’. He was fairly heavily criticised for saying this. As was the present Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, when he said last September that terror attacks these days are just ‘part and parcel of living in a big city’. In a sense Khan and Valls are correct. Terror is indeed something that the residents of London, Paris, Antwerp and many other cities are going to have to learn to live with. In the same way that the residents of Istanbul, Beirut and Islamabad have had to learn to live with the same.

    Yet why it might be that London, Paris and Antwerp are having to accustom themselves to the security status of Istanbul, Beirut and Islamabad is a question that nobody in any position of power seems keen to ask.

    Admin: What our politicians won't admit and even writers like Douglas Murray have to be wary about is saying jihad is part and parcel of Islamic doctrines. It was a large part of Muhammad's life and the way that Islam was established in the first place.

  • Summary: 
    • A dangerous message is being sent to the Muslim world by the West: There is nothing that moderate Muslims or anyone else should fear from radical Islamic terrorism! Look at us Western governments! We are bringing in refugees who cannot be vetted even if they are ISIS infiltrators. In fact, we in the West are so goodhearted that we are encouraging many organizations to operate legally in the West under the banner of the Muslim Brotherhood -- even organizations that are sympathetic to the terrorist group Hamas and that are pledging to overthrow us!

    • The West, by taking all the Syrian refugees, is emptying Syria of any kind of resistance to the Caliphate (ISIS). The West's compassion, by taking in the refugees escaping ISIS, will end up leaving only the radicals to rule unopposed in Syria and Iraq. This, in US foreign policy, is not compassion; it is gross negligence and reckless endangerment.

    • "Tough love" is badly needed when dealing with the Muslim world. We must say: No, we cannot accept your jihadist aspirations. We cannot accept you forcing your way of life on the world; your way of life is unacceptable to us. Before you send your refugees, you must end your "us against them" jihadist culture. The civilized world no longer finds your aspirations for an Islamic Caliphate tolerable.

  • Summary: 

    Now, back to Islam, and more importantly, to Muhammad.

    Those who criticize Islam do not often realize it, but we stand with a drawn arrow next to the Achilles heel of Islam. It is almost funny to see Islamist apologists attempt to use the No True Scotsman fallacy – when Muhammad invented Scotland and crowned himself the king of the Scots! There have been hundreds of thousands of words written about Muhammad and his teachings. I am not a religious scholar, nor do I need to be. I only need to know a couple of things about Muhammad to make my arguments.

    One, that 

    And two, that Muhammad committed acts that should be condemned by the entirety of civilized society. A few examples: … the list goes on and on.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    n an article in the sixteenth issue of the online magazine Al-Ansar, which is affiliated with Al-Qa'ida ,(1) a columnist identified as Seif Al-Din Al-Ansari discussed the Koranic verse "Allah Will Torture Them [the Infidels] At Your Hands":

  • Summary: 

    Praise be to Allah swt Who has ordained Al-Jihad (the holy fighting in Allah's Cause):

    1. With the heart (intentions or feelings),

    2. With the hand (weapons, etc.),

    3. With the tongue (speeches, etc., in the Cause of Allah)

  • Summary: 

    Robert Spencer, Founder and Director of Jihad Watch, delivers his talk entitled "The Theological Aspects of Islam That Lead to Jihad." Mr. Spencer's talk was sponsored by the Veritas Center for Ethics in Public Life at Franciscan University of Steubenville

  • Summary: 

    Forget the  of Islam.  It is the Five Stages of Islam that threaten the fundamental freedoms of  Western Democracy.  Freedoms which include freedom of thought, expression, and association and the crucial derived right of freedom of the press.  We should never forget that "Islam" means submission -- the opposite of self-determination and Enlightenment  values.

    Six years ago Dr. Peter Hammond  a remarkable book which included a statistical study of the correlation between Muslim to non-Muslim population ratios and the transition from conciliatory Islam to fascist Islam.  The stages are the same in 2011 but the demographics have changed to show an alarming progression.  Many European nations and the U.S. are on the cusp of moving to a higher bracket.  The demographics change but the story is the same. 

  • Country: 
    France
    News Date: 
    23/01/2017
    Summary: 

    The State Council – France’s highest administrative court – ruled the controversial Paris mosque is to remain closed until the end of the state of emergency in July. This is the second time in less than three months that the mosque’s leaders attempt to reopen the prayer hall; and the second time that their plea is dismissed. The Al Rawda mosque, a prayer hall located in Stains, an impoverished and multi-ethnic suburb north of Paris, was shut down by former interior minister Bernard Cazeneuve in November following a crackdown on religious extremists. 

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    A DOCTRINAL BASIS EXISTS FOR THE JIHADI THREAT

    What We Choose Not to Know Confirming the Chairman’s frustration that we do not understand the enemy, the following example illustrates just what we have ignored to our great detriment. Remembering that U.S. forces are non-Muslim forces operating in Muslim lands, the following citations from standard Islamic texts will be followed by a series of quotes from a known “extremist” that demonstrates conformity between Islamic law and “extremist” claims. The point is to demonstrate both how the duties of jihad as stated in Islamic law are applicable to non-Muslim forces in Muslim lands and that those duties are actually being applied to American forces. From the English language translation of the Saudi-published Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Qur’an in the English Language, one can read “Appendix III -- The Call to Jihad -- (Holy Fighting for Allah in the Qur’an Statement),” written by Saudi Arabia’s Chief Justice, and learn that jihad -- holy fighting in Allah’s Cause -- is a requirement of Islam:

    The Verses of the Qur'an and the Sunnah (the Prophet's legal ways, orders) exhort Muslims greatly to take part in Jihad and have made quite clear its rewards, and praised greatly those who perform Jihad (the holy fighting in Allah's Cause) and explained to them various kinds of honours which they will receive from their Lord (Allah). This is because they - Mujahidin are Allah's troops. Allah will establish His religion (Islam), through them (Mujahidin). He will repel the might of His enemies, and through them He will protect Islam and guard the religion safely. And it is they (Mujahidin) who fight against the enemies of Allah in order that the worship should be all for Allah (Alone and not for any other deity) and that the Word of Allah (i.e. none has the right to be worshipped but Allah Then, from a translated 2005-2006 school-year edition of the 12th grade Saudi school textbook (already sanitized due to U.S. State Department pressure), one finds the requirements of jihad: • Scholars have noted that jihad is obligatory for the individual in three cases: o (2) If the infidels attack a specific country, it is obligatory for its people to fight them and repel them. Self-defense is a duty. Allah said, "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors." • When is battle jihad in the path of Allah? o To fulfill an order from God, sacrifice in His path, spread the creed of monotheism, defend the realms of Islam and Muslims, and raise up the Word of Allah. This is jihad in the path of God. • Jihad continues until the Day of Resurrection o It is part of God's wisdom that he made the clash between truth and falsehood continue until the Day of Resurrection. As long as this clash endures, jihad continues. It is not limited to a specific time. As long as there is falsehood, error, and unbelief, the jihad continues.28

  • Author(s):

    In our opinion, the Imams and Islamic scholars have failed to make the case that the jihad currently practised by ISIS and other groups is not sanctioned by Islamic texts. The critics have broken the very rules they accuse ISIS of not following when they try to make their case by ignoring abrogation and parts of Islamic texts that are inconvenient to their argument.

    They have also tried to substantially misrepresent the way Islam was spread after the initial conquest of the Arabian peninsular as been by defensive wars and peaceful invitations to people to become Muslims. The historical record shows a very different picture.

    Similarly with slavery, their claim that Islamic states have abolished it (under pressure from Western countries it must be said) is technically accurate, however slavery is still legal under Islamic Sharia law and it is still widely practised in several Islamic states. There is no will or movement in Islam that we are aware of to change Sharia law to abolish slavery and that such a movement is most unlikely to occur as Muhammad kept slaves himself and the Qur'an itself says that captured women may be used as sex-slaves:

    [ - "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee" Also , , ]

    Fatwa:

    Blog:

    The critics have also implicitly endorsed the principle of Sharia hadd punishments provided correct [Islamic] procedure has been followed. That these senior figures of Islam, many in the West, who purport to be moderate implicitly endorse such punishments rather than flatly rejecting is troubling.

    The most troubling aspect however is that a multitude of senior Islamic figures are unable to make clear and unambiguous case against Islamic jihad and an Islamic caliphate that all, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, can clearly understand. The truth is that this letter appears to be mostly a public relations exercise designed to quiet growing Western fears regarding Islam. To that end, this letter is just another example of 'jihad by the pen' and one our governments have been quietly complicit in since 9/11 as this makes clear.

    As the - “It is not enough to engage with the jihadis solely on the battlefield. They must be defeated as well in mosques, and libraries, and seminar rooms. This is a battle that, in the long run, can only be won by theologians.” On the basis of this very serious effort by these Muslim critics of ISIS, we appear to be a long way from that happening, if indeed that case can be made in any unambiguous way?

  • Summary: 

    Since 9/11, we often hear so-called “experts” in the West say that the Crusades especially have been the main cause for the negative attitude of Muslims towards the so-called “Christian countries,” which is totally wrong given the expansionist and violent history of Islam. A  cover story “takes for granted the idea that the Crusades constitute a looming grievance against the West that rightly resonates to this day.” While America was still an undiscovered part of the world during the Crusades in the Middle east (1095-1291), the Islam still considers the US as the Great Satan and it all can be explained because of the Crusades. The mentioned U.S. News & World Report was written by  and first published on april 31, 2002 () and republished on april 7, 2008 ().

    To obtain a good understanding of the historical background on the Crusades and the Jihad, we republish some interesting articles which are a response on the allegations in the Andrew Curry article that the Crusades are responsible for the Islamic Jihad against the West. The first article is from a newspaper column by Vincent Carroll, member of staff of the Rocky Mountain News in Denver.

  • Country: 
    Germany
    News Date: 
    07/01/2017
    Summary: 

    GERMANY'S Vice Chancellor has called for a ban on Islamist mosques in the country.

    Calls for UK to do the same:

     

    Calls in Germany for Islamist mosques to be shut down the UK must do the same

  • Summary: 

    “In my opinion, as long as the spread of the Salafi Jihadi ideology is not stopped decisively by all parties, then the threat of IS and other terror groups with the same ideology will not dissipate. In fact it will grow further.”

    Indeed. “He also warned of so-called ‘religious experts’ who depicted the terrorist group’s actions as justified.” But what if the group’s actions are indeed justified in Islamic law? That, too, needs to be confronted

  • Summary: 

    Germany is at a crossroads where that has engulfed the country. Prayers and “Ich bin ein Berliner” hashtags, public statements of shock and horror, and landmarks going dark in solidarity with the victims will not suffice to deal with the difficult question the German leadership now faces. It is pivotal that the commitment to address the root cause behind the  atrocity – the ideology of Islamism – triumphs over well-intentioned but ultimately meaningless platitudes.

  • Summary: 

    You can’t talk about the credibility of individual jihadi strategists without talking about religion, without talking about Islam, without talking about the religious texts they’re quoting. So if you deny that, if you say that’s prohibited territory, then all you have is the killing part of it, the whack-a-mole that we call it here in the United States. And as a result, you miss the broader picture, which is the ideology of why people become terrorists.

  • Summary: 
    • "Until religious leaders stand up and take responsibility for the actions of those who do things in the name of their religion, we will see no resolution." — The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby.
    • "The Islamic State is a byproduct of Al Azhar's programs... 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... Al Azhar teaches stoning people. So can Al Azhar denounce itself as un-Islamic?" — Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah Nasr, a scholar of Islamic law and graduate of Egypt's Al Azhar University.
    • The jihadists who carry out terrorist attacks in the service of ISIS, for example, are merely following the commands in the Quran, both 9:5, "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them..." and Quran 8:39, "So fight them until there is no more fitna [strife] and all submit to the religion of Allah."
    • Archbishop Welby -- and Egypt's extraordinary President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi -- has finally had the courage to say in public that if one insists on remaining "religiously illiterate," it is impossible to solve the problem of religiously motivated violence.
  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Over the past few years, Western leaders whose knowledge of Muslim scripture is scanty in the extreme have repeatedly been obliged to pose as experts on Islam. The atrocities currently being committed by jihadis in the Middle East have prompted them to a particular slew of commentary. John Kerry, speaking recently in Iraq, was typical. The Islamic State, he declared, “claims to be fighting on behalf of Islam but the fact is that its hateful ideology has nothing to do with Islam.” A reassuring assertion, and one that almost everyone, including the vast majority of Muslims, would desperately like to believe – but wishful thinking, all the same.

    The grim truth is that sanctions can be found in the Qur’an, in the biographies of Muhammad and in the histories of early Islam for much that strikes the outside world as most horrific about the Islamic state. “Kuffar are afraid we will slaughter yazidis,” a British jihadi tweeted recently from Syria, “our deen [religion/ law] is clear we will kill their men, take their women and children as slaves insha Allah.” That this reading of assorted qur’anic verses and episodes from the life of the Prophet is the most brutal one imaginable does not necessarily invalidate it. To be sure, there are other, richer, more nuanced interpretations possible – and yes, the bone-headed literalism of those who would interpret the Qur’an as a license to maim, enslave and kill represents a challenge to everyone who prizes it as a revelation from God, supremely compassionate and supremely wise. That is no reason, though, to play the jihadis’ own takfiri game, and deny them a status as Muslims. The very appeal of their sanguinary interpretation of Islamic scripture is far too lethal to permit such a tactic. It is not enough to engage with the jihadis solely on the battlefield. They must be defeated as well in mosques, and libraries, and seminar rooms. This is a battle that, in the long run, can only be won by theologians.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    19/11/2016
    Summary: 

    The Archbishop of Canterbury has said "we will see no resolution" to terrorism until the world recognises that Islamic State (IS) is basing its actions on Islam. Most Rev Justin Welby said those who say IS is "nothing to do with Islam" are making it "incredibly difficult, probably impossible, to overcome".

  • Summary: 

    Claims that the atrocities of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant have “nothing to do with Islam” are harming efforts to confront and combat extremism, the Archbishop of Canterbury has insisted.

    Religious leaders of all varieties must “stand up and take responsibility” for the actions of extremists who profess to follow their faith, the Most Rev Justin Welby said.

    He argued that unless people recognise and attempt to understand the motivation of terrorists they will never be able to combat their ideology effectively. 

  • Summary: 

    Can the wave of violence sweeping the Islamic world be traced back to the religion's core teachings? An FP debate about the roots of extremism.

     However, during his time in Mecca, Mohammed and his small band of believers had little success in converting others to this new religion. So, a decade after Mohammed first began preaching, he fled to Medina. Over time he cobbled together a militia and began to wage wars.

    Anyone seeking support for armed jihad in the name of Allah will find ample support in the passages in the Quran and Hadith that relate to Mohammed’s Medina period. For example, Q4:95 states, “Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home).” Q8:60 advises Muslims “to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know.” Finally, Q9:29 instructs Muslims: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor 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.”

    Mainstream Islamic jurisprudence continues to maintain that the so-called “sword verses” (9:5 and 9:29) have “abrogated, canceled, and replaced” those verses in the Quran that call for “tolerance, compassion, and peace.”

     

     

  • Summary: 

    An atheist & a Muslim discuss the future of Islam. Fantastic segment with @SamHarrisOrg & @MaajidNawaz on ABC Australia. From about 11mins: "...Islamists who want to impose Islam on society and jihadists who use violence....have a plausible reading of scriptures...."

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    As a secular Muslim, Zineb El Rhazoui is allowed to say in the mainstream what others are excoraited as “anti-Muslim extremists” for saying. The truth is true no matter who says it, but in today’s culture of identity politics, it’s truer when coming from racially and culturally approved voices. “Zineb el Rhazoui, Charlie Hebdo survivor, discusses why the world needs to ‘Destroy Islamic Fascism,’” by Emma-Kate Symons, New York Times (of all places), October 18, 2016:

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    The book rejects a Huntingtonian clash of civilizations, and describes the real ideological dispute of the modern world as a "furious" intra-Islamic struggle to "claim or reclaim what Islam stands for in the twenty-first century". But the battle within British (and global) Islam between the 'moderates' and the Islamists is a competition fought on losing ground. As long as scripture and, importantly, the sayings of Mohammed, are the deciding factor that overrides everything else, the moderates will lose. Admin: No such thing as 'British' Islam.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    The Aims of Warfare The Moslems are agreed that the aim of warfare against the People of the Book, with the exception of those belonging to the Quraysh-tribe and Arab Christians, is twofold: either conversion to Islam, or payment of poll-tax (djizyah). This is based on (9:29): .....

    On Apostasy: "An apostate...is to be executed by agreement in the case of a man, because of the words of the Prophet, ʻSlay those who change their din [religion]'...Asking the apostate to repent was stipulated as a condition...prior to his execution." 

  • Summary: 

    A summary of quotations from the Koran which clearly incite to hatred and violence can be found in the following link

    There is an abundance of fatwas (religious edicts) by Muslim authorities inciting to genocide and suicide attacks against Christians and Jews. All these fatwas are based on the Koran and Hadeeth.

    Ali Gom’a, the grand mufti of Egypt, the highest Muslim religious authority in the world, supports murdering non-Muslims. In the daily Al Ahram (April 7, 2008), he says, “Muslims must kill non-believers wherever they are unless they convert to Islam.” He also compares non-Muslims to apes and pigs, not only the Jews.

    Muhammad Sayyid Al Tantawi, president of Al Azhar University also approves of killing and maiming Christians, Jews, and other infidels. He added, “This is not my personal view. This what the Shari’a Law says, the law of Allah, the only valid law on the earth.”

    Yousef Al Qaradhawi, the spiritual leader of the fundamentalist organization, the Muslim Brothers, urged on Al Jazeera TV (Jan. 9, 2009) Muslims to kill the Jews, not only in Israel but also worldwide. He added, “No peace can be made between us (Muslims) and the non-believers. This what our holy book says. This what Allah says.” 

    Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti, Sheikh Abdulaziz Bin Abdullah Bin Mohammed al Sheikh said on Iqra’ TV channel, “Killing producers who show women unveiled is legal.” 

    The Saudi Sheikh Saleh Al-Lehadan, head of the Supreme Judiciary Council, told Al Watan daily, (March 25, 2008) “After getting rid of the Jews in our Arab land, we must turn to the Christians. They have three options: either they convert to Islam, or leave, or pay Jizia (protection taxes). Further, there is not such a thing as Shiites, Sufis, etc. There are only Sunnis. All these sects must renounce their pagan beliefs and return to Sunna, the right path of Islam.”

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    WHEN WE discover some basic facts about Islam, our first impulse is to think, “But surely it’s only a small minority of extremists!” If you’ve looked into it, and especially if you’ve read the Quran, you realize the “extremists” are following standard, mainstream Islamic doctrine. That’s a real shock when this first dawns on you.

    One day when I was reading yet another popular Muslim leader giving a speech and saying something that would be considered “inflammatory rhetoric” if I said it, but that was nothing more than just plain, ordinary Islamic teachings, I thought I should start collecting a list. Here’s what I have so far (below). I’m sure I’ll add to it as I go along, and I hope you to add to it in the comments.

  • Summary: 

    It is just common sense for them to study the texts that form the motivating ideology behind the global jihad. But they have to do it quietly, behind the scenes, because the Obama administration is committed as a matter of policy to denying that Islam has anything to do with jihad. This denial of reality is the source of innumerable policy errors. It is good that at least some in the Pentagon are trying to fight against this.

     

    Admin: This denial started with Bush and Blair in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and has hampered us ever since. Islam doctrines are the problem

  • Summary: 

    - I myself was sentenced to prison for defending LGBT rights and being an atheist. also i'm an Ex-Muslim who memorizes the whole Quran and studied the history of Islam and religion for years. so please don't say i don't know about Islam, i know it better than you.

    Please click through to the youtube page for sources and to support the author: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKYLS6XOxs0

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Western recruits for jihad are inspired by the literal interpretation of Muslim sacred texts. This is what we must fight.

    ....

    Naturally, I agree that interacting with ISIL recruiters is a bad idea, but I believe what the recruiters themselves say sheds the most insight on the radicalization process. ISIL’s primary recruiting technique is not social or financial but theological. With frequent references to the highest sources of authority in Islam, the Quran and hadith (the collection of the sayings of the prophet Muhammad), ISIL enjoins upon Muslims their duty to fight against the enemies of Islam and to emigrate to the Islamic State once it has been established.

  • Summary: 

    In 2014, after President Obama and numerous others stated that ISIS was not Islamic, and indeed that it was anti-Islamic, al-Azhar University, the seat of Sunni learning in the Arab world, refused to denounce ISIS members as non-Muslims. The contrast was stark: Western leaders and Muslim apologists residing in the West denounce ISIS members as non-Muslims while the main representative of Sunni Islam refuses to do so.

  • Summary: 

    The article goes on to list six reasons why they hate the West and why they fight Westerners. They six reasons are as follows:

    1. “We hate you first and foremost, because you are disbelievers, you reject the oneness of Allah.”
    2. “We hate you because your secular, liberal societies permit the very things that Allah has prohibited while banning many of the things He has permitted.”
    3. “In the case of the atheist fringe, we hate you and wage war against you because you disbelieve in the existence of your Lord and Creator.”
    4. “We hate you for your crimes against Islam and wage war against you to punish you for your transgressions against our religion.”
    5. “We hate you for your crimes against Muslims; your drones and fighter jets bombs, kill, and maim our people around the world.”
    6. Sixth “We hate you for invading our lands and fight you to repel you and drive you out.”

    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, hence the reason we addressed it at the end of the above list. 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 jizyah and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you. No doubt, we would stop fighting you then as we would stop fighting any disbelievers who enter into a covenant with us, but we would not stop hating you…

  • Summary: 

    This is an edit from the full show, to see the full show please visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tS0mc...

    Subject: 'Does Islam need updating? A discussion of reformation or revival'

    6th November 2013

  • Summary: 

    Jordanian politician: Islamic State’s “doctrine stems from the Qur’an and Sunnah”… “There is no such thing as ‘ISIS ideology’ — it’s Islam”

  • Summary: 

    Is ISIS eccentric in this idea, or twisting and hijacking the peaceful religion of Islam? The Qur’an says: “Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties, for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed” (9:111).

    This is essentially a guarantee of Paradise to those who “kill and are killed” for Allah. This verse has become in the modern age the rationale for suicide bombing. The mainstream and revered Qur’an commentator Ibn Kathir explains: “Allah states that He has compensated His believing servants for their lives and wealth — if they give them up in His cause — with Paradise.” 

  • Summary: 

    Eureka! At last, a “new study” has emerged that is a breakaway from the usual eye-roll studies that are laden with leftist claptrap and psychobabble, enabling victimhood and encouraging collective Western self-hatred for past wrongs, thereby playing into the hands of jihadists (stealth and violent). This new study, unlike most which refuse to go beyond Western constructs of mental illness and alienation, finally identifies what really motivates jihadists: religious zeal.

  • Summary: 

    The minority of Muslims who support, and use, violence against infidels follow original, literal Islam.  They’re not “Islamic terrorists” – they’re legacy, Koranic literalists who use terror as a tactic to promote the conversion of non-Muslims who must convert to Islam or die.

    Pure Islam is not a “religion of peace” and was never designed to be a religion of peace.

    Instead, Islam is a religion that uses terror to enforce a dogma that defines behavioral practices that comply with the Koran and that define the regulations of daily life.

  • Summary: 

    The status of Islam should be clarified if the debate on how to defeat terrorism is ever to bear fruit. Islam, I would argue, is not a religion in the common acceptation of the term as a community of believers dedicated to the loving worship of the Divine, the sanctity of life, and the institution of moral principles governing repentance for sins and crimes, making life on earth a stage toward a higher reincarnation, an ineffable peace, or a confirmatory prelude to eternity in the realm of a righteous and merciful God.

    In fact, Islam is an unrepentant politico-expansionist movement clothed in the trappings of religion and bent on universal conquest by whatever means it can mobilize: deception (taqiyya), social and cultural infiltration, or bloody violence, as its millennial history and authoritative scriptures have proven. (See Koran 13:41, which is meant literally despite the attempt of apologists to launder its purport: “Do they not see that We are advancing in the land, diminishing it by its borders on all sides?”)

  • Summary: 

    "Ghouse argues that all violence and intolerance committed under the banner of Islam is not due to the Quran:"

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-source-of-muslim-extremism_us_57...

    Unfortunately, its thesis is built on a faulty premise. Even if every single Muslim was to reject the Hadith and other “secondary books,” that wouldn’t change the fact that the Quran is saturated with violent and intolerant teachings that need no clarification from supplemental literature.

  • Summary: 

    Sharia as practiced is not divine, and divine by definition should be flawless; Sharia laws cannot be divine by any stretch of the imagination.  It was a body of law created by men with the intent of serving justice to fellow beings.  Our own Constitution is a human effort and has been amended 27 times to correct the flaws. To err is human and Sharia law has major flaws that need fixing in order to reflect God’s law which cannot be anything but justice, fairness, kindness and mercy.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Radicalisation is a process. It can happen quickly or slowly, but in the context of Muslims there are some essential religious requirements. If a believing Muslim is to carry out a suicide bombing, they must believe that this is a good act in the eyes of God, and not an act that will automatically condemn them to spending all of eternity in Hell. The same applies to killing other people without ending your own life. If the Muslim concerned believed that killing a particular person or persons was going to automatically condemn them to spending all of eternity in Hell, they would not do it.

  • Author(s):

    Summary: 

    The leader of the 7 July 2005 bombers was Mohammad Sidique Khan who made a pre-suicide videotape; the link takes you to the text of the video. I don't believe that a man recording a video before committing suicide will lie about his motivation and have selected the following extract:

    "Our religion is Islam - obedience to the one true God, Allah, and following the footsteps of the final prophet and messenger Muhammad... This is how our ethical stances are dictated. Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetuate atrocities against my people all over the world. And your support of them makes you directly responsible, just as I am directly responsible for protecting and avenging my Muslim brothers and sisters."

    His videotape states clearly that he was motivated by his religious beliefs and not by some other aspects of his identity. We all have multiple identities; I am simultaneously British, Mancunian, Punjabi, Pakistani, Muslim, Conservative and Cantabrigian amongst others. Different aspects of my identity come to the fore in different contexts. Mohammad Sidique Khan's statement makes it clear that he was motivated primarily by his religious beliefs and not by some other aspect of his identity.

  • Summary: 

    At its simplest, my view is that if the 7/7 bombers had believed that carrying out the bombings was guaranteed to result in them spending all of eternity in Hell, they would not have carried out the bombings. It is one thing to sacrifice your life in a noble cause, as they clearly believed they were doing. It is something quite different to kill yourself doing something for which you believe God will punish you for all eternity.

  • Summary: 

    Condemning terrorism is easy and no Muslim organisation need fear any criticism from Muslims (or others) if all it does is to condemn terrorist acts. However, condemning terrorism is not enough if you are unwilling to acknowledge its causes. If you deny its causes, you cannot put forward a meaningful vision of the way forward.

    The terrorists’ religious beliefs matter fundamentally

    I am utterly fed up with hearing people, both Muslim and non-Muslim, argue that the religious views of the terrorists are irrelevant.

  • Summary: 

    This polemic against Islamic extremism highlights the striking parallels between contemporary Islamism and the 20th-century fascism embodied by Hitler and Mussolini. Like those infamous ideologies, Islamism today touts imperialist dreams of world domination, belief in its inherent superiority, contempt for the rest of humanity, and often a murderous agenda. The author, born and raised in Egypt and now living in Germany, not only explains the historical connections between early 20th-century fascist movements in Europe and extremist factions in Islam, but he also traces the fascist tendencies in mainstream Islam that have existed throughout its history.

Pages

Subscribe to Jihad-Is-Islamic