Geert Wilders Trial: Refresher Course

The purpose of this blog post is to remind readers of the background information essential to comprehending the resumption of the trial of Geert Wilders.

    This quote is from an English translation of the summons which lists the accusations against  Geert Wilders.  The summons is 24 pages long, detailing many statements.

The aforementioned summoned person is charged with the fact that
1.
he, on one or more dates in or about the period from 8 August 2007 up to and including 27 March 2008, in The Hague and/or Amsterdam and/or (elsewhere in) the Netherlands, on multiple occasions, at least once, (each time) in public, orally, in writing or through images, intentionally offended a group of people, i.e. Muslims, based on their religion, by (each time) intentionally in
- De Volkskrant and/or
- on the internet on the website www.liveleak.com (in the film Fitna)
placing (having placed) and/or showing (having showed) and/or having heard one or more texts and/or images and/or footage and/or audio fragments with the following content:
(De Volkskrant of 8 August 2007, ‘Enough is enough: prohibit the Quran’)
„A moderate Islam does not exist. It does not exist because there is no distinction between Good Islam and Bad Islam. There is Islam and that is it. And Islam means the Quran and nothing but the Quran. And the Quran is the Mein Kampf of a religion that intends to eliminate others and that refers to those others – non-Muslims – as unfaithful dogs, inferior beings. Read the Quran, this Mein Kampf, again. In whatever version, you will see that all the evil that the sons of Allah commit to us and themselves originates from this book (Oriana Fallaci, The Force of Reason, post-script, page 305, February 2006).‟...

2.
he, on one or more dates in or about the period from 7 October 2006 up to and including 27 March 2008, in The Hague and/or Amsterdam and/or (elsewhere in) the Netherlands, on multiple occasions, at least once, (each time) in public, orally, in writing or through images, incited to hatred of people, i.e. Muslims, based on their religion, by (each time) in
- De Volkskrant and/or
- De Pers and/or
- Dagblad De Limburger-Limburgs Dagblad and/or
on the internet
- on the website www.geenstijl.nl and/or www.pvv.nl and/or
- on the website of Radio Nederland Wereldomroep and/or the Wereldomroep and/or
- on the website www.liveleak.com (in the film Fitna)

 [Emphasis added.]

    Notice the prominent mention of Fitna, the publication of which is the basic issue, condemned by many government leaders, the OIC, and the Secretary General of the United Nations.  The summons goes on to describe the images in the video and list statements made therein.

    The first charge is intentionally offending Muslims.  The statute, cited on the last page of the summons,  makes the issue cut and dried.

Article 137c Dutch Penal Code

• o 1. He who publicly, verbally or in writing or image, deliberately expresses himself in an way insulting of a group of people because of their race, their religion or belief, or their hetero- or homosexual nature or their physical, mental, or intellectual disabilities, will be punished with a prison sentence of at the most one year or a fine of third category.
• o 2. If the offence is committed by a person who makes it his profession or habit, or by two or more people in association, a prison sentence of at the most two years or a fine of fourth category will be imposed.

 Article 137d Dutch Penal Code

• o 1. He who publicly, verbally or in writing or in an image, incites hatred against or discrimination of people or violent behaviour against person or property of people because of their race, their religion or belief, their gender or hetero- or homosexual nature or their physical, mental, or intellectual disabilities, will be punished with a prison sentence of at the most one year or a fine of third category.
• o 2. If the offence is committed by a person who makes it his profession or habit, or by two or more people in association, a prison sentence of at the most two years or a fine of fourth category will be imposed.

    Truth is not a defense in the statute.  How shall the defendant establish proof of his intent?  The law, as written, criminalizes truthful speech on the grounds of perceived insult & inciting hatred, discrimination or violence.

    Geert Wilders is an elected member of the Dutch Parliament, in that position, he is entitled to discuss public policy.  Islamization is a legitimate subject for public discourse; it is taking place in Europe.

    Fitna can be viewed in its entirety by clicking this link. It is divided into two parts on Youtube.  I will embed the two parts here so that you can view them.
You will see a few verses from the Qur'an  and an English translation .  You will hear an Arabic recitation and see graphic depictions of the practical application of the verses. 


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37w-aXGk8M0


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwwsnAr3rY8

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:

“There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence,” Ban said in a statement. “The right of free expression is not at stake here.”

    Who expressed hatred in that video?  Who incited violence in that video?    The Qur'an, not Geert Wilders  is the source of hate and incitement.  Wilders exposed hate & incitement, he did not perform it.

    My earlier blog posts relevant to the trial are linked in the list below.

• Fitna: Supporting Documentation 03/27/08   Qur'an quotes from Fitna and the speech to Parliament, with links to parallel translations & Ibn Kathir's Tafsir.
• Geert Wilders Accused of Blasphemy  06/23/08 Who is the blasphemer: Wilders or Moe?
• Free Speech vs Islam  04/09/09 Comments on a Geert Wilders speech in California. Be sure to read the transcript!
• Geert Wilders On Trial  01/24/10  Two quotes from his remarks and documentation of his Qur'an quotes.
• Geert Wilders: Free Speech on Trial  02/03/10  Analysis of the persecution of Geert Wilders.
• Wilders Trial Web Site  02/04/10   A great site for gathering information about the persecution.
• Geert Wilders Trial: Deceptive Commentary  02/11/10  Six Islam experts sent a letter to the District Court in Amsterdam This post exposes some of their malignant malarkey.
• Interviewer Tries to Trap Geert Wilders 05/01/10
• Wafa Sultan Interview  07/20/10  Interviewed before her testimony in the Wilders trial.

Sphere: Related Content

Coming Soon to a Courtroom near You

Citizen Warrior posted a video  about  Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff's case, also linking to a very informative  previous  article.  Wolff & Wilders are on trial in Europe, accused of  insulting & inciting hatred against Muslims.  Jail terms and heavy fines hang over their heads because they spoke openly and honestly about the damnable doctrines & practices of Islam revealed in its own canon of scripture, tradition, exegesis & jurisprudence.   Others have been persecuted  for truth in Australia, Canada, England and Scandinavia.

    In America, at present, we can not be brought up on criminal charges for revealing the demonic core of Islam because we are protected by the free speech clause of the First Amendment.  But Justice Stephen Breyer has brought our umbrella of protection into doubt: "And what is the crowded theater today? What is the being trampled to death?"

    In the current political climate, Democrats are desperately seeking ways to squelch criticism of their policies & corruption.  Some seek to resurrect the "fairness doctrine", others look to changes in the licensing requirements for radio stations.  They need to silence Rush Limbaugh and others  who speak truth to power.

    Unfortunately, that domestic threat converges with a parallel international threat,  Bolstered by the controversy of International Burn a Qur'an Day.  The OIC and its member states have been screaming for international legislation to criminalize criticism of Islam.  At the opening of the 15^th  session of the  Human Rights Council, they urged "internationally oriented preventive measures to combat negative religious stereotyping
including denigration of religions"¹  and  "It is through an outright  rejection of such acts and sustained engagement at evolving norms to deal with them that we would prevail against the extremists who are out to rock the very foundations of peaceful coexistence."²

    Two phrases in that last quote need elaboration.  "such acts" is a direct reference to International Burn a Qur'an Day but it expands to encompass all questioning & criticism of Islam.  "Evolving norms to deal with them"  may be wrongly assumed to refer to the annual Combating Defamation... resolutions but it has a more sinister reference.  Few beyond the ivory tower heights of international human rights NGOs are aware of this threat to our precious liberty.

    The HRC  appointed an ad hoc committee  to explore and elaborate "complementary international standards"³.  The committee's lofty title and charge tell us nothing  useful.  It is only by scratching beneath the surface that we discover  their mission: to write a binding protocol to ICERD which will give the force of international law to the defamation resolutions.  

    By encoding the content of the resolutions ⁴ into a protocol attached to ICERD⁵, they will be made enforcible by the World Court.  Signatories will be required by international law to legislate and enforce acts prohibiting criticism of Islam.  

    Steve Malzberg had a masterful rant on the subject of "hate speech" laws in the opening hour of his September 13 radio show.

..."Even Republicans-Even the great Peter King, Congressman-said that 'Terry Jones is putting our troops at risk; I agree with General Petraeus'  blah blah blah. ladies and gentlemen, if our freedom of speech can be seen as putting our troops at risk, then our freedom of speech is going away.  Make no mistake about that--our freedom of speech is going away.  In Canada, you can't say anything that would offend a group, like Muslims, for instance, that they might consider offensive, oh gee, they call it hate speech. Ya can't say it. ...

    Who is to blame for the escalating violence over the Qur'an burning, is it the Pastor himself, is it the Obama Administration or is it the media? I said: common, you left out choice D, which is the correct choice, where it it? Those were the choices, ladies and gentlemen, A, B & C.  The correct choice is .... the people responsible for the threat of violence are the scumbag terrorists. Duh.  Don't you see how this makes Terry Jones's point?  When he says that there's something wrong with portions of Islam?  Do you see where we've progressed to or digressed to, on this issue?  You can't burn a Qur'an, you can't incite the poor terrorists, you can't do something that will give Usama bin Ladin a recruiting poster, even if it is protected by freedom of speech; the First Amendment, you can't do it; we'll send the FBI to your church,  we'll take files out, we'll have somebody close down/ whoever runs your web  site/ your provider close it down, which is what happened. The FBI came, the provider said 'oh, you violated such and such a rule-no more web site for the church  ' . And they read him the riot act. God knows what they told him.  Who knows how they threatened him to get him to stop?  God spoke to him and told him not to do it.  Of course, first he said he had a deal 'the mosque will not be built there', yeah right, ... but don't you for one minute think that this is not the beginning of the end of the United States of America as you know it.

    Remember after 9/11 some started saying well, ... how is this different from the Imam himself who said that we were 'accesory to 9/11, and Usama
bin ladin was made in the united states, that we have Muslim blood on our hands'  ?  So shat do you expect, how is this different from Rev. Wright; 'the chickens have come home to roost.' 'cuz we support the Israelies & dropped bombs on Hiroshima? How is this different than what they're saying, when you tell a Pastor 'if you burn that book, the terrorists are going to strike and its your fault', how is it different than what Reverend  Wright and Imam Rauf and the rest of the skunks say about 9/11 and about this country deserving it ?  And whose to blame for 9/11; I always thought it was the terrorists, but  if you follow Barack Hussein Obama's logic; Hillary Clinton's logic' General Petraeus's logic; Defense Secretary Gates's logic and I'm sorry to say, just about everybody I've heard from's logic  if he';d burned the Qur'an and something had happened, it'd be his fault. How is that?

    Now, next in line will be, and we've already heard it,   We've heard it from the Imam: he can't move the mosque  from where he wants to build it; absolutely not, do you know why?   he can't do it ('Our national security now hinges on how we do this and how we speak about it and what we do . It is important now for us to raise the bar...
if we move the radicals have  shaped the discourse --the radicals have shaped the discourse on both sides and those of  us who are moderates on both sides ..')...

What will they demand next?  People like me, speaking up; 'you're inflaming the terrorists'; its our fault. Its terry Jones's fault, its the people who want the mosque moved's fault .  Its my fault, don't you get it?  Just like  its the U.S. Government's fault that 9/11 happened,
And now we, not me, are starting to accept it in this country.

Well, you'd better not burn the Qur'an, don't want to inflame the terrorists, well we don't do anything to  upset them-screw'em!    What the Hell is going on here?  

    Wolff & Wilders are on trial for "hate speech"  It is assumed  by LibTards that revealing the core doctrines & practices of Islam  inculcate hatred & incite violence. while in reality, the hatred is inculcated and the violence incited by the Qur'an, hadith, Sira & kutbah based upon them, preached in every mosque  every Friday afternoon.

    View Fitna. You saw the Qur'an, in Arabic and English. You heard it recited. You saw the Imam's preaching it. You saw the rioting, death and destruction which result.  Which is hate speech:  the sanctification & mandate of genocidal conquest or exposing it to the world?   The Imams who preach from that accursed book should be in the dock, not Geert Wilders.  

    This is what the Secretary General of the U.N. said about that 17 minute video.

Reuters quotes U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon about Fitna:

“There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence,” Ban said in a statement. “The right of free expression is not at stake here.”

    The right of  free expression is at stake; there is ample justification for Fitna; none for the Qur'an.  Ban  ki-Moon is guilty of inverting morality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhgkN42uAJQ&feature=player_embedded



    Wilders & Wolff are being tried under existing national hate speech legislation.  If the OIC prevails in its pursuit of tyranny, our nation will emulate those laws and our liberty will be lost forever.

    The annual resolutions are getting all the press. Who is paying attention to the activity of the Ad Hoc Cmte. which  presents the real threat?  The OIC outnumbers us and can out vote us.  We can not prevail by lobbying efforts. We can not prevail with bland, inoffensive petitions  calling for the defeat of impotent resolutions.  We need to raise the  political/public relations cost of  the OIC's mission to enslave us.  We need to use their own methods against them.

    Who has the SISU to reveal the truth about Islam?  Who will point out the fact that Islam's Qur'an & Sunnah are egregious static violations of existing human rights covenants?

ICERD. [Emphasis added.]

Article 4

States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin, or which attempt to justify or promote racial hatred and discrimination in any form, and undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures designed to eradicate all incitement to, or acts of, such discrimination and, to this end, with due regard to the principles embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in article 5 of this Convention, inter alia:
(a) Shall declare an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin, and also the provision of any assistance to racist activities, including the financing thereof;
(b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, and also organized and all other propaganda activities, which promote and incite racial discrimination, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offence punishable by law;
(c) Shall not permit public authorities or public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination.

States Parties condemn all propaganda and all organizations which are based on ideas or theories of superiority of one race or group of persons of one colour or ethnic origin,

ICCPR

Article 20

1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad  and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh - and rebellious against Allâh's Command).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Verse:--"You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind." means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

2:91. And when it is said to them (the Jews), "Believe in what Allâh has sent down," they say, "We believe in what was sent down to us." And they disbelieve in that which came after it, while it is the truth confirming what is with them. Say (O Muhammad Peace be upon him to them): "Why then have you killed the Prophets of Allâh aforetime, if you indeed have been believers?" 
98:6. Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islâm, the Qur'ân and Prophet Muhammad  from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikûn will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.
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.

9:30. And the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh's Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!

Tabari IX:69 "Arabs are the most noble people in lineage, the most prominent, and the best in deeds. We were the first to respond to the call of the Prophet. We are Allah's helpers and the viziers of His Messenger. We fight people until they believe in Allah. He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for one who disbelieves, we will fight him forever in Allah's Cause. Killing him is a small matter to us." [Quoted by Craig Winn.]

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

Article 3

The following acts shall be punishable:

• (a) Genocide;
• (b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
• (c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
• (d) Attempt to commit genocide;
• (e) Complicity in genocide.

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.

Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6985:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

    ICCPR, ICERD & CPPCG require that Islam and its canon of scripture & tradition be condemned and proscribed by law.  Who will enforce those provisions?  They want to amend ICERD to use against us while it already condemns them!   How shall we deal with those arrogant violators of human rights?  Hoist them on their own petard!  Sign, publicized & promote the International Qur'an  Petition.  You can copy the full, html format petition, complete with  links to the evidence and a link to the signature page and paste it into an email, with an exhortation to sign and forward it.

---

1. Statement of   The OIC Secretary General His Excellency Prf. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu  Before the 15^th  Session of the Human Rights Council
   16 Sept. 2010  http://www.eyeontheun.org/assets/attachments/documents/8864sggenevaoic.pdf
2. ibid
3. The blog posts listed here contain quotes from & links to the few available documents related to the cmte. 
• Syria Spews al-Taqeyya 04/13/10 On April 12, 2010, Syria’s U.N. Ambassador addressed the 14^th session  of the  Ad Hoc Committee on Measures to eliminate international terrorism on behalf of the OIC.  I have selected three crucial excerpts from his prepared remarks.
•  Ad Hoc Committee: New Resolutions  03/20/10  Competing Nigerian & American drafts in  pursuit of a binding protocol to ICERD for the purpose of outlawing these blog posts.
• Letter from OIC to Ad Hoc Committee 11/13/09  This is about the drive to criminalize criticism of Islam.
• Ad Hoc Committee Leaves Work Unfinished  Our freedom of expression is almost safe until their next session. 10/30/09
• Ad Hoc Cmte: Non-Paper  08/04/09  The cmte. President's outline of the program of censorship. This document is crucial to comprehending the related posts which follow in this list.
• AdHoc Committee: African Submission  08/03/09  Detailed analysis of the Africa group's proposal to censor critics of Islam.
• AdHoc Cmte USA Submission  08/03/09 This nation is governed by irrational idiots & traitors. Read it and weep.
• AdHoc Cmte: Pakistani Submission  08/03/09  Detailed analysis of the OIC's proposal to censor critics of Islam.
• Ad Hoc Committee: Iranian Submission  08/03/09 Detailed analysis of Iran's proposal to censor critics of Islam.
• Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards 08/01/09  They aim to add a protocol to ICERD to criminalize these blog posts.
4. Combating defamation of religions
• A/HRC/RES/13/16  
• Defamation of Religions UNHRC March 25 ’10
• A/RES/64/164
• Combating Defamation of Religions: the Substance
5. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination

Sphere: Related Content

Qur'an: If You Won't Burn It, Read It

Pastor Terry Jones did the nation a service by bringing  a burning issue to the front burner and let it down by failing to fully exploit the issue.  He should have explained in detail why the Qur'an should be burned and  and exhorted people to read it.  He should especially have exhorted preachers to read the most egregious  ayat from their lecterns to educate their congregations.

    Jones did another great disservice to the nation and the free world by backing down in the face of Islamic threats and governmental condemnation.  Backing down to threats reinforces those who make the threats.  When we back down, the bullys experience triumph and are encouraged by it to  issue more threats in the future.

    There was no need to burn hundreds of Qur'ans and no benefit from it.  Burning one is sufficient for the symbolic act of resistance to Islamic intimidation, infiltration, sedition and conquest.

    Had he burned just one English translation of the Qur'an,  he could have answered the hordes of Muslim protesters with a simple statement that he did not burn their sacred book; Muslims do not consider translations to be  sacred.

    Another Christian activist and  associates gathered near the White House to protest  Islamic violence.  They  crumpled pages torn from a paperback translation of the Qur'an.  The torn pages were selected for their violent, anti-Christian content.  Think Progress reports that Andrew Beacham did the tearing while Randall Terry explained which  verses were selected and why.  In a radio interview with Sean Hannity, Terry urged listeners to read the Qur'an.  Hannity agreed and announced that he would have a special Qur'an reading hour this week,  possibly as soon as Tuesday September 14.

    Randall Terry also gave  the url of his blog, which contains two papers he wrote for one of his courses in a Masters degree program. I did not catch it off the air, but hope I found it with a Google search.  A press release  revealed that two papers were distributed at the protest.  Earth Times published a list of the torn ayat.  9:5-6 are listed, 9:29, 30, 33 & 123 are interesting omissions.

1) "Is Islamic Sharia law incompatible with international laws of human rights for freedom of thought, conscience, religion and expression?"
2) "How do the words and deeds of Islamic terrorists, or Muslims who call for acts of terror and violence, emulate the words and deeds of Muhammad?"

   
    There is one thing more important than incinerating a Qur'an: becoming familiar with  its evil content.   Noel Yatom published a list of 164 violent verses. The Calcutta Qur'an Petition lists some critical ayat which establish the doctrine of jihad: offensive conquest. 

During his early days in Medina, the Prophet apprehended attacks from the Quraish of Meeca.  So he formed the Muslim-Jewish alliance as a defensive measure.  Allah came forward with “revelations” (22.39-41) permitting the Prophet to fight in self-defence, and promising help.  But no attacks came from Mecca so that the Prophet was left free to break his alliance with the Jews and form his own Muslim Ummah.  Allah obliged immediately by converting the permission into a command (2.216; 4.76-77, 84, 8.39, 66- 66).  War against the Pagans now became obligatory on all Muslims.  Muslims were to go out and attack the infidels in regular military formations (4.71; 8.15; 9.123; 61.4). ...Allah had purchased the lives and properties of the Muslims in exchange for dominion in this word and paradise hereafter (2.244-45; 9.111).  Avoiding jihAd became a great sin and violation of the covenant with Allah (2.218; 3.156; 4.74, 77, 95; 9.24, 38-39, 81.84). Becoming a martyr (shahId) became the highest merit for every Muslim (2.154; 3.157, 169-70,195, 198; 22.58; 33.16-17).

    Click those links, print the verses, take them to Sunday school, and ask the teacher to identify them, "what part of the Bible is this from".  Change Allah to God, and you'll have them stumped.  If that does not get you shunned or disfellowshiped,  spring them on the preacher; ask him to read them in church.

    It is not necessary to read the entire Qur'an to discover its true nature nor is there any mystery about it. Allah's commands are contained in clear verses which are the foundation of the book.  If you read Surahs Al-Anfal & At-Taubah, you will have a pretty good understanding of the bottom line.

    The hierarchy of your church probably believes the standard lies, that Islam is a "great religion of peace" and an "equally valid pathway to God".  They probably believe that Islam reveres Jesus as a Prophet, too.  Of course they don't know that Islam denies his paternity, divinity, crucifixion, death & resurrection, depicts him as inferior to Muhammad and a genocidal warlord who will "kill the Jews" when he returns.   What if you prove it to them?  My blog post "The Defamation of Jesus Christ", contains the evidence you need, from the Qur'an, hadith & Tafsir, to show  your church the anti-Christian core of Islam.  Will you do it?  If you won't. who will?

Sphere: Related Content

Koran Toilet Paper

Muslim Facebook Boycott Protests 'koran toilet paper' was uttered and published 10/19/'09 in response to a threatened Muslim boycott of Facebook. The Muslims were demanding the deletion of a Facebook group "Koran Toilet Paper Roll".   Posted at Freedom Ain't Free, it has received  532 page views, 9 of them on September 8.  

    I do not know how many page views it has received  on my VOX blog, but recently it has been the most popular post.   That post comes up #9 in the Google SERP.   That post drew 17 of 70 page views to 10 p.m. today.

    Just in case readers are looking for the literal product, I did a search for novelty tp.

• Just Toilet Paper does not offer Koran tp. They do offer  custom printing.

That search was a bust.  A German man tried to market Qur'an tp four years ago and got arrested, which may have put a damper on the market.

    KTPR was taken down by Facebook, briefly restored, and disappeared.  It has been replaced by two smaller groups  which are less active as well as less popular.

• We who use The Qur'an as toiletpaper
• I bet this 'Toilet Paper' can Get more fans than 'Quran'.

    The group demanding KTPR's deletion is still going, but not extremely active.

• Facebook must delete the group "koran toilet paper roll"

    It is fun to joke about using the Qur'an for peri-anal  hygiene but, the practice can have consequences.  Some inks can be irritating and  coated paper can cause paper cuts, which can become infected, resulting in painful boils.  I suggest using the  less expensive paper back editions that ain't printed on  thin coated paper.

    With the preliminaries out of the way, its time to get down to the serious stuff.   The issue is not covered in the Qur'an, so we turn to the hadith.  The fun starts in Sahih Bukhari 1.4.157  with a narration in which the Profit asks his companion to bring him three stones,  but not bone or dung.
   

    Sunan Abu Dawud 1.7   makes the prohibition explicit.

Book 1, Number 0007:
Narrated Salman al-Farsi:

It was said to Salman: Your Prophet teaches you everything, even about excrement. He replied: Yes. He has forbidden us to face the qiblah at the time of easing or urinating, and cleansing with right hand, and cleansing with less than three stones, or cleansing with dung or bone.

Why should Muslims be prohibited from wiping their butts with dried camel dung or old bones?  Why would anyone consider using a piece of crap for that purpose?  But that's beside the point.  Moe has an answer for you.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 1, Number 0039:
Narrated Abdullah ibn Mas'ud:

A deputation of the jinn came to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and said: O Muhammad, forbid your community to cleans themselves with a bone or dung or charcoal, for in them Allah has provided sustenance for us. So the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) forbade them to do so.    

    You thought jinn were mythical, didn't you?  But Moe met with a delegation of jinn who told him that Allah provided bones and dried dung for them to eat. If they eat dried dung, whats the problem?   They could just wait for the crap on the soiled items to dry.

    The Prophet said to use three clean stones.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 1, Number 0041:
Narrated Khuzaymah ibn Thabit:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) was asked about cleansing (after relieving oneself). He said: (One should cleanse oneself) with three stones which should be free from dung.

    But there's more; stones ain't enough, you  should use water, too.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 1, Number 0044:
Narrated AbuHurayrah:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: The following verse was revealed in connection with the people of Quba': "In it are men who love to be purified" (ix.108). He (AbuHurayrah) said: They used to cleanse themselves with water after easing. So the verse was revealed in connection with them.

    Ain't those great suggestions?  But they are more than suggestions, they are law.  Book e of Reliance of the Traveller  contains the rules of ritual purity.   This is not suitable for children or overly sensitive adults.

 e9.0: Going to Lavatory  [Emphasis added to interesting parts.]

e9.1: Recommended Measures

It is recommended when one intends to use the lavatory:

-1- to put something on one's feet, unless there is an excuse (O:such as not having shoes);

-2- to cover the head (O:even if only with a handkerchief or other);

-3- to set aside anything on which there is the mention of Allah Most High. His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace), or any revered name (O:like those of prophets or angels).  If one enters with a ring (O:on which something worthy of respect is written), one closes one's hand around it;

-4- to ready stones (N: or other suitable material (def:e9.5) ) (O:if one uses them) to clean oneself of filth (N:though water alone is sufficient);

-5- to say before entering:

"In the name of Allah. O Allah, I take refuge in You from demons, male and female,"

and after leaving,

"[O Lord,] Your forgiveness: Praise be to Allah who rid me of the hurt and gave me health";

-6- to enter with the left foot first and depart with the right foot first (and this, together with (3) and

-5- above, are not only for indoors, but recommended outdoors as well);

-7- not to raise one's garment until one squats down to the ground (O: to keep one's nakedness covered as much as possible) and to lower it before one stand up;

-8- to put most of one's weight on the left foot while squatting;

-9- not to spend a long time;

-10- not to speak; 

-11- when finished urinating, for men to squeeze the penis with the left hand from base to head (O: recommended because this is where the urethra is, and for women to squeeze their front between thumb and forefinger) (N: so urine does not exit later and nullify one's ablution) pulling lightly three times (O: this being recommended when one thinks the urine has stopped, though if one thinks it has not, this is obligatory);

-12- not to urinate while standing (O: which is offensive) unless there is an excuse (N: such as when standing is less likely to spatter urine on one's clothes than sitting, or when sitting is a hardship);

-13- not to clean oneself with water in the same place one relieved oneself, if it might spatter, though if in a lavatory one need not move to a different place;

-14- to distance oneself from others if outdoors and to screen oneself;

-15- not to urinate into holes, on hard places, where there is wind, in waterways, where people gather to talk, on paths, under fruit trees, near graves, in still water, or in less than 216 liters of running water;

-16- and not to relieve oneself with one's front or rear facing the sun, moon, or the Sacred Precinct in Jerusalem.

e9.2: Prohibitions

It is unlawful to urinate on anything edible, bones, anything deserving respect, a grave or in a mosque, even if into a receptacle.

e9.3

It is unlawful to urinate or defecate with one's front or rear towards the direction of prayer when outdoors and there is no barrier to screen one, though this is permissible when one is indoors within a meter and a half of a barrier at least 32 cm. high, or in a hole that deep. When one is not this close to such a barrier at least 32 cm. high, or in a hole that deep. When one is not this close to such a barrier, it is not permissible except in a lavatory, where, if the walls are farther from one than the maximal distance or are shorter than the minimal height, relieving oneself with front or rear towards the direction of prayer is permissible, though offensive.  

e9.4: The Obligation of Cleaning Oneself of Filth

It is obligatory to clean oneself of every impure substance coming from one's front or rear, though not from gas, dry worms or stones, or excrement without moisture.

e9.5: Use of dry substances or water

Stones suffice to clean oneself, though it is best to follow this by washing with water. Anything can take the place of stones that is a solid, pure, removes the filth, is not something that deserves respect or is worthy of veneration, nor something that is edible (O: these being five conditions for the validity of using stones (N: or something else) to clean oneself of filth without having to follow it by washing with water).

But it is obligatory to wash oneself with water if:

-1- one has washed away the filth with a liquid other than water, or with something impure;

-2- one has become soiled with filth from a separate source;

-3- one's waste has moved from where it exited (n: reaching another part of one's person) or has dried;

-4- or if feces spread beyond the inner buttocks (N: meaning that which is enfolded when standing), or urine moved beyond the head of the penis, though if they do not pass beyond them, stones suffice.

e9.5: How to clean oneself

It is obligatory (N: when cleaning oneself with a dry substance alone) to both remove the filth, and to wipe three times, even when once is enough to clean it, doing this either with three pieces (lit. "stones") or three sides of one piece. If three times does not remove it, it is obligatory to (N: repeat it enough to) clean it away (O: as that is the point of cleaning oneself. Nawawi says in al-Majmu' that cleaning oneself (N: with a dry substance) means to remove the filth so that nothing remains but a trace that could not be removed unless one were to use water) (N: and when this has been done, any remaining effects of filth that could have been done, any remaining effects of filth that could have only been removed with water are excusable).  An odd number of strokes is recommended. One should wipe from front to back on the right side with the first piece, similarly wipe the left with the second, and wipe both sides and the anus with the third. Each stroke must begin at a point on the skin that is free of impurity.

It is offensive to use the right hand to the oneself of filth.

e9.6: Cleaning before or after ablution

It is best to clean oneself of filth before ablution, though if one waits until after it to clean, the ablution is nevertheless valid(N: provided that while cleaning, the inside surface of the hand (def: e7.4 does not touch the front or rear private parts).

If one waits until after one's dry ablution (tayammum, def:e12) to clean away filth, the dry ablution is not valid (A: because lack of filth is a condition for it).

    E9.1-3 instructs Muslims not to carry the Qur'an into the lavatory. E9.5 is explicit: you must not use any object that deserves respect or veneration.  Since they do not consider translations to be sacred,  for maximum  offense (if that is the intention) you should desecrate an Arabic Qur'an.  The problem with toilet paper is that it could  be made from recycled Qur'ans.

    The right hand prohibition has a cultural connection. Seventh century Arabs did not use eating utensils, they  grabbed food out of common pots with their right hands. Amputating the right hand of a thief forces him to use his left hand for everything, which could introduces feces into the common pot.   Perhaps that is why Risala (Maliki Fiqh) gives this instruction.

4.1e The place is rubbed with the hand while the water is being poured until it is cleaned of noxiousness. It is enough that he thinks it probable if he is able to do that. If he is not able to do it because his hand is cut off or short, he delegates someone who is able to touch that place, be it wife or slavegirl.

Sphere: Related Content

Geller vs Ghouse

Pam Geller wrote an article published at Big Journalism, about CAIR's attempt to silence her message to an upcoming Tea Party convention. In that article, she included a debate she had with Mike Ghouse on Sean Hannity's radio show. The audio stream is accompanied by text and images from the Abomination. I want you to listen to that debate. I want you to hear the disgusting lies spewed by mike Ghouse. I want you to see those horrific images and relive that awful September morning. I want the anger and outrage to rise in your throat until you stand up and curse Islam.

I want you to resolve never to vote for a candidate for high office who does not clearly condemn Moe's War Cult for what it is. I want you to have your eyes and ears open, and your mind clear, ready to detect the spew of lies that flows whenever the subject of Islam heats up. The truth will not make you free if you do not recognize it and reject the lies which oppose it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kk6efjmxK_g&feature=player_embedded

• Well, Pamela, first of all everybody is crying out loud for Muslims to take the initiative to bring about a positive change and this cultural center that is being built is to do precisely that, to give a voice to the moderate Muslims so we can subside the extremists among us. It is good- et should be [unintelligible] by every American that moderate Muslims take charge and speak up. And this cultural center will house--one part of the cultural center is a prayer place, but most of it is talking about pluralism and how to get along, learning about each other and what this center is gonna do is a very welcome thing to do. And as for your comment about Muslims and jihad, its one of the most mistranslated verses that you're couching on for the last eight or nine centuries. Look at the Mohammad Asad translation and eighteen other translations. you are going by what was wrongly translated, not rightly translated, Pamela.
• We should not tolerate any teachings of Jihad, anywhere in the world, not only in America. Muslims turn up against that kind of teaching.
• [About Taqiyya] It is not in the Qur'an, you can't lie to the public, Pamela...

• How will a Mosque, where Muslims gather to pray for our destruction, make any positive change in the damnable doctrines of Islam?
• "Moderate Muslims" is an alias for what Moe called hypocrites, whose Islam goes no deeper than their throats, who are to be defeated and gathered into Hell along with us. The meek do not inherit the earth while the aggressors are running it.
• Pluralism? Islam demands a total monopoly on faith and practice, it is not multicultural.
• How to get along? No, its how to conquer and dominate.
• Jihad is ordained for Muslims, made mandatory by Surah al-Baqarah 216.
  
• [2:216]
  Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But God knoweth, and ye know not.
  
  

  ---

  * v.216 : To fight in the cause of Truth is one of the highest form of charity. What can you offer that is more precious than your own life? But here again the limitations come in. If you are a mere brawler, or a selfish aggressive person, or a vainglorious bully, you deserve the highest censure. If you offer your life to the righteous Iman, who is only guided by God, you are an unselfish here. God knows the value of things better than you do. [Abdullah Yusuf Ali]
• [2:216]
  FIGHTING is ordained for you, even though it be hateful to you; but it may well be that you hate a thing the while it is good for you, and it may well be that you love a thing the while it is bad for you: and God knows, whereas you do not know.
  
  

  ---

  * v.216 : Insofar as it relates to fighting, this verse must be read in conjunction with 2:190-193 and 22:39: but it expresses, in addition, a general truth applicable to many situations.[Mohammad Asad]

Surah Al-Baqarah deals with defensive jihad, when Dar ul-Islam is threatened with invasion. Surah Al-Anfal & Surah At-Taubah are about offensive jihad, when Islam takes the aggressive initiative.

• The Spoils
• Mohammad Asad
• Abdullah Yusuf Ali
• Repentence
• Mohammad Asad
• Abdullah Yusuf Ali

• 3:28. Let not the believers take the disbelievers as Auliyâ (supporters, helpers, etc.) instead of the believers, and whoever does that will never be helped by Allâh in any way, except if you indeed fear a danger from them. And Allâh warns you against Himself (His Punishment), and to Allâh is the final return.
• Let not the believers take the disbelievers as patrons, rather than, that is, instead of, the believers — for whoever does that, that is, [whoever] takes them as patrons, does not belong to, the religion of, God in anyway — unless you protect yourselves against them, as a safeguard (tuqātan, ‘as a safeguard’, is the verbal noun from taqiyyatan), that is to say, [unless] you fear something, in which case you may show patronage to them through words, but not in your hearts: this was before the hegemony of Islam and [the dispensation] applies to any individual residing in a land with no say in it. God warns you, He instills fear in you, of His Self, [warning] that He may be wrathful with you if you take them as patrons; and to God is the journey’s end, the return, and He will requite you. [Jalalayn]
• 16:106. Whoever disbelieved in Allâh after his belief, except him who is forced thereto and whose heart is at rest with Faith but such as open their breasts to disbelief, on them is wrath from Allâh, and theirs will be a great torment.

Tafsir al-Jalalayn is fairly terse, yet it clarifies the meaning of verses sufficiently. Ibn Kathir's Tafsir is more verbose and one of the most accepted. http://www.qtafsir.com/ has a search engine with which you can look up verses by the Surah: Ayeh numbers. Here are the titles of the tafsir most relevant to this issue. Clicking them will display the Arabic text, related ahadith and Ibn Kathir's explanations.

• 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

So terrorism is harram? Explain away these tafsir which explain 8:60 and 8:12!!

• 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

Riyad us-Saliheen, Book 11, Chapter 234 presents the most relevant ahadith with commentary. Shari'ah is based on both sources. Its most accepted codification is Reliance of the Traveller.

• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-0.html Jihad defined as making war on kuffar.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-1.html The communal obligation to attack kuffar at least once each year.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-8.html The caliph makes war on Jews... codification of 9:29.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-9.html The caliph fights all other people... codification of 8:39.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO9-13.html Women & children enslaved by reason of capture.
• http://www.crusadersarmory.co.cc/RelianceO25-9.html The eighth duty of subordinate rulers: to undertake Jihad.
  

Sphere: Related Content

Islam is the Enemy

A blog titled 'YARDY YARDY YARDY" published a post about moves to ban the burqa and minarets. I will quote and refute the concluding paragraph.

But isn't that confusing moderate Islam, with the extremists who kill and bomb in the name of their wild interpretations of the Qur’an? Yes, the memories of 9/11 will forever demonise Islam, but in reality it should only demonise those carrying out the terrorist attacks.
Islam is not the enemy: its radical variants are.

Moderate Islam is a figment of fertile imagination, it does not exist. Islam is not moderate, it is a demonic mandate to terrorize the entire world and subject it to genocidal aggression. Islam is what Allah said, Moe repeated & exemplified. Allah said that fighting is ordained for Muslims. He ordered Muslims to fight pagans until resistance ceased and only Allah was worshiped. He ordered Muslims to fight "people of the book" until they are subjugated and submit to extortion. Moe confirmed the orders, then he invaded his neighbors.

Allah said that he would cast terror. He ordered Muslims to build a strong army to strike terror into their enemies. Then he cast terror, so that one of the local Jewish settlements was conquered, the men killed and their widows & orphans enslaved. Moe said that he was made victorious by terror.

There is only one correct interpretation of the Qur'an, Moe's interpretation which is exemplified by his military career of 86 battles. To discover what Moe said and did about the Qur'an, exemplifying his interpretation of his recitation, turn to

Ignorant idiots think that Moe was a benign saint, the best and greatest of men. They are blissfully unaware of the fact that he dictated extortion letters to his scribes and had them hand delivered to neighboring kings and emperors. He followed up those missives by sending his army.

The founder of Islam was a barbarian warlord who preached and practiced genocidal aggression. How then can anyone assert that the institution he founded is benign and anodyne?

Islam is a deen: way of life; intra-species predation. Muslims are people who believe in and implement that deen. They are the enemy. The assumption that Muslims accept the "good parts" and reject the rest is based on false hope and misunderstanding. Islam is all or nothing, not a la carte.

Sphere: Related Content

Terrorism Fatwa: Feces!

Shaykh-ul-Islam Dr Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri has issued a 600 page fatwa, written in Urdu, which he hopes to have translated and published in English.
The fatwa is entitled: FATWA ON SUICIDE BOMBINGS AND TERRORISM. I have linked the title to an 88 page English summary in pdf format. It is likely that when published in English, the fatwa will appear on or near this minhaj books page.


Taken at face value, the fatwa appears to condemn violence against civilian populations without reservation. It places the greatest emphasis on condemning attacks against Muslims, particularly against Mosques. Unfortunately, I can not accept the fatwa at face value.

Cherry Picking: quote out of context

Beware of trickery: quoting the Qur'an out of context to distort the meaning of an ayeah, giving it a false application.
This occurs on page 52 of the description & summary where, writing about the terrorists, this citation is made:

The Holy Qur’an has vividly described them in this verse:
“It is those whose entire struggle is wasted in worldly life, but they presume they are doing very good works.” (Al-Qur’an, 18: 104)

In fact, that verse describes disbelievers; Jews & Christians. Observe the context. [Hilali & Khan quoted, linked to Pickthall, Shakir & Yusuf Ali; links below to Hilali & Khan and ten parallel translations Emphasis added for clarity.]

18:100. And on that Day We shall present Hell to the disbelievers, plain to view,

18:101. (To) Those whose eyes had been under a covering from My Reminder (this Qur'ân), and who could not bear to hear (it).

18:102. Do then those who disbelieve think that they can take My slaves [i.e., the angels, Allâh's Messengers, 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), etc.] as Auliyâ' (lords, gods, protectors, etc.) besides Me? Verily, We have prepared Hell as an entertainment for the disbelievers (in the Oneness of Allâh Islâmic Monotheism).

18:103. Say (O Muhammad ): "Shall We tell you the greatest losers in respect of (their) deeds?

18:104. "Those whose efforts have been wasted in this life while they thought that they were acquiring good by their deeds!

18:105. "They are those who deny the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of their Lord and the Meeting with Him (in the Hereafter). So their works are in vain, and on the Day of Resurrection, We shall not give them any weight.

18:106. "That shall be their recompense, Hell; because they disbelieved and took My Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and My Messengers by way of jest and mockery.

Hilali & Khan
Qur'an Browser

Al-Taqeyya

On page 33, a new section begins, entitled "THE QUESTIONS THAT SPRING TO MIND AND THEIR BRIEF ANSWERS"

Q: The first question in this connection that concerns all relates to use of force to spread beliefs: is it lawful for a group or organisation to use force to promote and put into effect their own creed and beliefs in the name of reforming others’ beliefs and ideologies, presuming themselves to be on the right path? Does Islam allow, somehow, the killing of people because of ideological differences, looting their wealth and properties and destroying mosques, religious places and shrines?.

A: Islam is a religion of peace and safety that champions love and harmony in society. According to Islamic teachings, only such a person will be called a Muslim at whose hands the lives and properties of all innocent Muslims and non-Muslims remain safe and unhurt. The sanctity of human life and its protection occupies a fundamental place in Islamic law. Taking anyone's life for nothing is an act that is forbidden and unlawful. Rather, in some cases, it amounts to infidelity.[...] [Emphasis added, spelling original.]

Is it lawful for Islam to use force to promote and establish itself'; to make it superior over all other religions? Let us consult Reliance of the Traveller, the handbook of Shari'ah.

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) ). [Emphasis & link added.]

Does Islam allow killing people because they are not Muslims and seizing their property? Once again, we turn first to Shari'ah for the answer. Book O, Chapter 9, Section 25 lists eight duties of subordinate rulers. The last item in the list is of interest to us.

O25.9

-8- and if the area has a border adjacent to enemy lands, an eighth duty arises, namely to undertake jihad against enemies, dividing the spoils of battle among combatants, and setting aside fifth (def: o10.3) for deserving recipients.

Of course that could only refer to established enemies of Islam who have been harassing & attacking Muslims, right? Wrong!

O9.1The Obligatory Character of Jihad

[...] 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. [...]

Muslims have an annually recurring communal obligation to attack disbelievers even though they are in their own countries, peacefully attending their own domestic affairs. Allow killing people and taking their property? No, it is required, not allowed.

According to the Sheikh, " Islam is a religion of peace...at whose hands the lives and properties of all ...innocent non-Muslims remain safe and unhurt". The truth is that Allah issued imperatives to wage jihad against pagans until resistance ceases and Allah has a monopoly; against Jews & Christians until they are subjugated and make annual extortion payments. When we read Surahs al-Anfal & at-Taubah, we learn that Islam is permanent war.

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.

So all innocent people remain safe and secure in their property? Caution! Words spoken by Muslims do not mean what you want them to mean, their meaning is assigned by the Muslims who speak them. Innocent means Muslim. If you are not Muslim, you are a rebel against Allah, waging war against him.

Another question and answer, found on pages 36 & 37 respectively, provides more proof that the fatwa is malignant maundery.

Q: The third question arises: does Islam offer clear commands on the sanctity of human life? Is it lawful to
kidnap and assassinate foreign delegates and innocent and peaceful non-Muslim citizens to avenge the
injustices and disruption of the non-Muslim global powers?

A: The importance Islam lays on the sanctity and dignity of human life can be gauged from the fact that
Islam does not allow indiscriminate killing even when Muslim armies are engaged in war against enemy
troops. The killing of children, women, the old, infirm, religious leaders and traders is strictly prohibited. Nor
can those who surrender their arms, confine themselves to their homes and seek shelter of anyone
be killed. The public cannot be massacred. Likewise, places of worship, buildings, crops and even trees
cannot be destroyed. On the one hand, there is a clear set of Islamic laws based on extreme discretion, and on
the other, there are people who invoke the name of Islam to justify the indiscriminate killing of people,
children, and women everywhere, without any distinction of religion or identity. It is a pity that such
barbaric people still refer to their activities as Jihad.

Lets see what Muhammad, the founder of Islam said about the sanctity of human life.

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."

Our blood and property are not sacred to Muslims and we have no rights until we become Muslim. Now let us examine the proscription on killing women and children; surely it must be founded on morality?

Muslim Book 019, Number 4294:
It has been reported from Sulaiman b. Buraid through his father that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him to fear Allah and to be good to the Muslims who were with him. He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war, do not embezzle the spoils; do not break your pledge; and do not mutilate (the dead) bodies; do not kill the children. [...]

Note the acts which would defile and profane a holy war; two of them are relevant to our quest for truth.

• Make a holy war
• do not embezzle the spoils
• do not kill the children

What do embezzlement and killing children have in common? Our first hint will come from Shari'ah.

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.

Is it clear to you yet? If not, Ibn Taimiyyah has the final clue for you, from The Religious and Moral Doctrine On Jihad.

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].

Some [jurists] are of the opinion that all of them may be killed, on the mere ground that they are unbelievers, but they make an exception for women and children since they constitute property for Muslims.

I emphasized the most critical clause in case there might be some readers with limited comprehension skills. The proscription on killing women and children is economic, not moral.

In the matter of those who surrendered; the Sheikh asserts that they must not be killed. Muhammad's excellent companions reveal the truth.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 280:

Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:

When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad's judgment, Allah's Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah's Apostle said (to the Ansar), "Stand up for your leader." Then Sad came and sat beside Allah's Apostle who said to him. "These people are ready to accept your judgment." Sad said, "I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners." The Prophet then remarked, "O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah."

So, what did Muhammad do?

Sunan 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.

They surrendered after a long siege, Muhammad decapitated them and threw them into a trench, then he did the same to their adolescent sons. Can you say genocide? Can you recognize the fact that, like all Muslims, the learned Sheikh is a liar; that his fatwa is malignant manure? If not, then do the nation a favor, burn your voter registration card.

Sphere: Related Content