Irrationality reared its ugly head at Blogocracy.

Initially, Rodan opined that Islam should be banned because "It is not only Muslim immigrants that are a threat.". Subsequently, he retracts hes call for banning Islam on the basis of a reader comment from Lance. Lance argued that banning Islam would lead to banning Christianity.

ban islam and christianity and judiasm follow.

1st amendment applies or it doesn’t.

it doesn’t allow them to commit terrorism, but they can still face east and pray to a black rock if they wish.

remember that there are many who come here to escape oppression.

I will take on Rodan first. Involvement by native converts and Muslims born here is irrelevant to the question of whether Islam should be banned. Islam should be banned or tolerated based on its mission, doctrines and practices, not the identity of its adherents.

Lance's argument that banning Islam implies banning religions is illogical because there is good cause for banning Islam. Unlike Judiasm & Christianity, Islam has a mercenary mission and militant methods. It issues a mandatory license to kill, enslave, rape, pillage & plunder. Jihad is "ordained for Muslims". That means Jihad is mandatory, not optional. Jihad is their "original religion", abandoning it in favor of productive pursuits subjects them to a curse from Allah.The Bible neither issues an open license to kill nor threatens adherents with Hellfire for failing to engage in offensive conquest.

Islam's mercenary mission, evident in 8:1, 8:41, 8:67 & 48:20, its mandate to global conquest in 8:39, 9:29 & 9:123, its mandate to cast terror in 8:12 and its mandate to genocide in 8:67 & 47:4 make Islam absolutely intolerable. Those Qur'an verses have no functional equivalent in the Bible.

The free exercise clause prevents Congress from passing laws abridging the free exercise of religion. Jihad, terrorism & genocide are intrinsic sacraments of Islam; they can not be prohibited by law unless the first amendment is reinterpreted or amended. Islam is inseverable; Jihad can not be separated from Iman, Salat & Zakat.

It is true that many Muslims fled to America and Europe to escape from prosecution by the "hypocrites" whose tyrannical regimes they sought to overthrow and supplant with their own corrupt theocracy. That does nothing to change the fact that Islam is a war cult which wears a thin veil of religion as a camouflage and troop motivator.

Inter Religious Idiocy

JTA (Article by Eric Fingerhut July 23, 2009)

The Foundation for Ethnic Understanding sponsored a conference of Rabbis & Imams to promote ethnic understanding. At the end of the four days of meetings, including visits to New York City and Washington D.C. , a joint statement was issued. Selected excerpts are reproduced below. [Emphasis added.]

• We should explore together the commonalities in our faiths and traditions. We affirm here that we respect the sanctity of each other’s houses of worship and will stand together in case of an assault on either a mosque or a synagogue. We also stand in solidarity with each other in affirming that both Islamophobia and anti-Semitism are wrong and unacceptable, and we will fight against them together. Bigotry against any Jew or any Muslim is an attack on all Muslims and all Jews. In addition we are united in support of human rights for all peoples.

• We denounce all forms of violence in the name of any religion or ideology and will do everything we can to prevent the spread of extremism in the name of any faith—including our own.

• We feel sorrow and pain over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the great suffering it has brought to both peoples involved in that conflict. We pray for a non-violent resolution of that conflict that will allow both Palestinians and Israelis to live with dignity in peace and security. We have resolved to work together to strengthen Muslim-Jewish ties in our own countries and around the world. We will not allow future eruptions of violence in the Middle East to derail our efforts to strengthen Jewish-Muslim ties in Europe and North America because we understand that good Muslim-Jewish relations are necessary for the health of our own communities and our societies.

The condemnation of "Islamophobia" stands out as a token of idiocy or insincerity. Fear and loathing of Islam is not irrational, since 270*10⁶ innocent people have been slaughtered by Islam in the last 1400 years. Bigotry against Jews is founded in the Qur'an, including 1:7, 2:76, 3:64-65, 4:47, 9:30 & 98:6.

Denunciation of "all forms of violence in the name of any religion" stands out as a clear case of al-taqeyya. Jihad against Jews is mandated by Surah At-Taubah 29. Renouncing Jihad is an act of Apostasy punishable by death under Shari'ah. Refer to Reliance of the Traveller, O8.7-7.

Considering the Qur'anic mandate to make war upon Jews and the hadith which prescribes the final genocide as a prerequisite for Judgment Day, the prayer for non-violent resolution of the attempted reconquest of Israel rings hollow.

What Will Jesus Do?

Image via Wikipedia

Muslims assert that they revere Jesus Christ as a Prophet. Here is an example from islamicity.

Muslims respect and revere Jesus, and await his Second Coming. They consider him one of the greatest of God's messengers to mankind. A Muslim never refers to him simply as 'Jesus', but always adds the phrase 'upon him be peace'. The Quran confirms his virgin birth (a chapter of the Quran is entitled 'Mary'), and Mary is considered the purest woman in all creation.

So Christians and Muslims share common ground as monotheistic faiths holding Jesus Christ in high esteem. Most readers are aware of the Christian Jesus, but unaware of the Islamic concept of Jesus. Allah's book, the Qur'an, will enlighten us. The following quotes are from the Hilali & Khan translation, linked to a table of ten parallel translations. [Emphasis added.]

3:59 Verily, the likeness of 'Iesa (Jesus) before Allah is the likeness of Adam. He created him from dust, then (He) said to him: "Be!" - and he was.

3:61 Then whoever disputes with you concerning him ['Iesa (Jesus)] after (all this) knowledge that has come to you, [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus)] being a slave of Allah, and having no share in Divinity)...

4:157-158 And because of their saying (in boast), "We killed Messiah 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), the Messenger of Allah," - but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but the resemblance of 'Iesa (Jesus) was put over another man (and they killed that man), and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) ]: But Allah raised him ['Iesa (Jesus)] up (with his body and soul) unto Himself (and he is in the heavens). And Allah is Ever All­Powerful, All­Wise.

4:159 ...And there is none of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), but must believe in him ['Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), as only a Messenger of Allah and a human being]...

23:91 . No son (or offspring or children) did Allah beget, nor is there any ilah (god) along with Him; ...

Islamic scripture denies Christ's divinity, paternity, crucifixion, death & resurrection. Why do Muslims anticipate the second coming? Our first hint comes from an obscure, off topic reference in Shari'ah, Islamic law codified in Reliance of the Traveller. I have added emphasis to the crucial text.

O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9.29),

the time and place for which is before the final descent of Jesus (upon whom be peace). After his final coming, nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus' descent (upon him and our Prophet be peace), which is the divinely revealed law of Muhammad. The coming of Jesus does not entail a separate divinely revealed law, for he will rule by the law of Muhammad. As for the Prophet's saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

"I am the last, there will be no prophet after me,"

this does not contradict the final coming of Jesus (upon whom be peace), since he will not rule according to the Evangel, but as a follower of our Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) ).

We learn from Shari'ah that the caliph is obligated to extend dawa to people having scriptural religions and to make war upon them if they reject Islam. We learn that he can accept extortion payments from them in lieu of conversion, but only until the second coming, after which Jizya will not be accepted. After Jesus returns, Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians must convert or die; only Islam will be accepted from them.

We learn that Jesus will be a successor to Muhammad and that he will rule by the Qur'an, not the Bible. It follows that he must make war upon Jews & Christians as all caliphs must do. For amplification we turn to one of the prophetic hadith of Muhammad which bears directly on this issue. [Emphasis added.]

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4310:

Narrated AbuHurayrah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: There is no prophet between me and him, that is, Jesus (peace_be_upon_him). He will descent (to the earth). When you see him, recognise him: a man of medium height, reddish fair, wearing two light yellow garments, looking as if drops were falling down from his head though it will not be wet. He will fight the people for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill swine, and abolish jizyah. Allah will perish all religions except Islam. He will destroy the Antichrist and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die. The Muslims will pray over him.

Jesus will fight the people for the cause of Islam, just as Islamic law requires. Breaking the cross is an obvious reference to destroying Christianity. Killing swine is a metaphor for genocide of the remaining Christians. "As cited in Ibn Abbas: The apes are Jews, the keepers of the Sabbath; while the swine are the Christian infidels of the communion of Jesus."

Islamic prophesy depicts Jesus Christ as a genocidal warmonger, not the prince of peace. But thats not all, Islamic exegeses informs us that Jesus will lead the Muslims in exterminating the Jews. This quote is from Ibn Kathir's Tafsir of 7:167 : Eternal Humiliation Placed on the Jews.

In the future, the Jews will support the Dajjal (False Messiah); and the Muslims, along with `Isa, son of Mary, will kill the Jews. This will occur just before the end of this world.

Now you know what Jesus will do: he will wage war against and kill Christians & Jews and rule the world as caliph, a successor of and subordinate to Muhammad. Jesus Christ: genocidal warmonger. So much for the "great religion of peace". So much for "common ground" & "inter religious dialogue". We have been lied to: Islam is a war cult, not a religion of peace and it co-opts Jesus Christ as a genocidal warlord. Now that you know, what will you do about it? Will you roll over and return to sleep or will you share your new found knowledge and seek more? Copy and paste this blog post into emails to your family, friends and associates. Send a copy to the Pastor of your church or Rabbi of your synagogue. Follow the links and read the Qur'an, hadith, tafsir & Shari'ah.

Islam in Action

The video embedded here was recorded at a recent Islamic Festival held in Dearborn, Michigan. In it you will see and hear Muslims assaulting and attempting to intimidate a Christian. Observe their expressions and gestures; hear their words and experience Islamic supremacism, triumphalism and arrogance. As their numbers increase, their attitude will intensify. The video was posted to You Tube by Act! For America.


The video has a ten minute run time and is 23MB. If, like me, you are limited to a dial- up cconnection, you will need to download it. For that you will need Firefox or Flock, with DWHelper; you will also need Irfanview to play the flv file.

The video centers around the Islamic response to Christians who wanted to discuss a pamphlet distributed by Muslims at a booth in the festival. The pamphlet's title was "Uprooting the Forces of Evil:: Islam's War on Terrorism". The pamphlet is available on the web as a pdf file at http://www.islaam.ca/downloads/islamswaronterror.pdf.

A critical examination of the pamphlet will explain their reluctance to have a Dialogue about it. The pamphlet is in question/answer format.

• Are these indiscriminate bombings, such as what occurred in the US, London and Madrid, Islamically justifiable?
• Islam unequivocally prohibits the likes of these horrendous acts and does not condone this awful behavior. Look at what Allah says, in the Quran, about those who kill innocent people.
• "It would be as if he killed the whole of mankind; and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole of mankind."(Al-Ma'idah: 32)
• Prophet Muhammad- may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him-s stressed the prohibition of killing women and children on many occasions, even at times of war:
• Abu Bakr; the Prophet's closest disciple said :Do not kill women or children or a senile person, do not cut down fruit-bearing trees and do not destroy an inhabited place."
• Therefore, this behavior can never be justified in any way, shape or form.

The polemicist quotes 5:32, but completely ignores the verse which follows it, which has a bearing upon the definition of innocent.

5:33. The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.

I have added emphasis to the most critical parts of that ayeh. We must focus our attention upon one key phrase: wage war against Allah; what does it mean?
The answer is contained in Ibn Kathir's Tafsir:

[...]`Wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. [...]

Waging war against Allah and his Messnger consists of opposing and contradicting Islam and it includes three parallel sub elements:

1. disbelief
2. blocking roads
3. spreading fear.

If you do not believe in Allah, and fully submit to him, then you are not innocent; you may be killed with impunity because you are at war against Allah and his Messenger.

Whenever a Muslim speaks or writes about the prohibition of killing innocent people, he practices kitman: lying by omission. In so doing, he relies upon your assumption that he shares your definition of innocent. He does not; In the Muslim world view, only Muslims are innocent.

By the same token, we are expected to assume that the prohibition on killing women and children is based upon moral principles. It is not! The prohibition is economic, not moral. Kuffar women and children are economic assets for their captors. Examine Allah's word..

33:26. And those of the people of the Scripture who backed them (the disbelievers) Allâh brought them down from their forts and cast terror into their hearts, (so that) a group (of them) you killed, and a group (of them) you made captives.

Note the italicized phrase: whom did they make captives? Once again, the answer is provided by Ibn Kathir.

[...]Those who were killed were their warriors, and the prisoners were their children and women.[...]

What is the disposition of captive women and children? We learn from Shari'ah that they become slaves by reason of capture. Examine this quote from Reliance of the Traveller.

O9.13 When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman's previous marriage is immediately annulled.

This hadith will clarify the matter for you; it should also fill you with disgust.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz:

I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."

They received captives. Captive women were distributed as part of the spoils. Moe gave his companions permission to rape those women.

Crescent of Embrace ---> Mecca

This article exposes an exemplar of assidiocy seldom equaled if ever excelled. "Oh, what a tangled web we weave...:.

"The only thing that orients the memorial is the crash site,"

As a noun, orient means East. As a verb, it means to align someone or something to the East. Could it occur to any of those idiot savants that Mecca is in a generally Easterly direction from the crash site?  What natural structure or element of the crash site "orients" it toward Mecca? Was there a prominent sign or directional arrow etched into the earth? was Flight 93 flying toward Mecca when it crashed? Is the crash site "oriented" by anything other than the design of the monument? The liars perceive themselves as so clever and us as so dull that we will never perceive the obvious truth.

 The design of the memorial is a gross insult to the heroes who diverted the hijacked flight from its mission of murder and mayhem.  Instead of honoring them, it honors the damnable, demonic cult which inspired the murderous hijackers.

 It would be better to have no memorial but the scarred earth and the little bits of shattered aircraft, bone and teeth that will gradually work their way to the surface as the freeze-thaw cycles sort them from the soil.  Are you a lover of life, liberty and truth? If so, then join us in endorsing the petition linked in the graphic below.




http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2009/07/everyone-involved-with-flight-93.htm

Everyone involved with the Flight 93 Memorial knows that the Crescent of Embrace points to Mecca In 2007, Flight 93 Advisory Commission member Tim Baird told Alec Rawls (the author of these blogburst posts) that everyone at the meetings he attended is fully aware that the giant crescent, originally named the Crescent of Embrace, really does point almost exactly at Mecca. Professor Baird says they all just assume (himself included) that the Mecca orientation must be an innocent coincidence. Pretty crazy, when they have also been told the meaning of a crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca. Every mosque is built around a Mecca-direction indicator called a mihrab, and the classic mihrab is crescent shaped. Geometrically, the Crescent of Embrace is the world’s largest mihrab. However honestly Project Partners believe that the Mecca orientation of the crescent must be a coincidence, this is not what they tell the public. When reporters asked Memorial Project Superintendent Joanne Hanley about the Mecca orientation, she denied it:

"The only thing that orients the memorial is the crash site," she said.

Thinking that the Mecca orientation of the crescent must be a coincidence in no way justifies lying to the public about this explosive information. If Baird’s account is accurate—that the dozens of Memorial Project Partners all know that the giant crescent actually does point to Mecca—then the Memorial Project has a lot of explaining to do. Now an overlooked article from 2007 corroborates Professor Baird’s information. Dr. Glenn KashurbaIt turns out that a Pennsylvania psychiatrist who has been intimately involved with the memorialization of Flight 93 (writing two books on the subject) argued to a reporter before the July 2007 Memorial Project meeting that the Mecca-orientation of the giant crescent (which he took as a given) should be seen as coincidental:

“When you calculate angles to Mecca - I'm going to be in Washington, D.C., this week, and I'm sure if I calculate angles of the monuments, at least one points to Mecca,” Kashurba said. “I don't know if it will be the White House or the Lincoln Memorial, but at least one will. People looking for a way to support their way of looking at things will look at this in this way for ever and ever.”

If Dr. Kashurba was getting his information from the Memorial Project’s public statements, he would have denied that the crescent points to Mecca. Here is what Memorial Project Partner Patrick White told the press 9 days before the Kashurba story:

Rawls, of Palo Alto, Calif., contends that the centerpiece of the design points toward Mecca. Rawls’ claims are untrue and “preposterous,” according to Patrick White, Families of Flight 93 vice president. “We went through in detail all his original claims and came away with nothing.”

Kashurba knew better, as did Patrick White himself. The week after his public denial, a local woman asked White how he could be okay with the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent. This time White did not deny the Mecca orientation, but argued that it cannot be seen as honoring Islam because the inexactness of the Mecca orientation would be "disrespectful" to Islam. Mecca orientation takes literally 2 minutes to verify, starting from source documents It is not surprising that these Memorial Project insiders would know that the giant crescent does in fact point almost exactly at Mecca (1.8° north of Mecca to be precise, ± 0.1°). After all, they had by the summer of 2007 been examining Rawls’ report, and answering questions from the press about it, for over a year, and the near Mecca orientation of the Crescent of Embrace is trivially easy to verify. Just use any of the online Islamic prayer-direction calculators to print out the direction to Mecca from Somerset PA. Place this graphic over the Crescent site-plan on your computer screen, and you will see that the Mecca-direction line (which Muslims call “qibla”) almost exactly bisects the crescent: The green circle in this image is from the qibla calculator at Islam.com (down at the moment, but you can use the one at Qibla.com, or QiblaLocator.com). A person standing between the tips of the giant crescent and facing into the center of the crescent will be facing almost exactly at Mecca. Patrick White knows this and deceives the press and the public about it. Dr. Kashurba knows it and stands by as White and others deceive the press and the public about it. These deceptions have been blatant. Everything points to Mecca?The Project even went to far as to dig up an academic fraud from Texas, willing to deny that there is any such thing as the direction to Mecca:

Daniel Griffith, a geospatial information sciences professor at the University of Texas at Dallas, said anything can point toward Mecca, because the earth is round.

Was the reporter embarrassed to ask Muslims if they can really face any direction to face Mecca? Hard to blame her. Just to ask such a stupid question is to answer it, but the obviousness of the fraud is no excuse for letting it stand. According to Professor Baird, every Memorial Project member who saw these denials knew that they were fraudulent, yet not one of them has tried to tell the public about the Project’s dishonest cover-up. When the truth does get out to the broader public, Project members are going to have a lot to answer for, which is presumably why they are keeping their mouths shut now. They have done a very bad thing and they don’t want it exposed. What proves Islamic intent is the architect’s elaborate repetition of the Mecca orientationNo one ever claimed that the almost exact Mecca orientation of the Crescent of Embrace proves Islamic intent. Architect Paul Murdoch proves intent in a different way: by elaborate repetition of his Mecca orientations. His first confirmation of intent is to include an exact Mecca orientation. In Murdoch’s explanation, the flight path breaks the circle, turning it into the giant crescent. To find this thematically defined crescent, remove those parts of the full Crescent of Embrace that extend out past the point where the flight path breaks the circle. The resulting true or thematic crescent points EXACTLY at Mecca: At the upper tip of the crescent, the flight path comes down from the NNE and symbolically breaks the circle. What symbolically remains standing is the true or thematic Crescent of Embrace, pointing exactly at Mecca. Murdoch’s next confirmation of intent is to exactly repeat this entire multi-Mecca oriented geometry in the vast array of crescents of trees that surround the Tower of Voices part of the memorial. Setting aside the chance that an architect could in the first place design a memorial to Flight 93 out of nothing but crescents just by innocent coincidence (which must be close to zero), the odds that these crescents would by random chance manifest Murdoch’s repeated Mecca orientations are 1 in 131 billion: The only change was to include an explicitly broken off part of the circleThe original Crescent of Embrace design included the symbolically broken off parts at the upper crescent tip. When the bare naked Islamic-crescent shape caused a public uproar, the Memorial Project added another broken off part of the circle, floating out in front of the mouth of the original crescent. They call it a broken circle now, but the unbroken part of the circle, the symbolic result of 9/11, is still a giant Islamic shaped crescent, still pointing EXACTLY at Mecca. That makes it a mihrab, the Mecca-direction indicator around which every mosque is built. The planned memorial is actually a terrorist memorial mosque. To join our blogbursts, just send your blog's url.

Interreligious Dialogue: Snake Feces

The Pakistan Observer published an article by Muhammad Munir & Aftab Hussain about interreligious dialogue. One paragraph stands out from the rest as an exemplar of al-taqeyya. I present it here in block quote format with my comments running full column width.

The peaceful resolution of inter-confessional issues is possible only during an open and friendly dialogue.

Is Jesus Christ the son of God or not? Was he crucified; did he die on the cross? Was he resurrected? Answers from Christianity and Islam are polar opposites, no reconciliation is possible.

Reconquest of Israel, Spain, Greece & South Eastern Europe is another issue that can not be reconciled. Islam is intrinsically violent, mandated by Allah to conquer and subjugate the entire world.

Islam considers any assertion of Christ's deity to be blasphemy. Wherever Allah's writ runs, Christians are forbidden to build churches or repair existing churches.

In fact the religious, spiritual problems frequently are the catalyst of many negative political processes in the modern world. And here one can refer to both pure religious problems (as, for example, in the situation with caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) in the western press), and misinterpretation of religious norms by various confessions (for example, religious extremist misinterpret Islam in justification of terrorism).

Islamic law forbids any criticism of Allah and his Messenger. Refer to Reliance of the Traveller, O8.7 and O11.10. The cartoons depicted Moe as a terrorist, which he was by his own admission. [Bukhari 1.7.331, 4.52.220]

"Terrorism" is used by the writers as a shibboleth to distract us from the issue of Jihad. Jihad is ordained for Muslims, who are commanded to fight pagans until all resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped. They are commanded to fight people with scriptural religions until they are subjugated & extorted. Jihad is the purpose of their relationship with Allah and a "commerce that will save them from a painful torment". Terrorism is a battle tactic sanctified by Allah in 3:151 & 8:12 and exemplified in 33:26 & 59:2. Moe bragged about being made victorious by casting terror.

Who misinterpreted the Qur'an? Moe said that he was "ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.'".

There are many hopes and aspirations attached to the third session of the congress. The international scenario is changing; people around the world have rejected fundamentalists and extremists. The elections held in different countries around the world have proven that fundamentalists and extremists have been defeated, may these be religious extremists or political fundamentalists. In such an environment it becomes very necessary for the religious leaders to play a role to fill the gap that was created by these extremists. The attempts by the president of Kazakhstan are highly appreciating and such steps should be taken around the world.

Are Hamas & Hezbollah "extremists" or "fundamentalists"? Which elected Islamic government rejects them and their program of reconquest? Which elected Islamic government denounces rocket & bomb attacks upon Israel and attempts to prevent their subjects from supporting those attacks financially?

Exposing Islam through Refutation of Lies

Go Burn With Muhammad does not draw many comments, so when a moderation notice is received, I take due notice. This blog post is my response to a comment by Carlisticeday. The post he commented on has been viewed 320 times since October 20, '07.

The post begins with a quotation from Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9. The post continues with a brief explanation of the quotes and an outline of the nature of Islam, with links to its foundation in scripture and tradition.

Carlisticeday's comment is reproduced here in block quote style & Ariel font; my responses to his points are interspersed in normal column width and Times Roman font. Unlike Akhter, Carlisticeday has written his own comment, I do not find any evidence of plagiarism in it.

What You Need to Know About Islam

Carlisticeday

Submitted on 2009/07/03 at 5:50pm

First of all, “Islam” doesn’t say or do anything – Muslims do. Ditto for Christianity.

Organized religions are fictional legal persons, governed by fallible men, who speak and act for them. Islam and Christianity have fundamental doctrines which define them and are codified in their respective canons of scripture. The doctrines of Islam, expressed in the Qur'an and exemplified in hadith are the subject of What You Need to Know About Islam.

Who in history made it a policy, indeed, a religious requirement to force people to believe as they believed or die horrible deaths by burning at the stake, torture, drowning, disembowelment and so on? Not Muslims, Christians.

Religions should be judged by their orthodox doctrines & practices, not by deviations therefrom. The Inquisition was a deviation from fundamental Christianity, not the standard.

In fact, the Qur’an explicitly forbids forced conversion, and it has been understood as such for centuries. Where is that in the Bible?

Moe revealed the Qur'an piece by piece between 610 and 622. It contains obvious situational scripture and conflicting ayat which are resolved by the science of naskh. Later revelations abrogate[2:102,16:101] earlier revelations with which they conflict. Al-Baqarah was #87 in sequence of revelation.

2:256. There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Tâghût and believes in Allâh, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.

Surah Yunus was #51 in sequence of revelation.

10:99. And had your Lord willed, those on earth would have believed, all of them together. So, will you (O Muhammad ) then compel mankind, until they become believers.

Surah Al-Anfal was #88 in sequence of revelation, therefore it is nasikh and 2:256 & 10:99 are mansukh: the more tolerant ayat have been abrogated.

8:39. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

Fight them until...and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone.... Allah told Moe to fight pagans until all resistance ceased and only Allah was worshiped. How did Moe interpret that?

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."

Ordered to fight until...then he is a Muslim... Got a clue yet? For the interminably recalcitrant, I offer confirmation from Shari'ah: Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9, Paragraph 9.

O9.9

The caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim (O: because they are not a people with a Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya) ) (n: though according to the Hanafi school, peoples of all other religions, even idol worshippers, are permitted to live under the protection of the Islamic state if they either become Muslim or agree to pay the poll tax, the sole exceptions to which are apostates from Islam and idol worshippers who are Arabs, neither of whom has any choice but becoming Muslim (al-Hidaya sharh Bidaya al-mubtadi' (y21), 6.48-49) ).

Islamic scripture, tradition & jurisprudence form a congruent pattern; they confirm and reinforce each other. Unfortunately, the terminally recalcitrant are blind to that pattern. Can you perceive it? Unlike Moe, Jesus did neither preached nor practiced warfare. Instead, he taught his disciples to use persuasion.

9:1 Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases.

9:2 And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick.

9:3 And he said unto them, Take nothing for your journey, neither staves, nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece.

9:4 And whatsoever house ye enter into, there abide, and thence depart.

9:5 And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet for a testimony against them.

(King James Bible, Luke)

Contrast that with the orders Moe gave to his generals in the field: Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4294.

Prior to 1900, did Muslims living under Christian rule enjoy anything like the freedoms and protections of life and property that Christians did under Islamic rule in the Middle Ages? No, not by a long shot.

Let us examine Shari'ah to discover the freedoms and protections enjoyed by Christians under Islamic rule.

O11.5

Such non-Muslim subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:

-1- are penalized for committing adultery or theft, thought not for drunkenness;

-2- are distinguished from Muslims in dress, wearing a wide cloth belt (zunnar);

-3- are not greeted with "as-Salamu 'alaykum";

-4- must keep to the side of the street;

-5- may not build higher than or as high as the Muslims' buildings, though if they acquire a tall house, it is not razed;

-6- are forbidden to openly display wine or pork, (A: to ring church bells or display crosses,) recite the Torah or Evangel aloud, or make public display of their funerals and feastdays;

-7- and are forbidden to build new churches.

Do the Christian (or Jewish) scriptures provide in any way for these protections? No, on the contrary. Does the Qur’an? Yes, in fact it does.

At-Taubah 29 commands Muslims to make war upon Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians until they are subjugated and submit to annual extortion.

9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

At-Taubah 123 commands Muslims to fight the nearby Christians and treat them harshly.

9:123. O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allâh is with those who are the Al-Muttaqûn (the pious - see V.2:2).

Furthermore, if “Islam” is such a violent religion, tell me, who has been responsible for the most death, mayhem, oppression, suffering and injustice in history, Muslims or Christians? There is simply no comparison: all the deaths in wars by Islamic states don’t come close to the deaths in WWII alone – a war essentially precipitated by and led on both sides by Christians…and we haven’t even begun to talk about the colonial period.

The wars of the 20^th century were political and economic, not religious. Islam has a 1400 year track record, with 270 million victims.

Who depopulated North America so that they could own it all themselves? Not Muslims, Christians. Who enslaved millions in Central and South America for profit, and forced them to convert, to boot? Same answer.

Were the Conquistadors acting in accord with the teaching and example of Jesus Christ? Show me the Book, Chapter & Verse citations for Christ's commands to engage in conquest.

Who went around the world gobbling up everyone else’s resources and labor in the name of God and country? Who now refuses to take responsibility for any of the chaos, injustice and political unrest that has resulted from that?

Islam! These maps illustrate Islam's spread by the sword.

• first 25 years
• 750
• various Caliphates
  

Who supports the colonizer Zionist state at all costs and at the expense of the people who were displaced by it, and who refuses even to acknowledge the daily humiliation that state pours on those displaced people? Not Muslims, Christians.

That assertion inverts history, justice & morality in excellent form. Jews & Christians were living in the Roman Province of Syria in the 7^th century. Surah At-Taubah deals with the ghazwat against Tabuk, complaining of those Muslims who refused to join it. When asked which campaign a Muslim should join, Moe had a very significant answer.

Abu Dawud 14.2477
Narrated Ibn Hawalah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: It will turn out that you will be armed troops, one is Syria, one in the Yemen and one in Iraq. Ibn Hawalah said: Choose for me, Apostle of Allah, if I reach that time. He replied: Go to Syria, for it is Allah's chosen land, to which his best servants will be gathered but if you are unwilling, go to your Yemen, and draw water from your tanks, for Allah has on my account taken special charge of Syria and its people.

Moe sent an extortion letter to Heracleus, it is informative. It is in Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4380 and LETTER TO HERACLES CAESAR.

Islam's attitude is that all land they conquer is Islamic forever. Allah will not allow Kuffar to reconquer it and rule over Muslims. He promised victory to the Muslims, but they fought on the losing side of WW1 and lost the Levant, which Caliph Umar had conquered in 638. Israel regained a tiny fragment of her ancient patrimony, and Muslims immediately attacked with genocidal intent. They attacked again in 1967 and lost the Gaza Strip & West Bank which they seized in 1948. Every condition the Falestinians complain about is a consequence of their attempted genocide & policide.

I could go on, but please note that

a) none of this is meant to justify violence in the name of religion – merely to provide perspective, and

b) nowhere have I said “Christianity” here. The Bible is full of blood, injustice and crimes of all sorts, all justified by religion. Even Christ said, “I come with the sword…”, and as a result his heirs gave us the “Christian soldiers” of European fame.

The point: it’s very easy to pick out sections from text, present them out of context and then make sweeping claims about “Islam” while ignoring what Muslims actually do. Likewise it’s easy to grab legal text books and assume that they necessarily reflect actual practice, rather than an abstract ideal.

Everything must be seen in context, and you have to see these texts as Muslims have understood them at different times and in different circumstances. That’s called being fair and reasonable.

But of course, you’re not interested in THAT, are you?

Allah's word mandates and sanctifies Jihad. 2:216 tells Muslims that Jihad is ordained for them. 8:39 commands Muslims to make perpetual war upon pagans. 9:29 commands Muslims to make perpetual war upon "people of the book". 61:10-13 describe participation in Jihad as a "commerce" that saves Muslims from "painful torment". Those mandates find confirmation in hadith & Shari'ah.

How Muslims have understood those texts is illustrated by Fiqh: rulings by scholars of Islamic law. I direct doubters & dissenters to download FOMIJihad.chm and read the Jihad in Fiqh chapter. How Moe understood those texts is illustrated by the oral traditions of his excellent companions. You can read them at USC-MSI.

• Fighting for the Cause of Allah (Jihaad)
• One-fifth of Booty to the Cause of Allah (Khumus)
• Military Expeditions led by the Prophet (pbuh) (Al-Maghaazi)
• The Book of Jihad and Expedition (Kitab Al-Jihad wa'l-Siyar)
• Jihad (Kitab Al-Jihad)
• Jihad