One of my Google Alerts was triggered by an article by Jeffrey Goldberg published by Bloomberg. We plow through 16 of 17 paragraphs before we reach the central point.
extreme vilification of Islam
The self-appointed Prophet of Allah, who founded Islam, married the six year old daughter of his closest friend and consummated the marriage three years later. He included in his Qur’an, a provision for divorcing girls whose marriages were consummated before they had experienced menarche.
The prophet, rejected Zaynab’s parents, fixed up his adopted son with Zaynab. When the time was right, he arranged their divorce and married her. Worse yet, as Allah’s last appointed spokesman, he had Allah bless the corrupt union. His child bride confirmed the obvious: “I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires.” Moe’s sexual proclivities and revelation of situational scripture disqualify him as a Prophet, throwing the entire “revelation” into question.
Moe, speaking for Allah, ordained jihad for Muslims, making it mandatory, not optional. He issued imperatives to wage perpetual war against pagans, Jews & Christians, and confirmed the command. He sanctified, practiced and bragged about being made victorious with terrorism. He promised Muslims that “any step” taken to “injure or enrage” disbelievers would be imputed to them as a deed of righteousness, to be weighed against their sins on Judgment Day.
Does the revelation of true facts about Islam constitute vilification? What is extreme about revealing those facts? If I recall correctly, a wise statesman once reminded us that “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice”.
Muslims tend to congregate in ghettos and avoid assimilation. A generation which fled tyranny and Shari’ah may be secular, but their descendants feel the tide of Islamic orthodoxy tugging at them. Does anyone really believe that they are unaware of the damnable doctrine genocidal jihad or that they reject it until they read our blog posts? Allah threatens them with the fire if they sit at home, and promises admission to Paradise if they join the jihad.
That word may not be the pinnacle of lies, but it is very near to the top. The standard of Islam is violent and genocidal. Believers are defined by their enslavement to Allah, which is in exchange for admission to Paradise and for which they “fight in Allâh’s Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. ”
Alcohol & fornication are near the top of an adolescent male’s hierarchy of needs. Both are forbidden by Islam. But if a Muslim becomes a Shahid, Allah promises that he will be rewarded with rivers of wine and maidens of equal age.
Offensive jihad is fard al-kifaya, not fard ayn. But it is required in every year, and if it is not performed in a year when it was possible, all who know of the obligation are in a state of sin. [Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9.1]
Brig. S.K. Malik’s The Qur’anic Concept of War exposes something we need to know about terrorism and how to defeat Islam.
a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition of terror into
the opponent’s heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be
achieved. It is the point where the means and the end meet
and merge. Terror is not a means of imposing decision upon
the enemy; it is me decision we wish to impose upon him. [pg. 59]
Psychological and physical dislocation is, at best, a means,
though, by no means, conclusive for striking terror into
the hearts of the enemies. Its effects are related to the
physical and spiritual stamina of the opponent but are seldom
of a permanent and lasting nature. An army that practises the
Quranic philosophy of war in its totality is immune to psychological
pressures. When Liddell Hart talks of imposing a direct decision
upon the enemy through psychological dislocation alone, he is
taking too much for granted.
Terror cannot be struck into the hearts of an army by merely
cutting its lines of communication or depriving it of its routes
of withdrawal. It is basically related to the strength or weakness
of the human soul. It can be instilled only if the opponent’s
Faith is destroyed. Psychological dislocation is temporary;
spiritual dislocation is permanent. Psychological dislocation can be
produced hy a physical act but this does not hold good of the
spiritual dislocation. To instil terrorinto the hearts of the enemy,
it is essential. in the ultimate analysis, to dislocate his Faith. An
invincible Faith is immune to terror. A weak Faith offers inroads
to terror. The Faith conferred upon us by the Holy Quran has
the inherent strength to ward off terror from us and to enable
us to strike terror into the enemy. Whatever the form or type of
strategy directed against the enemy, it must, in order to be effective,
be capable of striking terror into the hearts of the enemy. A strategy
that fails to attain this condition suffers from inherent drawbacks
and weaknesses; and should be reviewed and modified. This rule
is fully applicable to nuclear as well as conventional wars. It is
equally true of the strategy of nuclear deterrence in fashion
today. To be credible and effective, the strategy of deterrence
must be capable of striking terror into the hearts of the enemy. [pg. 60] [Emphasis added.]
What is the absolute prerequisite for the success of terrorism? What can we do to deprive Islam of that condition? What is the essential first step in defeating Islam? How shall we go about destroying their belief in Allah? These are the questions which few have the courage to propound and none have the fortitude to answer.
American Congress For Truth sent out an email quoting a Dallas News Article:
The article quotes an exhibit in the Holy Land Foundation trial. You can read that exhibit and more at NEFA. The Investigative Project on Terrorism published explicit quotes from the Explanatory Memorandum. I reproduce one here with the addition of links to my explanation of the meanings of several critical expressions. Those explanations will include critical references to Islamic scripture.
The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Proecess” with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen be equal.
Here is the court exhibit, in pdf format. The English translation follows the scanned Arabic document. An Explanatory Memorandum On the General Strategic Goal for the Group In North America 5/22/1991
Radical implies something beyond the norm; something extreme. What is the norm in Islam? What standard did Muhammad establish by his preaching & practice? What is permitted; mandated?
- Aggressive wars of conquest?
- Infliction of terror?
- Allah commanded
- Muhammad preached
- Muhammad exemplified
such practices? Are they not then standard, neither radical nor extreme?
2:190 And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors. 2:191 And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-al-Harâm (the sanctuary at Makkah), unless they (first) fight you there. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers. 2:193 And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allâh) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allâh (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zâlimûn (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.) 2:195 And spend in the Cause of Allâh (i.e. Jihâd of all kinds, etc.) and do not throw yourselves into destruction (by not spending your wealth in the Cause of Allâh), and do good. Truly, Allâh loves Al-Muhsinûn (the good-doers). 2:216 Jihâd (holy fighting in Allâh’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know. 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. 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.
Thus spake Allah. Allah said “fight them”. Is that what he meant? Are the words clear? Are the sentences imperative? Once again: Is aggressive Jihad standard or radical? How did Muhammad interpret them?
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.”
What did Muhammad do?
Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 512: Narrated Anas: The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, “Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.” Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives, She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet . The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr’.
“Whenever we approach a nation” !!! It was a regular habit, not an exceptional practice. Jihad is part of the Islamic Deen. Its their way of life. Follow the link to that ahadith. Trace it back to the Sunnah page and read the entirety of Books 52 & 53. See what Muhammad did as a regular practice.
8:67 It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allâh desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.
How was Muhammad to earn admission to Paradise? What did he do about it?
Abu Dawud Book 38, Number 4390: Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.
Let that sink in for a moment. Muhammad took about 800 captive men of the Banu Qurayzah, dug a trench in Medina, cut off their heads and threw them into the trench. Then he did the same to their adolescent sons. Did it sink in yet?
3:151 We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrongdoers). 8:12 (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.“
Allah said: “We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve“, “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved“. What did he do about it?
33:26-27 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. And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do all things.
What did Muhammad say about it?
Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 7, Number 331: Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah: The Prophet said, “I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me. 1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey. 2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due. 3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me. 4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection). 5. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind. Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220: Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).
Resulting Islamic Law
Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (10th century), a Maliki jurist, declared:
Jihad is a precept of Divine institution. Its performance by certain individuals may dispense others from it. We Malikis maintain that it is preferable not to begin hostilities with the enemy before having invited the latter to embrace the religion of Allah except where the enemy attacks first. They have the alternative of either converting to Islam or paying the poll tax (jizya), short of which war will be declared against them.
Ibn Taymiyya (14th century), a Hanbali jurist, and a favorite of contemporary jihadists:
Since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God’s entirely and God’s word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought. As for those who cannot offer resistance or cannot fight, such as women, children, monks, old people, the blind, handicapped and their likes, they shall not be killed unless they actually fight with words (e.g. by propaganda) and acts (e.g. by spying or otherwise assisting in the warfare).
The Hanafi school, as set forth in an the authoritative work, Hidaya, authored by Burhan-ud-din Ali ben Abu Bakr al-Marghilani (12th century), a work which is considered widely authoritative as a guide to Islamic jurisprudence in Central Asia, Afghanistan, and India, rules:
It is not lawful to make war upon any people who have never before been called to the faith, without previously requiring them to embrace it, because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith, and also because the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war.
If a Muslim attack infidels without previously calling them to the faith, he is an offender, because this is forbidden; but yet if he do attack them before thus inviting them and slay them, and take their property, neither fine, expiation, nor atonement are due, because that which protects (namely, Islam) does not exist in them, nor are they under protection by place (namely the Daru ‘l-Islam, or Muslim territory), and the mere prohibition of the act is not sufficient to sanction the exaction either of fine or of atonement for property; in the same manner as the slaying of the women or infant children of infidels is forbidden, but if, notwithstanding, a person were to slay such, he is not liable to a fine. It is laudable to call to the faith a people to whom a call has already come, in order that they may have the more full and ample warning; but yet this is not incumbent, as it appears in the Traditions that the Prophet plundered and despoiled the tribe of al-Mustaliq by surprise, and he also agreed with Asamah to make a predatory attack upon Qubna at an early hour, and to set it on fire, and such attacks are not preceded by a call. (Qubna is a place in
Syria: some assert it is the name of a tribe).
If the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax, it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do. And having so done, the Muslims must then with God’s assistance attack the infidels with all manner of warlike engines (as the Prophet did by the people of Ta’if), and must also set fire to their habitations (in the same manner as the Prophet fired Baweera), and must inundate them with water and tear up their plantations and tread down their grain because by these means they will become weakened, and their resolution will fail and their force be broken; these means are, therefore, all sanctified by the law.
The Shafi’i scholar Abu’l Hasan al-Mawardi (11th century), holds:
The mushrikun [infidels] of Dar al-Harb (the arena of battle) are of two types: First, those whom the call of Islam has reached, but they have refused it and have taken up arms. The amir of the army has the option of fighting them…in accordance with what he judges to be in the best interest of the Muslims and most harmful to the mushrikun… Second, those whom the invitation to Islam has not reached, although such persons are few nowadays since Allah has made manifest the call of his Messenger…it is forbidden to…begin an attack before explaining the invitation to Islam to them, informing them of the miracles of the Prophet and making plain the proofs so as to encourage acceptance on their part; if they still refuse to accept after this, war is waged against them and they are treated as those whom the call has reached…
Robert Spencer’s www.jihadwatch.com continues:
Underscoring the fact that none of this is merely of historical interest is another Shafi’i manual of Islamic law that in 1991 was certified by the highest authority in Sunni Islam, Cairo’s Al-Azhar University, as conforming “to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni community.” This manual, ‘Umdat al-Salik (available in English as Reliance of the Traveller), after defining the “greater jihad” as “spiritual warfare against the lower self,” devotes eleven pages to the “lesser jihad.” It defines this jihad as “war against non-Muslims,” noting that the word itself “is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion.”
It spells out the nature of this warfare in quite specific terms: “the caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians . . . until they become Muslim or pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” It adds a comment by a Jordanian jurist that corresponds to Muhammad’s instructions to call the unbelievers to Islam before fighting them: the caliph wages this war only “provided that he has first invited [Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians] 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) . . . while remaining in their ancestral religions.” Also, if there is no caliph, Muslims must still wage jihad.
Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), a pioneering historian and philosopher, was also a Maliki legal theorist. In his renowned Muqaddimah, the first work of historical theory, he notes that “in the Muslim community, the holy war 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.” In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with “power politics,” because Islam is “under obligation to gain power over other nations.”
Extremists? Propaganda? No, this is the Islamic mainstream.
Examine the standard handbook of Sharia: Reliance of the Traveler.
O-9.8: The Objectives of Jihad The caliph (o-25) 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: o-11.4) -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-9.9 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’ (y-21), 6.48-49) ).
The Caliph makes war & fights in the regular course of affairs; nothing special. That’s standard, neither radical nor extreme. How often does he do it?
Al-Shafi’i (God have mercy on him) said: “The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims’ interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse.” He said: “If he did not undertake the sending of enough troops to fight, those who are absent (must) go out, and consider as an obligation that which God (who is praised) said.”
What if he doesn’t?
Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar: I heard the Apostle of Allah, (peace_be_upon_him) say: When you enter into the inah transaction, hold the tails of oxen, are pleased with agriculture, and give up conducting jihad (struggle in the way of Allah). Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion.
What man, having a soul, possessing even a scintilla of vestigial morality, can know this without cursing Islam? How then, can any politician, any elected official; any aspirant for high office use adjectives or qualifiers when discussing Islam? “Radical Islam”, “Extreme Islam” & “Fundamentalist Islam” all imply that Islam is peaceful, that it does not engage in aggressive wars of conquest, genocide nor terrorism. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have established, by quoting Allah & his Messenger, the traditions of his companions, and Sharia, the fatal fact that Islam sanctifies & mandates Jihad, genocide & terror. Hereafter, when you hear a politician use these terms: “Radical Islam”, “Extreme Islam” & “Fundamentalist Islam”, you will know that he is either ignorant or a liar. Attempt to educate him; send him a copy of this essay.
Al-Ikhwan is the Muslim Brotherhood, originally a wild & militant band of Wahhabis who formed the nucleus of Ibn Saud’s army in his take over of the Hijaz. Here is a machine translation of one article on their web site. Click it and see their historical emphasis on conquest. HAMAS is the Fallestinian branch of Al Ikhwan. Their Charter is informative.
The Islamic Resistance Movement draws its guidelines from Islam; derives from it its thinking, interpretations and views about existence, life and humanity; refers back to it for its conduct; and is inspired by it in whatever step it takes.
Article 1 informs us that Islam is the source, not Al-Ikhwan. Article 8, their slogan, lets the cat out of the bag.
Allah is its goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur’an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief.
Article 11 tells us how Islam acquired land:
This is the status [of the land] in Islamic Shari’a, and it is similar to all lands conquered by Islam by force, and made thereby Waqf lands upon their conquest, for all generations of Muslims until the Day of Resurrection.
Jihad means struggle or striving. Lets examine the explanation provided by Hilali & Khan, who translated the Qur’an published by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This is the footnote to 2:190.
(V.2:190) Al-Jihâd (holy fighting) in Allâh’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islâm and is one of its pillar (on which it stands). By Jihâd Islâm is established, Allâh’s Word is made superior, (His Word being Lâ ilaha illallâh which means none has the right to be worshipped but Allâh), and His Religion (Islâm) is propagated. By abandoning Jihâd (may Allâh protect us from that) Islâm is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihâd is an obligatory duty in Islâm on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfil this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.
Muslims and their apologists love to tell us that 2:190 is the lesser Jihad; that Jihad an- Nafs is the greater Jihad. Great! How do you get killed fighting against your ego & temptation?
4:74 Let those (believers) who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter fight in the Cause of Allâh, and whoso fights in the Cause of Allâh, and is killed or gets victory, We shall bestow on him a great reward.
Destruction by their hands is a reference to 59:2.
He it is Who drove out the disbelievers among the people of the Scripture (i.e. the Jews of the tribe of Bani An-Nadir) from their homes at the first gathering. You did not think that they would get out. And they thought that their fortresses would defend them from Allah! But Allah’s (Torment) reached them from a place whereof they expected it not, and He cast terror into their hearts, so that they destroyed their own dwellings with their own hands and the hands of the believers. Then take admonition, O you with eyes (to see).
What did Allah do? He terrorized the Bani An-Nadir. Result: destruction of their village. Legacy: casting terror into our hearts. Allah’s religion is made victorious over all other religions has several references to the Qur’an & Hadith.
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.
9:33 It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islâm), to make it superior over all religions even though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh) hate (it).
Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 53, Number 355: Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ashari: A bedouin asked the Prophet, “A man may fight for the sake of booty, and another may fight so that he may be mentioned by the people, and a third may fight to show his position (i.e. bravery); which of these regarded as fighting in Allah’s Cause?” The Prophet said, “He who fights so that Allah’s Word (i.e. Islam) should be superior, fights for Allah’s Cause.”
9:111 Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allâh’s Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur’ân. And who is truer to his covenant than Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success .
4:95 Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allâh with their wealth and their lives. Allâh has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allâh has promised good (Paradise), but Allâh has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward;
The following quote was found at politico.com.
- A key adviser said the two biggest issues motivating Thompson are “Islamic radicalism and the threat of terrorism reaching our shores,” and a sense that “politics has broken down in the domestic arena, too.”
One phrase in that quote bothers me: Islamic radicalism. Are you merely careless with the language or ignorant of Islam? The term implies that Islamic terrorism is a deviation from the orthodox standard of Islam. Nothing could be further from the truth. Here is the standard of Islam; what Allah & Muhammad said and did:
- 3:151 We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they joined others in worship with Allâh, for which He had sent no authority; their abode will be the Fire and how evil is the abode of the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrongdoers).[The Prohibition of Obeying the Disbelievers; the Cause of Defeat at Uhud]
- 8:12 (Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.“[Allah commands the Angels to fight and support the Believers]
- 33:26-27 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.And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches, and a land which you had not trodden (before). And Allâh is Able to do all things. [Allah drove back the Confederates disappointed and lost] [The Campaign against Banu Qurayzah]
- Bukhari Volume 1, Book 7, Number 331:
Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:
The Prophet said, “I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me.
1. Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month’s journey.
2. The earth has been made for me (and for my followers) a place for praying and a thing to perform Tayammum, therefore anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due.
3. The booty has been made Halal (lawful) for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me.
4. I have been given the right of intercession (on the Day of Resurrection).
5. Every Prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.
- Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220: Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” …
There you have Allah’s words, from the Hilali & Khan translation of the Qur’an. I have hyperlinked the Surah:Ayat numbers to the source for easy verification and access to the entire document. Bracketed references are to Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir, which explains the meaning of the ayat. Muhammad’s words come from Khan’s translation of Sahih Bukhari, the most accepted & trusted hadith collection.
- Do you understand this: “We shall cast terror”…”I will cast terror”…”Allah cast terror”…”Allah made me victorious by awe”…I have been made victorious by terror” ?
- Then has Islam been hijacked, distorted or perverted as President Bush claims?
- Then is not terrorism an intrinsic sacrament of Islam?
- Then will you abjure the use of distracting & deceptive adjectives when discussing Islam?
Those are the minimum requirements for receiving my vote, both in the primary and the general election. Those who fail the fourth test will not get my vote.