Stop the Trial: Khalid Sheikih Mohamnmed Confessed!

Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and his four compatriots awaiting a Federal Court trial in N.Y.C. for their participation in the planning & execution of the attacks on the WTC & Pentagon submitted a response to to the accusations against them. The content of that response clearly establishes both their guilt and that of the demon's war cult whose doctrines motivated their evil act.

In this post I will quote the response out of context interspersing my comments. If you want to read the entire response to the accusations, click the link above. Notice how they open their statement.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate

They are asserting demonic sanction for their foul deed, claiming to speak and have acted for it.

With regards to these nine accusations that you are putting us on trial for; to us, they are not accusations. To us they are badges of honor, which we carry with pride. Many thanks to God, for his kind gesture, and choosing us to perform the act of Jihad for his cause and to defend Islam and Muslims.

Organizing the hijacking of commercial passenger aircraft, murdering the flight crews and flying them into occupied structures is a "badge of honor" to none but demon spawn. They thank Allah, the demon, for choosing them to perform an act of Jihad for his cause; in defense of Islam. That expression acknowledges their guilt, but they do not own it as guilt, they wear it with pride.

Therefore, killing you and fighting you, destroying you and terrorizing you, responding back to your attacks, are all considered to be great legitimate duty in our religion.

Fighting & terrorizing us is a great legitimate duty in their religion. Where would they get such an idea? Could it be the Qur'an? Could it be the hadith? Could it be the Sira? Could it be Shari'ah? Or is it all of those?

Nevertheless, it would have been the greatest religious duty to fight you over your infidelity.

It is their duty to fight us because we do not believe in and submit to their demon, Allah. If that is the case, it is the duty of every Muslim to attack us whenever the opportunity arises. Is it? What did Allah and his Messenger say about this issue?

• 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.
• 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." [Emphasis added.]

Do those words mean what they say or not? Turn to Islamic law: Reliance of the Traveller, for confirmation.

• 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),[...]

Allah said it, Moe confirmed it; Shari'ah codified it. Now the accused have confirmed it; what further proof do you need? Once in possession of this knowledge, how can you tolerate the existence of Islam?

After laying down their cause of action in the preamble, they answer the accusation of conspiracy.

This is a very laughable accusation. Were you expecting us to inform you about our secret attack plans? Your intelligence apparatus, with all its abilities, human and logistical, had failed to discover our military attack plans before the blessed 11 September operation. They were unable to foil our attack. We ask, why then should you blame us, holding us accountable and putting us on trial? Blame yourselves and your failed intelligence apparatus and hold them accountable, not us.

They had secret plans, and consider themselves innocent because we could not detect and interpret those plans. They call the abomination 'blessed'. Can anything be more perverse and evil? Why should the perpetrators be blamed? Blame the defenders instead. This blame the victims mentality; the role reversal, is a clear sign of AssWholliness.

With regards to us, we were exercising caution and secrecy in our war against you. This is a natural matter, where God has taught us in his book, verse 71 from An-Nisa: ((0 you believers! Toke your precautions, and either go forth (on on expedition) in parties, or go forth together.)) Also, as the prophet has stated: "War is to deceive."

They acknowledge the fact that Islam is waging war against us in the demon's name.

With regards to the second, third, and forth accusations; "Attacking civilians," "Attacking civilian objects," and "deliberately causing grave bodily harm":

We ask you; who initiated the attacks on civilians? Who is attacking civilian objects? And who is causing grave bodily harm against civilians? Is it us, or is it you?

This prime example of argumentum tu-quoque shows us the second reason why the demon spawn should not be granted a civilian trial: their attempt to reverse the roles and put us on trial. The best response to their contumacious attitude is to drown them in a septic tank, without any trial. They present a list of irrelevant accusations, in order to distract attention from the fatal fact that attacking us is their 'religious' obligation because we do not worship their demon.

In fact, it was you who had wiped out two entire cities off the face of the earth and killed roughly half a million people in a few minutes and caused grave bodily harm by nuclear radiation? Did you forget about your nuclear bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Our termination of the war in the Pacific was an act of self defense, not aggression. That history is entirely irrelevant to the issue of Islam's act of genocidal conquest against us. They accuse us of initiating the war, overlooking the attacks by the Barbary Pirates when this nation was young and had no external military presence.

With regards to accusations five and six. "Crimes in violation of the law of war." and "Destroying property in violation of the law of war":

Who is breaking the law of war in this world? Is it us, or is it you? You have disobeyed all heaven and earth's laws of war, to include your own laws. You have violated the law of war by supporting the Israeli occupation of Arab land in Palestine and
Lebanon, and for displacing five million Palestinians outside their land. You have supported the oppressor over the oppressed and the butcher over the victim.

Here we have a combination of role reversal and moral inversion. Israel was invaded and occupied by Islam in 638. It is Israel that is illegally occupied, by Muslims. Israel has every right to expel the illegal occupation and defend herself against her attackers.

Also, you have violated the law of war by attacking an independent sovereign Arab nation with you first crusade campaign in 1991. By force, you have occupied the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf. In addition, today, you are occupying Iraq and Afghanistan.

Can anything surpass this contumacious expression of AssWholliness? It was Saddam Hussein who attacked Kuwait, we came to Kuwait's defense. We retaliated against Afghanistan & Iraq because they were complicit in the second attack on the WTC. Claiming the consequence of their aggression as an excuse for it flies in the face of reason & justice. It can not and must not be accepted!

We do not possess your military might, not your nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, we fight you with the almighty God. So, if our act of Jihad and our fighting with you caused fear and terror, then many thanks to God, because it is him that has thrown fear into your hearts, which resulted in your infidelity, paganism, and your statement that God had a son and your trinity beliefs.
God stated in his book, verse 151, AI-Umran: ((Soon shall we cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, for that they joined companies with Allah, for which he has sent no authority; There place will be the fire; and evil is the home of the wrongdoers.))

Once again reversing the roles, they accuse us of terrorism, then they claim their demon as a weapon against us and cite his prophesy of terror.

So, our religion is a religion of fear and terror to the enemies of God: the Jews, Christians, and pagans. With God's wiling, we are terrorists to the bone. So, many thanks to God.

Such a fine reply to the charge of terrorism! No further confession is needed.

Verse 195, AI-Baqara: ((And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, and make not your own hands contribute to your destruction, but do good; for Allah loves those who do good.))We ask to be near to God, we fight you and destroy you and terrorize you. The Jihad in god's cause is a great duty in our religion. We have news for you, the news is: You will be greatly defeated in Afghanistan and Iraq and that America will fall, politically, militarily, and economically. Your end is very near and your fall will be just as the fall of the towers on the blessed 9/11 day. We will raise from the ruins, God willing. We will leave this imprisonment with our noses raised high in dignity, as the lion emerges from his den. We shall pass over the blades of the sword into the gates of heaven. So we ask from God to accept our contributions to the great attack, the great attack on America, and to
place our nineteen martyred brethren among the highest peaks in paradise. God is great and pride for God, the prophet, and the believers....

Yet they conclude with another confession. What need is there for a trial? Why waste the money? Why give them a platform for their damnable lies and false allegations? Why risk the chance that their compatriots will take hostages to force us to release them?

Let justice be done instead. Force them to dig pit toilets in Central Park, stake them out in the pits, erect outhouses over them and hold a big picnic every day in the week of the next 9/11 anniversary. When the pits are full, replace the outhouses with apple trees.

Besides doing justice in the matter of those five captured terrorists, we must recognize the fatal fact that Islam, as preached and practiced by its founder, is the enemy that attacked us and which will continue to attack us so long as it continues to exist. We must cast its votaries and its institutions out of this nation and bar their re-entry.

Those who seek to appease Islam; who defend it, asserting that it is a 'great religion' or that it has been 'hijacked' are not patriots, they are traitors. The elected officials among them must be impeached and removed from office.

Sphere: Related Content

Jesus 4 Shari'ah??

A British Muslim web site, whose creators and clients should have long since been expelled from Britain, http://www.islam4uk.com/ polluted the web with a blasphemous suggestion that Jesus Christ was a Muslim and would favor Shari'ah over secular 'democracy'. They want to debate Christians & Jews about Christ's mission one week before we celebrate the traditional anniversary of his birth. They advertise their debate proposal with two graphic images. Thanks and a tip of the hat to Logan's Warning for alerting me to the existence of this drek.




http://www.islam4uk.com/index.php/current-affairs/uk-news/367--the-big-debate-jesus4shariah-181209.html


The three questions propounded in the second image are critical. I will take them on superficially.

1. The message of Jesus was apolitical. His message was directed to his audience jointly and severally as God's creations, not as citizens of the state. He told them how to relate to each other and to God, not how to govern their nation. His kingdom is spiritual, not temporal; he came as a teacher, not a ruler.

• 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
  
  
  
• 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. [John, KJV]
  

2. I have seen no scriptural record of Jesus rebelling against the Romans or the Jewish hierarchy that cooperated with them. Driving the money changers from the Temple was his only recorded violent act; it was not against the hierarchy
3. Islamic arrogance stands out like a wart on the tip of Moe's nose. The question begs the question of oppression. The people of Iraq were oppressed by the Hussein regime, which provoked a war. They suffer the consequences of silently allowing a tyrant to engage in malicious mischief. Afghanistan made the same mistake, by supporting al-Qaeda and refusing to hand them over after they attacked us. Palestine is oppressed by the an occupying force of Muslim Arabs who do not belong there. Jesus would stand with the genuine victims, not the aggressors who pretend to be victims.

Islam blasphemes Jesus, denying his paternity & divinity, assigning him the status of slave, denying his crucifixion, death & resurrection and co-opting him as a genocidal warlord. As-Saff 14 implies that Jesus led his disciples into battle against the Jews who rejected him.

One hadith stands apart from the rest. Pay careful attention to this description of the second coming. What will Jesus do?

• 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.

"He will fight the people for the cause of Islam." According to Islamic prophecy, Jesus will return as a warlord, like Moe. What is the meaning of "break the cross, kill swine":? The answer is in the next sentence: "Allah will perish all religions except Islam. According to Islamic propecy, Jesus, fighting the people, will kill the remaining Christians and Jews.

The wise guiys will claim that I am reading too much into a simple saying, that I am mis-interpreting it. But I have confirmation, which comes from Ibn Kathir's Tafsir of 7:167.

• [...]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.[...]

So Jesus will impose and enforce Shari'ah. That includes amputation for theft and stoning for adultery. Lets check the scripture again.

• 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
  [John, KJV]
  

Jesus was a Muslim? Did he pray at the prescribed times? How did he know what they were? How did he know the prescribed prayers? How did he know the prescribed ritual gestures? Did he perform hajj and its attendant rituals? How is it possible that Islam's second most important prophet never visited the Kaaba? If he did, why is it not recorded in the Gospels? Why did he fail to teach his disciples to fast during Ramadan and perform Hajj? How would he know the rituals of Islam more than 500 years before Muhammad invented the cult? What Muslim would study the Torah instead of the Qur'an? Does anyone know of a Muslim Rabbi?

The imposition is a blasphemous outrage and an insult to our intelligence. The Church of England should send a qualified theologian to debate the impostors and trim them down to size. I doubt that they will do that; I expect that they will pass up a great opportunity to expose Islam as a foolish imposture.

Sphere: Related Content

Swiss Minaret Ban: Big Deal

Regular readers of my blog posts know that I waste few opportunities to blast Islam with facts. They must be wondering why I have not written about the Nov. 29 referendum which banned new minarets in Switzerland. There are two primary reasons. First, I am not entirely in agreement with the concept. Second, I wanted to let others write first so that I could take the role of clean up writer.

First and foremost, I am opposed to superficial, symbolic attacks which accomplish nothing beyond the counter productive stimulation of Islamic resentment. Beards, burkas & hijabs are symbolic, but they are not more important to the wearer as they are to us. Their value is more than symbolic, they are warning signs. Like a skunk's stripes and a rattle snake's noisy tail, they serve to alert us to the proximity of danger.

Second, I perceive the vote to be a temporary victory. I have little doubt that the result will be overturned in the courts. The vote serves mainly as a signal of rising public awareness of Islam's true nature and the existential threat it poses to Western Civilization.

My readers know that I will take on anyone, without fear or favor. While other writings have been more deserving of criticism, My choice did a better job of clarifying some of the issues involved. Dr. Sami Alrabaa wrote an exclusive for Family Security Matters: Minarets are Symbols of Bigotry. I will quote some good parts, but you really should click the link and read the entire article because the quotes which follow are taken out of context. .

It is also true that huge lavish mosques funded by petrodollars are being constructed to prove that Islam is omnipresent everywhere and Islam – the best religion on earth! – is increasingly being accepted and practiced all over the world.

The huge mosques & soaring minarets are symbols of Islamic supremacism & domination.

Minaret construction is an exhibition of political power spearheaded by Islamists. These “towers” are simply aggressive symbols of fanatic defying power.

Minaret construction has nothing to do with freedom of religion. It is a symbol of bigotry.

If we allow the erection of minarets without offering resistance, our silent acquiescence is a token of surrender. The Swiss electorate decided not to surrender, but they stopped short of effective resistance. They attacked symbolism, not substance.

But when it comes to referendum, the majority in the Western world would also reject Islam as a stone-age “religion.” I am pretty sure that if the Swiss referendum were held in other European countries, the majority would also vote in favor of banning the construction of minarets. The European public is better informed than their self-appointed defenders of Islam.

I am not yet convinced that a majority are fully aware of the nature of Islam. But the Swiss vote may indicate a trend of increasing awareness. Lapidation may be a stone age execution method, but Moe had weapons made of more advanced materials. 610 was hardly part of the stone age.

It is also true that the Swiss and the rest of the world are not against Muslims practicing their own religion in peace like all followers of other religions.

Islam can not be practiced in peace. Jihad is an intrinsic and inseverable part of Islam. Al-Anfal & At-Taubah are permanent parts of Islamic scripture. If we are not against the practice of Islam, then we are passively surrendering.

If, however, people around the globe, especially in the West, read the Koran and Hadith and realize how this religion incites to hatred and violence against non-Muslims, and discrimination against women, they would classify it as an extremist ideology, as politically incorrect and demand banning it like all extremist organizations. Check out “Is Islam a Violent Faith?” and “Women in Hadith.”

Nevertheless, the world community, including Switzerland, accepts Islam as a “religion” and allows its followers to practice it under the principle of religious freedom.

We accept Islam as a "religion" and allow its practice, but if we read Islam's canon of scripture and tradition we would reject it. Will anyone get a clue from those vital paragraphs?

Before the West accepts Islam as a religion it must demand that Muslim states reform Islam; accept/apply universal human rights and religious freedom in their societies.

Preaching hatred and violence must be banned and their perpetrators must be punished. Additionally, the free civilized world must demand from Muslims and their religious institutions and states: Drop all those atrocious passages from your Koran and Hadith if you want to be part of the civilized world.

So Islam must be reformed; the violent passages must be removed from its canon of scripture & tradition. You forgot one, Dr. Alrabaa : Shari'ah. Islamic law reflects Islamic scripture & tradition. How many of those texts exist in book stores and in libraries all over the world? How many exist in computer hard disks and web pages? How do you hope to edit all of them? Who will edit all the copies of Ibn Kathir's Tafsir and Riyad us-saliheen?

Allah tells us in 5:3 & 11:1 that Islam and its scripture are perfected. Perfection can only be defiled, not improved. Allah tells us in 6:115, 10:64 and 30:30 that the Koran and the "religion" of which it is the foundation can not be changed. In Sahih Bukhari 9.78.174 Moe is on record cursing anyone who changes Islam after his death, saying that they will be far removed from mercy. Abu Dawud 23.3455 has Moe saying that if Muslims abandon Jihad in favor of agriculture, "Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion." [Emphasis added.]


Muslims who would reform Islam risk fatwa as apostates. Muslims Against Sharia is a prime example. Their Koran revision leaves As-Saff 10-13 intact. while Surah At-Taubah has been entirely excised. Surahs 8 & 47 lose context & continuity when the violent ayat are removed.

Perhaps you'd prefer to re-interpret the Koran. But the gates of ijtihad have been closed for 900 years. They are not about to spring open. Who knows the interpretation better than the one who revealed it? His Sunna & Sira show us what the Koran means. What does this mean?

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.

Moe will tell you what it means!

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." [Emphasis added.]

Allah's jihad imperatives mean exactly what they say. They can not be edited, and if they were, they would eventually be restored.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 37, Number 4278:

Narrated AbuHurayrah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Allah will raise for this community at the end of every hundred years the one who will renovate its religion for it.

The Swiss initiative is symbolic, with no effect beyond giving visibility to the rising tide of rejection of Islam. Islam is an intolerable predator which can not be reformed. That leaves Western Civilization one alternative: Islam must be prohibited by law. Ban the substance, not its symbols.

Dr. Sami Alrabaa asserts that we would reject Islam and favor banning it if we understood it from reading the Koran & hadith. You can test that hypothesis without slogging through thousands of pages of musty text. The ayat most relevant to Islamic aggression, the tafsir which explain them and the ahadith which confirm them are contained in EgregiousAyat.chm, along with the most important part of Shari'ah which codifies them into law.

The practical application of those texts is found in fiqh: rulings by Islamic jurists. FOMIJihad.chm's Jihad in Fiqh chapter presents a significant sample of relevant rulings. For those who prefer the hard slog method, the Muslim Student Association at USC maintains a data base containing three parallel translations of the Koran and four of the six canonical hadith collections.

For those who need the look, feel, permanence & aroma of printed text:

• The Meaning Of The Holy Quran by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (Hardcover - May 2004) Buy new: $24.95 $20.60
• The English Translation of Sahih Al Bukhari With the Arabic Text (9 volume set) by Muhammad Ibn Ismail Bukhari and Muhammad Muhsin Khan (Hardcover - Oct 1996) 2 new from $158.98 2 used from $169.23
• Tafsir Ibn Kathir (10 Volumes; Abridged) by Hafiz Ibn Kathir (Hardcover - Sep 1, 2000) Buy new: $279.50
• Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law Umdat Al-Salik by Ahmad Ibn Lulu Ibn Al-Naqib and Noah Ha Mim Keller (Hardcover - Jul 1, 1997) Buy new: $29.95 $25.60

Sphere: Related Content

Comparative vs Absolute Violence

Sheila Musaji responded to Condemning Religious Extremism with a new article containing two rhetorical questions in its title.
Is Islam more violent than other religions?: Is the Qur’an inherently violent?

Dajjal, the author, then lists verses in the Qur’an which he believes to mean that my condemnation would call for me to condemn God and/or the Qur’an, or Islam. He goes on to repeat that “Islam not only encourages but mandates violence”. He repeats this process for each of the condemnations in my article, giving his interpretation of particular Qur’anic verses to “prove” that his understanding of Islam is more accurate than that of the majority of Muslims (including Muslim scholars), and that any moderate interpretation is a lie.

Sheila Musaji follows up with a recapitulation of her earlier article before listing several verses which she finds inspirational, including: 2:190, 8:61, 5:28, 60:8, 2:193, 2:256, 18:29, 10:99, 24:54, 109:1-6, 3:134 and 3:186.

The list of inspirational verses is followed by this:

Some time ago I wrote an article entitled The Use and Abuse of Scriptures and I believe that it responds very clearly to the problem of “quote mining” the scriptures.

The cited article was reproduced after that introduction. It lists Qur'an & Bible verses which are supposedly abused by cherry pickers. This brings me back to the list of verses which inspire the author. Why does she find them inspirational? She uses the translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. You can find it, with the translator's commentary, at altafsir.com. Lets examine the first verse she cited, linked at the end of the preceding sentence

[2:190]
Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors.

---

* v.190 : War is only permissible in self-defence, and under well-defined limits. When undertaken, it must be pushed with vigour, but not relentlessly, but only to restore peace and freedom for the worship of God. In any case strict limits must not be transgressed: women, children, old and infirm men should not be molested, nor trees and crops cut down, nor peace withheld when the enemy comes to terms.

" War is only permissible in self-defense" goes far beyond the text of the verse, if we interpret it literally. Is it true? "Those who fight you" implies that this verse is about defensive warfare. But look closely, it says "who fight you", not "who attack you". Lets turn to Ibn Kathir's Tafsir.

Abu Al-`Aliyah said, "This was the first Ayah about fighting that was revealed in Al-Madinah. Ever since it was revealed, Allah's Messenger used to fight only those who fought him and avoid non-combatants.

Women & children should not be killed. Why not? Is that ruling based on moral premises? Examine Malik's Muwatta 21.3.10, which contains several prohibitions.

• Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person
• Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees
• Do not destroy an inhabited place.
• Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food.
• Do not burn bees and do not scatter them.
• Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly

Notice that the first five prohibitions are all members of a set defined by the first clause in the last prohibition. Everything protected by the prohibition is booty! The economic foundation of the prohibition is confirmed in Shari'ah. We turn next to Reliance of the Traveller. [Emphasis added.]

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.

Ok, so non-combatants are not to be attacked, just enslaved or held for ransom. What about people passively minding their own business, in their own homeland, who were not attacking Muslims? [Emphasis added.]

O9.1: The Obligatory Character of Jihad

Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2). When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others (O: the evidence for which is the Prophet's saying (Allah bless him and give him peace),

"He who provides the equipment for a soldier in jihad has himself performed jihad,"

and Allah Most High having said:

"Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah's path with their property and lives. Allah has preferred those who fight with their property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind. And to each, Allah has promised great good" (Koran 4:95).

If none of those concerned perform jihad, and it does not happen at all, then everyone who is aware that it is obligatory is guilty of sin, if there was a possibility of having performed it. In the time of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) jihad was a communal obligation after his emigration (hijra) to Medina. As for subsequent times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.

The first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad (def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is speaking of when he says, "Jihad is a communal obligation," meaning upon the Muslims each year.

The second state is when non-Muslims invade a Muslim country or near to one, in which case jihad is personally obligatory (def: c3.2) upon the inhabitants of that country, who must repel the non-Muslims with whatever they can).

Jihad against Kufar in their own countries is a communal obligation binding upon the Muslims each year. Let Al-Shafi'i clarify the issue.

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."

What must the imam do? [Emphasis added.]

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) ).

The caliph invites people of the book to embrace Islam or submit to extortion. If they decline, he makes war on them. "Fight those who fight against you:" evidently means 'after you attack them'. Why would Muslims attack people who had not attacked them? Because Allah commanded it in 8:39 & 9:29. Moe dispatched armies, giving their commanders orders which were recorded in Sahih Muslim 19.4294.

[...]If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them.[...]

There is another source of verification which Muslims would prefer that we not be aware of. I learned of this resource by lurking in a Muslim chat room on Pal Talk a few years ago. Moe dictated extortion letters and dispatched them by couriers, later following up with his army. He sent one to the Byzantine Emperor before launching the ghazwat on Tabuk. He sent another to the Jews at the Khaibar Oasis prior to attacking them. But this exemplary gem of extortion letters is far more explicit than the others, leaving little to the imagination.

LETTER TO THE CHIEFS OF AQABA

In the name of ALLAH the compassionate, the Merciful
From Muhammad, Prophet of Allah
To the People of Aqaba

May peace be on you. I praise Allah who is one and except whom there is nobody else to be worshipped.

I do not intend to wage war against you till you receive my written reason for it. It is better for you, either to accept Islam or agree to pay Jiziya and consent to remain obedient to Allah, His prophet and his messengers. My messengers deserve honour. Treat them with respect. Whatever pleases my messengers, will also please me.

These people have been informed of the orders about Jiziya. If you desire that there should be peace and security in the world, obey Allah and His Prophet. Thereafter none in Arabia and Ajam (Iran) shall dare cast an evil eye on you. But the rights of Allah and His Prophet can at no time be waived.

If you do not accept these terms and set them aside, I do not need your presents and gifts. In that case, I shall have to wage war (to establish peace and security). Its result would be that the big ones shall be killed in war and the commoners shall be taken prisoners.

I assure you that I am a true Prophet of Allah. I believe in Allah, and His Books, and His Prophets and am of the faith that Maseeh (Messiah) son of Mariam (Mary), is a Prophet of Allah and His word.

Hurmala (Raziallah AnhoA.) who brought to me 3 wasaq (about 6 quintals) of barley, recommended your case. Had it not been in compliance of the command of Allah and the good opinion of Hurmala for you, it would not have been necessary for me to correspond with you and instead of it, there would have been a war. If you will obey my messengers, you shall immediately have my support and the help and support of everyone who is attached to me.

My messengers are Shuraih-beel, Obaiy, Hurmala and Hurais (Raziallah AnhoA.) and whatever decision they take in respect of you, shall be acceptable to me.

Your people are under the protection and responsibility of Allah and His Prophet.

Supply provisions to the Jews of Maqna, for their journey to their country.

If you accept obedience, may peace be on you.'

Seal: Allah's Prophet Muhammad .

Citing 8:39 & 9:29 might be cherry picking if their meanings were not so obvious, but they are clear verses, the foundations of the book. Furthermore, they are confirmed by Islamic oral tradition as well as by Shari'ah. [Emphasis added.]

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."

Classical Arabic of the time of the revelation of the Qur'an lacked vowels and diacritical marks. It was not much more than a memory aid. One man was an expert in the meaning of the Qur'an, the one who received and recited the revelation. He told his companions what it meant and demonstrated its meaning. His companions passed that information down from mouth to ear for generations before it was codified. Because Islamic traditions were codified and translated, we have access to them and can see what the Qur'an meant to Moe, the real expert.

• 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

Many Muslims will answer by denying the authenticity of hadith, asserting that the Qur'an is the only revelation of divine will, protected by Allah from all contamination. Of course, there are some problems with that assertion. Only Moe received the revelations, sometimes in the form of a bell ringing in his head.
Moe could say anything, asserting that it was from Allah, and he did. His child bride was wise to him. [Emphasis added.]

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 311:

Narrated Aisha:

I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Apostle and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).' (33.51) I said (to the Prophet), "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires."

The Qur'an was largely transmitted from mouth to ear, just like the hadith. Fragments were written on various materials, but when the Qur'an was codified, parts of it were only available from hafiz. If the hadith are not reliable, neither is the Qur'an. How is a Muslim to obey Muhammad and emulate his conduct without knowing what he commanded and exemplified? Does the Qur'an tell you how to perform Wudu? Does it tell you what to do if water is not available? So, how do you know?

What is Shari'ah based upon? It has two primary sources: Qur'an & hadith, extended by analogy. If you disclaim hadith, then how can you claim that Shari'ah has any validity?

Muslims assert that 2:256 & 10:99, quoted by Sheila Musaji, forbid compelling anyone to revert to Islam. There is a reason for that: Jizya was only collected from people of the book who had been conquered or intimidated. If they were reverted, they would cease to pay Jizya. Dhimmis were a source of Income for Moe.

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.

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.

10:100. It is not for any person to believe, except by the Leave of Allâh, and He will put the wrath on those who are heedless.

It says you can't force us to revert, it does not say you can't attack us. Where is the conflict between those verses and the Jihad imperatives?

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.

"Religion will all be for Allah alone", a terminal condition for warfare in 8:39, is obviously in conflict. But there is an out: abrogation.

2:106. Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allâh is able to do all things?

Later revelations abrogate earlier revelations with which they conflict. Which came first? Surah Al-Baqarah was #87 in sequence of revelation; Surah Al-Anfal was #88. 2:256 is abrogated.

Of course I don't know a character of Arabic, so I am not qualified to interpret the Qur'an, as if Allah's commandments required interpretation. Will you take the word of one who was qualified? Here is a fragment from the Wikipedia entry about Ibn Kathir.

Ibn Kathir wrote a famous commentary on the Qur'an named Tafsir ibn Kathir which linked certain Hadith, or sayings of Muhammad, and sayings of the sahaba to verses of the Qur'an, in explanation. Tafsir Ibn Kathir is famous all over the Muslim world and among Muslims in the Western world, is one of the most widely used explanations of the Qu'ran today.

Ibn Kathir was renowned for his great memory regarding the sayings of Muhammad and the entire Qur'an. Ibn Kathir is known as a qadi, a master scholar of history, and a mufassir (Qur'an commentator). Ibn Kathir saw himself as a Shafi'i scholar. This is indicated by two of his books, one of which was Tabaqaat ah-Shafai'ah, or The Categories of the Followers of Imam Shafi.

. The titles of the following tafsir topics should be sufficient to convince any sane person. If they don't convince you, click them and read the tafsir.

• The Command for Endurance when the Enemy Engaging
• The Command for Jihad against the Disbelievers and the Hypocrites
• The Command to fight Those Who fight Muslims and killing Them wherever They are found
• The Command to strike the Enemies' Necks, tighten Their Bonds, and then free Them either by an Act of Grace or for a Ransom
• The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
• The Order for Jihad against the Disbelievers, the Closest, then the Farthest Areas
• The Order to fight to eradicate Shirk and Kufr
• The Order to fight until there is no more Fitnah
• The Order for Jihad against the Disbelievers and Hypocrites
• Making Preparations for War to strike Fear in the Hearts of the Enemies of Allah
• Muslims invoke Allah for Help, Allah sends the Angels to help Them
• Allah gives Victory to the Believing Group
• The Good News that Muslims will conquer the Known World, and ultimately the Entire World
• The Good News that Muslims will Dominate the People of the Book
• The Good News that Islam shall prevail

Did Jesus Christ preach or practice conquest, genocide & terrorism? In what New Testament book, chapter & verse is such preaching or practice recorded? The Qur'an hadith show us that Moe preached & practiced those evils. Islamic tradition & exegeses also depict Jesus as a genocidal warmonger. If you doubt those facts, follow these links and see for yourself.

• 8:67
• 47:4
• Sunan Abu Dawud 38.4390
• Sunan Abu Dawud 37.4310
  
• Eternal Humiliation placed on the Jews

Sphere: Related Content

Condemning Religious Extremism

On November 15, 09, The American Muslim published Muslims Must Condemn Religious Extremists by Sheila Musaji. She expressed a desire to "go on record as condemning all religious extremism, bigotry, violence, hatred, and terrorism by both Muslims and non-Muslims." [Bold face in original.] She follows up by citing several "false claims" about Islam and sets out to disprove them by listing evil acts and obnoxious statements performed or made by Jews or Christians.

In the process of listing the relatively small number of evil acts & statements, Sheila Musaji tacks around the unpleasant & incontrovertible fact that terrorism is an intrinsic sacrament of Islam. Extraordinary claims require proof, don"t they? I submit as proof, the ample testimony of Allah and his messenger.

The testimony of Allah as recorded in the Qur'an. [Emphasis added.]

• 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."
• 8:57. So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson.
• 8:60. Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of God and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of God, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly. [Abdullah Yusuf Ali; compare with
  Arberry, Rodwell & Sale.]
• 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.
• 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).
• 59:13. Verily, you (believers in the Oneness of Allah - Islamic Monotheism) are more awful as a fear in their (Jews of Bani An-Nadir) breasts than Allah. That is because they are a people who comprehend not (the Majesty and Power of Allah).

The testimony of Moe as recorded in hadith. [Emphasis added.]

• Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 Allah made me victorious by awe, (by His frightening my enemies) for a distance of one month's journey. [...]
• Sahih Bukhari 4.52.220 [...]I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy) [...]

A counter at Religion of Peace indicates that Muslims have perpetrated 14,392 terror attacks since 09/11/'01. How many have Jews & Christians perpetrated in the last eight years? Besides lists of recent and prior year attacks, that web site lists these facts which help to put things in perspective..

• More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined. (source)
• Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years. (source)
• More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland. (source)
• 19 Muslim hijackers killed more innocents in two hours on September 11th than the number of American criminals executed in the last 65 years. (source)
  

Sheila Musaji lists several ayat which guide her understanding of the Qur'an. Her list includes Al-Ma'idah 32 and skips directly to Surah Ghafir 40-43.

“If anyone slays a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew all people. And if anyone saves a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all people.” Qur’an 5:32.

“The recompense for an injury is an injury equal thereto (in degree), but if a person forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from God, for God loves not those who do wrong. But indeed, if any do help and defend themselves after a wrong done to them, against such there is no cause of blame. The blame is only against those who oppress men with wrongdoing and insolently transgress beyond bounds through the land, defying right and justice. For such there will be a penalty grievous (in the Hereafter). But indeed, if any show patience and forgive, that would truly be an affair of great resolution.” Qur’an 42:40-43.

Why did she skip the context of 5:33 and turn so far away to complete the concept? For the same reason that other Muslims skip over that ayeh

: kitman. They don't want you to know its contents or its meaning. Lets take a close look at what they conceal from you. [Emphasis added.]

• 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.

What is the meaning of "wage war against Allah", which subjects one to the listed hudud? Ibn Kathir answers the question in his tafsir of 5:33.

• [...]`Wage war' mentioned here means, oppose and contradict, and it includes disbelief, blocking roads and spreading fear in the fairways. The Punishment of those Who Cause Mischief in the Land

If you do not believe in Allah, you are waging war against him and are subject to the listed hudud.

Sheila Musaji lists some actions and attitudes which she condemns. I will sample them out of context.

I condemn any individual who encourages others to commit violence, murder, or terrorism.

Does she condemn Allah & Moe? Qur'anic incitement to terrorism is listed above. Quranic incitement to violence include: 2:216, 8:39, 9:29 & 9:123.

I condemn any organization which encourages extremism, bigotry, or violence

Does she condemn Islam, which not only encourages but mandates violence?

I condemn anyone who attempts to degrade or insult the religion of others!

Does she condemn Allah? 1:7 says that Jews earned Allah's wrath and Christians went astray, 3:85 expresses intolerance, 8:22 expresses contempt for Jews & Christians and 9:33 curses us.

I condemn anyone who thinks that collective punishment, group responsibility, ethnic cleansing, or genocide is the solution to anything!

Does she condemn Allah? 9:14 & 3:12 involve collective punishment, 8:67 & 47:4 sanctify genocide.

I condemn anyone who thinks that membership in their faith group makes them superior to other human beings

Does she condemn Allah, who said that Muslims are the best of peoples in 3:110 and Moe who explained in Sahih Bukhari 6.60.80 that it means "the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam."?

Sphere: Related Content