Words for the Week -- On Jihad

This is awful. There is no allah there is only God and His son Jesus Christ who died on the cross for all of our sins and rose from the grave. He gives you every breth you breath. GLORY TO GOD ON THE HIGHEST!!! TEAR DOWN THE DOME OF THE ROCK!!! LET THE TEMPLE BE IN ITS RIGHTFUL PLACE!!!!!

It is so sad to witness on this board that so many people are so completely brainwashed and deluded by their faith that they cannot see that any man who murders, rapes, pillages and has sex with children is not a messenger sent from god, but is in fact a dangerous conman.

HL

According to the Bible, this is how Jesus dealt with temptation:

Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. After fasting for forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”

Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’ ”

Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple, “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written: “ ‘He will command his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’ “

Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’ “

Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendour. “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”

Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’ “

Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

(Matthew 4:1-11)

Dear HL,
You're repeating yourself. See the thread on God's Forgiveness.

And no - I'm not a missionary, not that it's a bad thing. Some missionaries are quite lovely people.

HL, "We will have a bottle of poison ready for you and see what happens dear faithful missionary when you take a swig."

When Jesus was tempted by the devil at the end of His forty day fast, Jesus said it is not right to test God. So taking a swig from the bottle of poison to please HL's sadism would belong to the category of testing God.

God does not need a death squad to spread His message of love. Christians have been warned to be on guard against death squads operating in God's name! Christians are asked to judge people by their fruits. HL offers poison to one he imagines is a faithful Christian missionary - now does it take a rocket scientist to figure out what that means?

Qasim Omar, or whoever you are,

I know by the words you use that you are a missionary, a lying, slandering and dishonest missionary at that. But then again, most of you are of that kind of character: lowly and debase. You are a disgrace to your religion which says "do not bear false witness" which you do plenty of in here. The prophet Muhammad was of great character and I am glad and proud to be a Muslim and that I am not member of that primitive religion you subscibe to. By the way, shouldn't you be somewehere in Africa or something? And you when you get back, we will have a test of faith for you to take.

Jesus said: "And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues;

they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them"

We will have a bottle of poison ready for you and see what happens dear faithful missionary when you take a swig. Afetr all, Jesus commands it. What do you say?

God speaks of the prophet as follows:

Quran 68: Thou art not, by the Grace of thy Lord, mad or possessed. Nay, verily for thee is a Reward unfailing:

And thou (standest) on an exalted standard of character.

Soon wilt thou see, and they will see, Which of you is afflicted with madness. Verily it is thy Lord that knoweth best, which (among men) hath strayed from His Path: and He knoweth best those who receive (true) Guidance.

So hearken not to those who deny (the Truth).

Their desire is that thou shouldst be pliant: so would they be pliant. Heed not the type of despicable men,- ready with oaths,

A slanderer, going about with calumnies,(Habitually) hindering (all)good, transgressing beyond bounds, deep in sin.

Greg Colman wrote:
Ross,
Sorry to read your post has been removed. If it has been removed, then it is incompatible with America's right of Freedom of Speech.

Greg,

I'm not surprised, this is typical of what is happening all over world i.e. muslims scurrying to defend their faith on the internet by whatever means possible. These include:
Trying to shutdown anti islamic sites, DOS attacks, Banning members in muslim forums who critisize islam, complaining to the admin's of sites like washington post to get comments removed etc.

For centuries muslims managed to hide the truth about islam and the evil deeds of Mohammed by issuing death sentences against people who tried to expose islam. But now things are changing their desperation is showing, the foundation of this evil cult is being chipped away by every post that exposes it. Thanks to the information highway millions now know the true nature of islam and its wicked prophet.

The Information Superhighway and the Death of Mohammedanism.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=20936

Ross,
Sorry to read your post has been removed. If it has been removed, then it is incompatible with America's right of Freedom of Speech.

Perhaps the truth enclosed was too much for some people to bear. Censorship is not what I expected from Washington Post, though.

God Bless America.

To the owner of this blog: please don't delete my post.

Posted on April 24, 2007 12:30

Deb Chatterjee wrote:
I was too quick my adulations. The Sayyid Qutb stuff which aroused my admiration was from Ross and not Pamela. Ross, a wonderful job ! Keep it up buddy !

However, Pamela has truly been busted by Ross. Anyway, Pamela is still honest with her quotes by as Ansar points out she maybe guilty of "bidaah" in that she is choosy on what makes her happy and comfortable with Islam. That, again is deception as we know.

Deb,
My busting post has been removed !!!

Pamela wrote:

Further, I have repeated time and time again, which obviously isn't sufficient for Ross, that, yes, there are verses which pertain to war, from the stage of the Prophet's mission. After the community was secure from attack, a different paradigm was ennuciated -- that of intercommunal harmony, intermarriage, shared meals, etc.

Finally, half those sources, Ross, are obscure, never even heard of by Muslims, half are snippets that distort the meaning, and so on. Again, I've dealt with this in previous threads (particularly the one slay them where you find them which cutting totally distorts the meaning of the passage which goes on to say, but if they cease hostilities, then you do too.)

Only one question:
I see you making references to me (2nd comment on this page) but strangely my post has disappeared, have you any idea why it was taken off ? or is this some new type of jihad ;)

I address this to the America public reading this thread. It is clear that Muslims consider a man who killed, murdered, made war on innocent villages and caravans, enslaved innocent women and children, traded slaves, permitted rape of female captives, forced women whos husbands he killed to 'marry' him, kept sex slaves, and had sex with a minor to be a man worthy of being a prophet of God.

This man also committed genocide and ethnic-cleansing. The reason why Arabia became 100% Muslim in his lifetime was because he purged Arabia of all those who disbelieved him. He made war on them, enslaved some and drove out others.

Is such a man worthy of being a prophet of God?

Is such a God that chose this man as his prophet worthy of being worshipped?

In the Quran when the word Jihad (or its derivation Jahidi) is used in relation to disbelievers it always means violence. Muhammad told his followers to qatiloo (i.e. fight for the purpose of killing) all disbelievers who refuse to submit to Islam or pay the Jizya in submission and humiliation.

That is why Islam spread throughout the Middle East and much of Africa and Asia, and attempted to spread to Europe.

Please consider this saying of Muhammad the founder of the Religion of Peace:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform a that, then they save their lives an property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah." Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24.

This is the Jihad that the Muslims have in mind for you.

Frank says; "hey jovezy - you are pretty funny. not relevant but funny."

Now he's an authority on relevancy too! And a condescending one at that...the irony!

I guess I am wrong, but I thought this was intended to be a forum for discussion, not the Frank Collins Tired Lecture Circuit.

By the way, PLEASE keep c/c/p-ing the same tired garbage over and over, I don't have a record player anymore and I miss the sound of broken records!

how about islam now reject those portions of the koran that demand hate, torture, holding for ransom, murder and forced conversions. that would be a great starting point for dialogue.
wow, what a concept - islam shows that it is for peace and renounces those parts of the koran that demand hate for jews, christians, hindu's, and now even rejects forced conversions.
and here is a really rad idea - islam now protects the rights of christians and jews and hindu's and all non islamic people to practice their respective religions and do it in islamic countries. hey - lets take peace one step further - islamic countries now allow missionaries to openly seek converts in islamic countries. after all islam can do every one of those things in the western countries, so as a step for peace commit yourselves to peace in all of its forms.

I think we need a new question. How about comparing the mindset of violence and intolerance with the capability for open-minded conversation?
And open it up to all mindsets, both religious and secular.
How about it, editors?

Might I also add that they came from one of the most hateful sites I have ever come across on the internet, whose name was mentioned earlier, it doesnt deserve repeatition. Pamela mentioned it, anyone who goes to their forum can clearly see the vile spewed for 1.5billion people. Its unfortunate how people can be filled with so much hatred, however Islam teaches us to love God\'s creation, I pray God may guide these people, Ameen.

Dear Pamela and Victoria, one can clearly see your posts are logical, concise and coherant. The 2 of you posses much more knowledge of Islam than the hords of people rushing here with the only purpose of insulting Islam and Muslims and acting in the most unhumane manner.

Those people clearly are not out for the truth, rather to insult, bicker and fight. The Qur\'an tells us of such people, they will not believe as you can see, they refuse to accept your facts on Islam and keep repeating their misconceptions and deliberate lies.

Great job in refuting them, but if they keep repeating the same nonsense, its a good idea to ignore them, readers of this page can already see the huge difference betwen your logic and the hate spewed by anti-Muslims.

Kind regards.

First of all the doctrinal definition of Islam is :the pure and total submission to God .This means that even christians ,jewishes ,budhists ,bahais and zoroastrians ...and so on are muslims .The difference between them is their time-chapter ,time-revelation their social context,following chronological logic suitable to human being capacity of understanding divine truth and transcanding our material world.

Second ,the successive God revelations means but one thing ,that human being is not perfect ,that he/she is in pertual evolution through perpetual and graduated messages but identical in their spiritual dimension which is the religion Nature or the religion Quintessence,the God Law.

Third ,graduated messages means an adequat language from the prophet of each stp to the community and the people.Mohameds' social context is among the hostile ,violent and terrific ones .Some social analyst think that fanatism and intolerance were KORAICHITS creation .Side to the mahometan community permanent agressions ,Mohamed waited until God ordered him to declare Djihad .But Djihad at that time meant the protection of muslim community,no more, even with arms as a last recourse.It was also a faith proof and a faith act from believers done in detachment and meditation ,empty of any particle of revenge or hate.

Mohamed with the God will and wisdom knew to overtake this hostile period symbolised by the peacefully opening of Mekka (ex Koraich).this peaceful atitude continued until his ascent.

After his ascent, problems of power emerged that led to Muhamed's tight friends and believers assassination and after that others .Other periods came that of human peace ,civilization construction,shining science interrupted some waves of fanatism and intolerance .But this are problems of muslims not islam.

Remember islam means pure and total submission to God.

In the name of God and in the name of all religions ,Peace on you .

Thank you

hey jovezy - you are pretty funny. not relevant but funny.

its not the boards we worry about - its the ral world. i notice that pam did not reject those parts of the koran that call for forced conversions and/or murder.
and i like that victoria attempts to fight facts of islamic terror with words of - who is angry here. since when is stating facts of islamic murder throughout history being angry? verbal violence against musleums - that one was great - i loved that double swpeak. so arguing facts with an islamic is verbal violence. the eternal victim speaks.
ok vickie - here is you challenge. specifically reject those portions of the koran that call for hating jews and christians, that reject spreading islam with violence. not generally but specifically. dont give me that islamo speak - we reject all improper violence. that statement, which i have seen in the past does not apply to islamic murder against non islamics as violence to spread islam is not improper, it is specifically condoned. so here, i will give you the verse's and you show us how peaceful you are and you and pam specifically reject them for all times, and call for islam to publically reject them and call on all islamics to punish those who do not reject them. i wont hold my breath. and please, call it a verbal attack when i quote the koran, i love it.
The Hadith No. 284, The Muslim, volume one, says that any Jew or Christian, who heard of Muhammad but did not convert to Islam, and died in disbelief, would rot in hell! Thus Islam withdraws from all Jews and Christians the right to believe in their faiths, and pratice them as such.
more?
"The unbelievers of the People of the Book and the idolators shall be in the Fire of Hell therein dwelling for ever; those are the worst of creatures. But those who believe, and do righteous deeds, those are the best of creatures..." (XCVIII: The Clear Sign: 5)
more?
Here those Jews and Christians, who spurn Islam, have been lumped together with the idolators such as the Hindus, and classified as 'the worst of creatures'. Therefore the Koran commands:
"O believers, take not as your friends those of them, who were given the Book before you, and the unbelievers, who take your religion in mockery and as a sport..." (V: The Table: 60)
more?
"The true believers say: Has not God ordered a chapter that commands the holy war" (Sura 47:22); or elsewhere: "Kill the idolaters wherever you find them, imprison them, besiege them, ambush them" (Sura 9:5); and, "Make war on unbelievers" (Sura 9:29). "When you come upon unbelievers, massacre them, tighten the bands of the captives that you will have taken. Then you will set them free, or you will release them for a ransom" (Sura 8:57).
more?
"To Allah, there are no animals viler than those who do not believe and remain unbelievers" (Sura 8:57). That is why it is necessary to Islamize them by force and by humiliation. And those who resist Islam and its founder must be chastised, according to the Koran: "Here is the fate of those who fight Allah and his messenger: you will put them to death or you will make them suffer the torture of the cross; you will cut their hands and their feet alternately. They will be driven from the country" (Sura 5:37).
more?
"Do not display cowardice, and do not call the infidels to peace when you are superior to them" (Sura 47:22). THIS ALLOWS THEM TO MAKE PEACE SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE WAR AGAIN LATER.
more?
4.89": They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

"4.90": Except those who reach a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people; and if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they should have certainly fought you; therefore if they withdraw from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not given you a way against them.

"4.91": You will find others who desire that they should be safe from you and secure from their own people; as often as they are sent back to the mischief they get thrown into it headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear authority.

PLEASE SHOW US THAT YOU ARE FOR PEACE REJECT THESE VERSES.

If you try to understand relegion through an earthly pragmatic logic and reduce providential history to human events you would indeed miss everything about relegion. what I mean by that is, there is provedential and a spertual law that governs and takes over human law from time to time, espicialy during the course of astablishing a relegion, you will find noumeres examples of that in evry relegion especialy in christianity and even in the jewish faith as will. in other word Gods well some time takes over human well and drive an event for his own purpose. and that purpose could be somthing we can understand and it could be somthing we may never understand. God said in the Qur'an "most people are without understanding." So let us all seak a better understanding.

i would like to make note that i just finished my afternoon prayer- so that is my state of mind in this composition-

also this happens 5 times a day, so at least 5 times a day i have this reasonable attitude(however i am inclined to believe the reason overlaps from prayer to prayer)

Muslims comprise the most diverse population of any grouping on the planet, yet people still persist in believing fox news perceptions-

id say the proof is in the pudding-

witness the very apparent examples on these boards-

where do you see angry and abusive muslims here?

do you see muslims name calling and castigating others?
acting impolitely, judging others, slandering others?

id say there is a dispraportionate amount of reasonable response to overt aggression here-

and yet it doesnt strike anyone as indicative of islamic manners and behavior?

while i see a preponderance of verbal violence against muslims-

is this verbal violence and abuse answered back in reciprocal manner?

there are even those who mislead others by using arabic names, and then propagating outright hatred and vitriol-

has anyone seen a corollary malice in return?

or even anger?

if islam is filled with out of control emotional and anger filled adherents, why dont we see any evidence of it here?

people respond with outright irrational emotions controlling their every word- but the muslims remain reasoned.

it is a phenomenon that certainly deserves mention and attention.

peace all

I have been somewhat reluctant to post on this week's topic, because I have felt it was unnecessarily inflammatory, but the direct back and forth in this section has induced me to comment.

I agree with Pamela that the adherents of a religion should have the right to understand their faith in more than one way.

When you look at the great saints that have arisen out of the Muslim faith, it is clear that you CAN interpret the teachings of Islam in such a way that you transcend the world of violence and limited thinking. As examples of this, consider the teachings of Rumi and Rabia. You can google them if you wish.

It is true that some great Muslim saints ended up being martyred by those who thought themselves to be more correct in their beliefs.

Pamela. Your positions page clarifies your thoughts on a number of interesting topics. I'm glad I found it. Best wishes.

http://www.pktaylor.com/positions.htm

pam its not how you understand your faith. you want to pretend that you do see violence there, then come out and say, specifically, that those passages that demand hate, murder, and forced conversions, are wrong and should never be followed by anyone who says they are islamic. but you will not do that. if you did that your fellow peaceful loving islamics would put you on the "kill on sight" list. so lets pretend you are not one of those that reject the words of hate and murder, then there are still hundreds of millions that dont agree with you and in fact there are even more who stand and cheer those that do disagree with you.
i have given enough lists of murders and torture by islamics - over 1,000 incidents in 2 years. but how about when the pope said it the part of the koran that said spread islam through violence was evil. millions came and marched, defending islams right to forece conversions, islams right to kill anyone that left islam for another religion, and in fact demanding the death of the pope. and there is 20,000,000 million being lead by a madman in iran right now that wants to kill all the jews becasue the koran requires it. and the taliban - and a few more million - supported bin laden in his attacks on america and the western culture. wow we are already over 40 million right now. and we havn't even got to pakistan, the other stand, islamics in india, syria, jordan, israel, gyppt, the sudan, just about all of north africia, and east africia, and lets not forget chad and ce3ntral africia.
so other than you, who else is there? i sure dont see them marching for christians rights to practive their religion in islamic countries, and definitely not for the jews to do it. so exactly where are they?

Pamela Vs. other posters!

Fight of the century! I put 2,000 on Pamela.

Problem with Moslems is . They cannot decide whether Mo was a prophet or a military commander. He spend most of his time planning raids on his enemies. Deception is the art of war, as Mo would say.

How can, so called man of God sell women and children in slavery and kill people for wealth?

No, I didn't get busted. What you see here, and what happens on every post by a Muslim panelist, is certain individuals are trying to argue that there is only one way to understand Islam, to tell me that I cannot understand my faith the way I (and countless others) do in fact understand it. They are trying to say that just because some Muslims have understood things in one particular way, all Muslims must therefore understand it in the same way. Which is patently false.

Further, most of the 'information' posted against Islam is either so obscure that the vast majority of Muslims have never heard of it, derived from repudiated sources, or are snippets designed to distort the intent and literal meaning of the passages they were taken from.

Further, as I've said in various threads herein... there was a period of time when the Muslim community, and the Prohpet, were under attack, and fighting for their lives. Yes. This is acknowledged. And I will be honest. If China or Canada or Iran invaded America tomorrow, I would take up arms in America's defense, so I'm ok with defensive war. However, the final stage was one of harmony and co-existence. This is clear from the Qur'an, whether or not the people posting snippets that relate to that earlier period or not wish to acknowledge it.

Further, what right does anyone have to say Muslims must remain stuck in one way of understanding? Would you have said the same to the Catholics at the height of the Inquisition? Would you have said the same to Shintoist kamikaze fighters? I hope not. Rather, I would hope that people would support those who are trying to spread more the more humane teachings of Islam (or other religions.)

I was too quick my adulations. The Sayyid Qutb stuff which aroused my admiration was from Ross and not Pamela. Ross, a wonderful job ! Keep it up buddy !

However, Pamela has truly been busted by Ross. Anyway, Pamela is still honest with her quotes by as Ansar points out she maybe guilty of "bidaah" in that she is choosy on what makes her happy and comfortable with Islam. That, again is deception as we know.

But, still Pamela congratulations. Maybe you will realize that all on faithfreedom are not fools.

Good luck to you.

Pamela:

May Allah be pleased with you. What you have posted about Jihad is entirely agreeable, but as Qasim pointed out that you are just focussing on the "inspiring" verses, and not the really "violent" ones.

Also, I fail to see why you chose to omit the monograph of Syed Abul Ala Maudoodi JIHAD IN ISLAM and in particular page 6 of the 36 page monograph. Particularly, the last paragraph from Sayyid Qutb is quite disturbing, admittedly.

However, your attempt is still honest and may you continuen to be honest in future. My fears about Islam being an inherently violent religion are all confirmed.

Thank you Pamela.

the islamic world got as large as it did through violence and murder, not peacefully. i will not give you hundeds of lines of recent murders, but here is a history lesson about islam. but you have to read this article - its great.
AND ITS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT EVERYTHING THAT WAS DONE WAS DONE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE DEMANDS OF THE KORAN AND MOHO! they were not just incidents where bad people sought to enforce a god religion through violent means. they were bad people who intended to force a violent and hate filed religion on anyone they could and use of violence was not just condoned, IT WAS DEMANDED.
what would you get if you tool all of the guns away from islamics in israel, PEACE! what would you get if you took all guns away from jews in israel? MILLIONS OF DEAD JEWS. now on with the show.
Muhammad's life is a testament
of ceaseless raids and plundering expeditions of highway caravans and waging
wars against the infidel (non-Muslims). He himself had orchestrated more than
one hundred raids, plundering expeditions and wars. Even just before his death,
he was in the planning of organizing an expedition, but he fell sick suddenly,
from which he never recovered. By this time, he had already extirpated all the
Jewish settlements around Medina by means of mass slaughter and enslavement
(Banu Quraiza) and mass exile (Banu Nadir and Banu Qainuqa). He had also
launched expeditions against the Jewish tribes in far-flung places, namely the
prosperous Jewish settlement of Khaybar. In his death bed one of his last wishes
was: “Let there be no other religion except Islam”. This wish was carried out to
fruition by his immediate successors, notably Caliph Abu Bakar and Omar.
The fact is: the kind of terror and violence perpetrated by Prophet Muhammad
have little or no parallel amongst the terrorism and violence of today’s Islamic
terrorists. The extermination of the Jews from Medina requires another mention
here. Consider the case of Muhammad’s raiding the Jewish enclave of Banu
Quraiza, because they did not join the Muslim army when the Meccans attacked the
Muslims in the famous battle of the Trench, which, the Quraiza tribe was
allegedly obligated to do because of a covenant of mutual protection signed
years earlier. The first reason of unwillingness of the Quraiza people to join
the battle that Muhammad started was that the Jewish people were sick and tired
of such violent activities and blood-baths, raiding and plundering expeditions
and fighting wars one after another, which became the prominent feature of the
Medina citizens' life once Muslims became powerful. Secondly, the Mecca army in
this battle was too powerful to ensure a decisive victory, had it not been for
the trenches Muhammad had dug – thanks to idea given to Muhammad by Salman the
Persian from his Persian experience of war. After a 25-day seize of the Jewish
enclave the Muslims, the Quraiza tribe surrendered unconditionally and pleaded
with Muhammad to let them go into exile. Instead, Muhammad decided to slaughter
all the males of weapon-bearing age, around 600 to 900 in numbers, captured
their women and children as slaves and took possession of their homes,
properties and farms as spoils of war and distributed them amongst the Muslims
who had participated in this genocide. The world is yet to witness an example of
similar barbaric atrocity perpetrated by today’s Islamic terrorists, though we
can be absolutely certain that today’s Islamist jihadists ardently crave to
match their Prophet’s examples.
Another incidence which requires mentioning again here is Muhammad’s victorious
entry into the city of Mecca, his paternal hometown. Upon his entry into the
city, he destroyed all the temples and deities which his ancestors had
worshipped for centuries. Soon after his invasion of Mecca, the Prophet sent his
general Khalid bin Walid to destroy all the pagan temples of the neighboring
tribes of Mecca. Khalid reached the Jazima tribe and asked them to say, “We are
Muslims”. But they said, “We are Sabians” – whereupon Khalid slaughtered the
whole tribe. The Jazima tribe people had never given any troubles to the
Muslims. Is there a parallel of such utter barbarity amongst terror acts of
today's Muslim extremists? No, there isn’t. The truth is: by the end of his 22
years of religious campaign, Muhammad had depopulated the entire Southern Arabia
of the infidel pagans, Jews, Christians and Sabians etc. through mass slaughter,
enslavement and forced conversion and mass exile. These acts of violence,
cruelty and barbarity of the Prophet have no parallel amongst violent acts of
today’s Islamic terrorists. Of course, throughout the Islamic world, there are
scattered incidences of violence and attacks on non-Muslims’ homes, churches and
temples and incidences of raping the infidel women. But there is no incidence in
which women of an entire community being captured as sex-slaves, all
weapon-bearing males of a community put to summary execution or an entire
village or community of the Kaffirs sent to exile.
The acts of violence and terrorism did not just disappear with the death of the
Prophet but was redoubled by his immediate successors; namely, Abu Bakr, Omar
and Othman et al. who were Muhammad’s closest friends. By the time of third
Caliph Othman’s rule, all remaining Jews and Christians of entire Arabian
peninsula were forcibly converted, expelled or slain which fulfilled Prophet’s
death-bed wish that no second religion remain in the holy land of Arabia.
Immediately after Muhammad’s death, many Muslims who were forced to accept Islam
wanted to leave Islam. Prophet’s first biographer, ibn Ishak writes, “When the
apostle was dead, most of the Muslims thought of withdrawing from Islam and had
made up their mind to do”. Many tribes rose in rejection of Islam, turned to
their tribal leaders and refused to pay taxes. The immediate task of the first
Caliph, Abu Bakr, was to bring these fierce and intractable tribes into
submission. Under the command of fierce Khalid ibn Walid, a bitter and
sanguinary battle, termed the Wars of the Apostasy (ridda) followed. The revolt
was cruelly suppressed and the recalcitrant tribes were forced back to the fold
of Islam.
The fanaticism and barbarity associated with these conquering expeditions need a
sampling here. The kind of fierce intolerance and fanaticism being inspired by
Prophet Muhammad amongst his followers have no parallel in the annals of any
other religion. Under his command, his followers were ready to kill even their
own fathers and brothers, if given approval by the Prophet. Prophet’s biographer
Hisahm al-Kalbi notes that the son of the great hypocrite Abduallah ibn Obayi
had begged for prophet’s permission to kill his own father and bring the head to
the prophet. But Abdullah was an influential man and the prophet didn’t dare.
According to Ibn-Ishak, in July 624, being increasingly exasperated with the
Jews, the prophet ordered: “Kill any Jew whoever falls into your power.”
Thereupon a Muslim convert named Muhaysa fell upon a rich Jewish merchant who
happened to be on the same way and killed him, despite the fact that he belonged
to his own tribe. When his elder brother, still a Jew, scolded him for killing
someone of his own tribe, Muhaysa replied, “By Allah, if Muhammad commanded me
to kill you also, I would have cut off your head”. So impressed was the Jewish
man by his brother’s conviction to Islam that he immediately converted to Islam.
The prophet’s fanatic inspiration to intolerance and violence compelled Voltaire
to comment: Such conducts cannot be defended by any person, ‘unless superstition
has choked all the light of reason from him.’
The violent fanaticism, inspired by the Prophet, was carried forward with
ruthless zeal by his immediate followers. Khalid ibn Walid, who fought on the
enemy side in the battle of Ohud but later embraced Islam, became one of the
most blood-thirsty and brutal of conquerors, if judged even by the standard of
his day. Yet his cruelty and rapacity were and still are greatly extolled by the
Muslims, honoring him with the title of “the Sword of Allah” (Sayif Allah).
The utter barbarity of Khalid was displayed in May, 633, when he defeated the
Zoroastrian Persians at the Battle of Olayis in Southern Iraq (between Hira and
Basra). For two days, his soldiers rounded up the great multitude of prisoners
and fugitives, who were then herded on to a dry river bed and were butchered
until it became a crimson stream. The place thereafter proudly bore the title of
‘the River of Blood’. Abu Bakr, the caliph was overjoyed when the news of
victory and massacre reached him.
On the barbarity of Khalid, Benjamin Walker writes:
A wine-lover and lustful debaucher, Khalid took sickly sadistic delight in
beheading a defeated chieftain on the battle-field, selecting his wife (if
young) or daughter and celebrating his nuptials with her on the spot soaked with
the blood of the victim (father/husband of the bride). [Walker, Foundations of
Islam, p. 316]
Before Muslims conquered Jerusalem, the scattered communities of Jews and pagans
lived in harmony along with the Christians. When Caliph Omar conquered
Jerusalem, much venerated in the Koran and a holy place in Islam, in 637 – the
Jewish temples and Christian Churches were razed to the ground and widespread
looting and pillaging was unleashed. The Patriarch Sophronius of Jerusalem
(634-638), who witnessed spread of Islam in the Arabia and the fall of Jerusalem
with his own eyes, described the Muslim invaders as “godless barbarians” who
“burnt churches, destroyed monasteries, profaned the Crosses and blasphemed
against Christ and the church.” The following year, thousands died of famine
resulting from the destruction and pillage by the Muslim conquerors of
Jerusalem. [Ibn Warraq, Why I am not a Muslim, p. 219]
The invading Muslims destroyed the main Jewish temple (Solomon Temple) and Omar
laid, in its place, the foundation of the prestigious al-Aqsa mosque with his
own hands. He declared a decree that Jews and Christians could practice religion
only in the confines of their churches and homes. No new churches would be
built, no conversion should be made, crosses should not be exhibited in their
churches and no public display of their faith should be made. These rather
benevolent treatments were accorded to the Jews and Christians under the
privileged term of the Dhimmis (Zimmis) as accorded to the people of the Book in
the Koran. Yet, repression and discrimination, attacks on pilgrims, raid and
ransacking of the monasteries and the destruction of the places of worship of
the non-Muslims continued.
The barbaric tradition of atrocity set in motion by the Prophet in the form a
command for incessant Jihad against the Kaffirs in the Koran, continued well
into the late period of the Ottoman caliphate. Even the highly magnanimous
caliphs, like Harun-ur-Rashid and his son al-Mamun were thoroughly brutal in
dealing with the Jews, Christians and pagans. The great caliph al-Mamun of the
golden age of Islam, who instituted the heretic rationalistic Mutazili doctrine
and non-divine nature of the Koran as state policy, too, was extremely harsh
when it comes to dealing with the non-Muslim subjects. Under his rule in the 9th
century, the pagans of Harran had to choose between Islam and death. Such
barbaric tools of forced conversion of the infidels continued well into the late
Ottoman period. Tavernier, the 17th century French traveler, describes how in
Anatolia “Everyday there are numerous Greeks forced to become Turks”.
Certain Western authors and historians believe that after an early onslaught of
Islamic conquests lasting until about the mid-eighth century, violence subsided
and relative calm and peace prevailed throughout the Islamic world for the
subsequent centuries [Saunders, J.J. A History of Medieval Islam. London:
Routledge, 1965; p79]. In truth, such claims of existence of centuries of peace
fly in the face of it. In reality, no period of the Islamic domination did
ensure a peaceful life to the non-Muslims subjects – thanks to Muslims’ Jihadi
campaigns in various forms, either by the state or by the Muslim mobs. Yet, some
desperate minority of Muslim rulers were tolerant towards non-Muslim subjects in
defiance of the Islamic injunctions. Islamic terror, as was unleashed by the
Prophet, comprised of unprovoked attack on the unwarned and unprepared infidel
territories, exiling or killing the adult male prisoners, taking the females and
children as captives (beautiful and young women were used in the harem as
sex-slaves, children for raising as Muslims and older females for sale), looting
and plundering the infidels of their valuable properties and assets, imposing
Jiziyah and of course, destroying the infidels’ religious institutions. Ibn
Warraq, in “Why I am not a Muslims” [p. 219-240] has listed the Islamic
atrocities and violence against the infidels of various sorts which I will
summarized here.
7th Century
After Prophet Muhammad’s emigration from Mecca to Medina in 622, the exiling and
extermination of 3 major Jewish tribes of Medina by 628, has been described
above. In 630, Muhammad marched into Mecca, mercilessly captured, destroyed the
most sacred pagan temple of Ka’ba and established the Islamic rule there. The
pagan inhabitants were given a choice between death and Islam. To save lives,
the pagans had no choice but to accept Islam. On the same day, Khalid ibn
Walid’s massacre of the entire Jezima tribe for not accepting Islam has already
been discussed. Khalid ibn Walid, upon command of Caliph Abu Bakr, launched the
blood-letting wars of the apostasy (Ridda) to submit those, who deserted Islam
immediately after Muhammad’s death, back to the faith. The utter barbarity of
Khalid Ibn Walid against the defeated the Zoroastrian Persians at the Battle of
Olayis in Southern Iraq in May 633, whereby he created what is famously called
the River of Death has been discussed before.
After completing extermination/exiling the Jews of Medina in 628, Muhammad
launched a campaign against the wealthy and prosperous Jewish community of
Khaybar. He ordered his charges to destroy all the Jewish temples as they came
across. Having defeated the community, he tortured the chief of tribe Kinana by
setting fire on his chest to find out the whereabouts of his treasures. After
extracting the location of the ensconced treasure, Kinana was beheaded, the
treasures were looted, and Kinana’s wife Safiyah was rendered as his share of
the booty. He married and took her to bed on the same night her husband’s dead
body awaited burial on the next day. Incidentally, Safiyah’s father belonged to
the Banu Quraiza tribe of Medina whom Muhammad had beheaded earlier.
In the Muslim campaign of 634, the entire region between Gaza and Caesarea was
devastated and four thousand peasants, comprising of Christians, Jews and
Samaritans, who were simply defending their lands, were massacred. In 637, the
Victorian Muslim army’s march into Jerusalem, with Caliph Omar at the lead, and
the accompanying destruction of the synagogues and burning of the churches,
desecration of the Crosses and setting in the Dhimmi laws of submission to the
Jews and Christians of the Holy Land have already been mentioned. In the
expeditions against Mesopotamia between 635 and 643, monasteries were sacked,
the monks slaughtered and Monophysite Arabs executed or forced to convert. In
Elam, all the people were put to the sword and at Susa all the dignitaries
suffered the same fate.
Details of conquest of Egypt starting with the capture of Alexandria by Amr Ibn
Al-As in 641 comes from the “Chronicle of John” – the Bishop of Nikiu, written
between 693 and 700 CE. As Amr advanced into Egypt, he captured the city of
Behnesa near Fayum, and exterminated the inhabitants. Nobody was spared,
irrespective of surrendered or captured, Old or Young or Women. Fayum and Aboit
suffered the same fate. At Nikiu, the entire population was put to the sword.
The Arabs took the inhabitants to captivity. In Armenia, the entire population
of Euchaita was wiped out. Seventh century Armenian chronicles recount how the
Arabs decimated the population of Assyria and forced a number of inhabitants to
accept Islam and then wrought havoc in the districts of Daron, southwest of Lake
Van. In 642, it was the turn of the town of Dvin to suffer. In 643, the Arabs
came back with “extermination, ruin and slavery”.
It was the same ghastly spectacle in North Africa, Tripoli was pillaged in 643;
Carthrage was razed to the ground and most of its inhabitants were slaughtered.
Michael the Syrian describes how the first Omayyad Caliph Muawiya, who took
power in 661, sacked and pillaged Cyprus and then established his domination by
a “great massacre”. In the capture of Istakhar (Persia), 40,000 Iranians were
slaughtered. Indeed, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Iraq, Iran and wherever
Muslims have marched, were presented with the same spectacle.
8th Century
In 712, Governor of Iraq, Hajjaj, ordered the conquest of Sind under the
commandership of his nephew, Muhammad bin Kasim. He was instructed to “bring
destruction on the unbelievers… [and] to invite and induce the infidels to
accept the true creed, and belief in the unity of God… and whoever does not
submit to Islam, treat him harshly, and cause injury to him till he submits.”
According to Al-Biladuri, after the capturing the port of Debal, the Muslim army
slaughtered the inhabitants over three days and the priests of the temples were
massacred.
After the initial surge of cruelty, Kasim became more tolerant and allowed the
infidels to continue their profession and religious practice. Learning about
this sympathetic treatment, a furious Hajjaj sent letter condemning Kasim’s
method of pardoning the infidels. It read, “… The great god says in the Koran
[47:7]: “O True believers, when you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their
heads.” The above command of the Great God is a great command and must be
respected…. Henceforth, grant pardon to no one of the enemy and spare none of
them..” Kasim quickly obliged to the divinely ordained command and on his
capture of Brahmanabad, he invited the infidel idol-worshipers to accept Islam.
On latter’s refusal, he ordered all adult males be beheaded with swords and
their women and the children were captured as slaves. Eight thousands, some say
26,000, men were put to the sword. One-fifth of the captured slaves (women and
children), which amounted to 20,000, amongst whom, were the daughters of Sind
Chiefs along with King Dahir’s severed head, were sent to Hajjaj as the share of
the states and the remainder were distributed amongst the soldiers. [Chachanama,
Muhammad al-Kufi, trs Kalichbeg, I, 155; Shashi R Sharma, Caliphs and Sultans,
p. 95]. The stream of captured slaves continued to flow from India to Baghdad
ever since Kassim captured Sind and Hajjaj alone is said to have forwarded
60,000 slaves from India (~1/5 of total) to the caliph Walid I (705-715 CE).
[Chachnama, I, 154]
In 704-705, Caliph Walid I gathered together the nobles of Armenia in the Church
of St. Gregory and in the Church of Xram on the Araxis and burned them alive.
The rest were crucified and their women and children were captured as slaves.
The worse happened to the Armenians between 852 and 855. Over in Egypt, in 722,
the surveyor Usama b. Zaid, attacked convents and churches but Caliph Hisham
later asked him to leave the Christians alone. Caliph Marwan (ruled 744-750)
looted and destroyed many monasteries in Egypt while fleeing the Abbasid army.
In the sacking of Euphesus in 781, 7,000 Greeks were taken captives and were
deported en masse.
9th century
In 853, Abbassid Caliph Mutawakil ordered all new churches to be destroyed. In
884, the convent of Kalilshu in Baghdad was destroyed. Caliph al-Mutasim, known
as the Islamic hero, was a great wager of holy wars against the Christians and
heretics. After the capture and pillage of Amorium in 838, there were so many
captive slaves that Caliph al-Mutasim ordered them to be auctioned in batches of
five and ten. During the rule of caliph al-Mamun – considered the most just
Muslim ruler and harbinger of the so-called “golden age of Islam” – the pagans
of Harran had to choose between Islam and death.
Ruined by the burden of imposition of Jizyah tax, the Coptic Christians of Lower
Egypt revolted in 832. This revolt was ruthlessly suppressed by the Muslim
rulers in which Christian villages, vineyards, gardens and Churches were burned.
There were mass slaughter and those spared were deported.
10th century
In 924, the Church and convent of Mary in Damascus was plundered and burned and
other churches destroyed. Further destruction occurred in Ramleh, Ascalon,
Tinnis, and Egypt during the invasion of Asad ud Din Shirkuh. In the capture and
sacking of Thessalonica in 903 CE, 22,000 Christian captives were divided
amongst the Arab chieftains or sold into slavery.
There were massacres of the Spanish Christians in and around Seville. Al-Hakim
biamr Illah gave orders that the Churches of his dominions should be destroyed.
A Muslim historian records that over 30,000 churches built by the Greeks in
Egypt, Syria and elsewhere were destroyed, their contents seized and sold in the
markets and lands confiscated. [Tritton AS, The Caliphs and their non-Muslim
Subjects. London, 1970, p. 54].
In Iran, the Zoroastrians faced frequent forced conversion, pressure to do so
and persecution which lead to riots in Shiraz in 979. To escape persecution,
they immigrated to India and live there even today as a respected community.
11th century
Six thousand Jews were massacred in Fez of Morocco in 1033. Hundreds of Jews
were killed between 1010 and 1013 near Cordoba and other parts of Muslim Spain
and an entire Jewish community of 4000 in Grenada was annihilated in 1066.
Fatimid caliph Hakim’s jealous persecution of non-Muslims and Church demolition
resulted in the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem in
1009. He also banned the pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Both events acted as the
major causes that ignited the Crusades.
In Kairoun (Tunisia), the Jews were persecuted and sent to exile in 1016, who
later returned, only to be expelled again. In Tunis, they were forced to convert
or leave. During subsequent decades, there were fierce anti-Jewish persecutions
throughout Tunisia.
In 1064, the Seljuk Sultan, Alp Arslan, devastated Georgia and Armenia. Those,
whom he did not take captive, were executed. [Ibn Warraq, pp. 218-238]
Eleventh century also saw the barbaric assault of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni on
Hindustan starting in 1000 CE. He launched 17 plundering, looting and
slave-taking expeditions to India. Abu Nasr Muhammad Utbi, Sultan Mahmud’s
secretary, gloats in his official chronicle that after attacking Waihind in
November 1001 CE, Mahmud’s army slaughtered 15,000 fighting men in “splendid
action” before capturing 500,000 men and women as slaves. In Mahmud’s attack of
Ninduna and Panjab in 1014, “slaves were so plentiful that they became very
cheap and the men of respectability in their native land were degraded by
becoming slaves of ordinary shop-keepers (in Ghazni)”. The extent of barbarity
of Sultan Mahmud was vividly described by contemporary Muslim historians. In the
attack on Thanesar, “the blood of the infidels flowed so copiously that the
stream was discolored and the people were unable to drink it”. Similarly in the
slaughter of Sirsawa near Saharanpur, “the Musalmans paid no regard to the booty
till they had satiated themselves with the slaughter of infidels.” [Utbi,
Tehrik-i-Yamini, ED, Vol II, pp 41-42, 49-50]. When Mahmud learned that the
famous Hindu temple at Somnath housed a monolith brought from the temple of
Ka’ba, which was destroyed by the Prophet of Islam in 630 CE, out of jealous
piety, he rushed to destroy the Somnath temple. Hindus in great numbered
assembled to protect their sacred temple and offered Mahmud great booty, which
he ignored and according to Ibn Asir [Kamil-ut-Tawarikh], he massacred 50,000
Hindus guarding temple and destroyed it.
12th Century
In the 12th century, the Almohads of North Africa spread terror wherever they
went. The Jews in Yemen were given choice of death or conversion to Islam in
1165. Similar choice was given to the Jews of Aden in 1198. According to
Stillman [The Jews of Arab Lands], there were forced conversions of Jews under
the Almohad caliphs, al-Mumin (d 1165), Abu Yakub (d 1184) and al-Mansur (d
1199). The Christians of Grenada were deported to Morocco by the Almoravids
rulers in 1126.
In the Indian front, after the scourge of Mahmud Ghazni, there was a relative
calm until Turk Ghaurid Sultan Muhammad Ghauri started his attacks beginning in
1175. When he became successful in 1192 to defeat Prithviraj Chauhan, he
launched a scourge of conquest of Sirsuti, Samana, Khuhram and Hansi with
ruthless slaughter and a general destruction of temples and their replacement
with mosques. Similar events followed in Ajmer and Delhi later on [KS Lal,
Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India, p. 21].
Muhammad Ghauri’s lieutenant Qutbuddin Aibak, succeeded him to become the first
Muslim Sultan in India. He dispatched Ikhtiyaruddin Bakhtiyar Khalji to the East
and himself concentrated in Hindustan proper. He captured Kol (modern Aligarh)
in 1194. There “those of the garrison who were wise and cute were converted to
Islam, but those who stood by their ancient faith were slain with the sword.”
[Hasan Nizami, Taj-ul-Maasir, E.D., H, 222]
In 1195 when Raja Bhim was attacked by Aibak, he captured 20,000 slaves.
13th Century
In Aibak’s attack of Kalinjar in 1202, 50,000 slaves were captured. “The temples
were converted into mosques,” writes Hasan Nizami, “and the voices of the
summoners to prayer ascended to the highest heavens, and the very name of
idolatry was annihilated.” Muhammad Farishtah specifically mentions that during
the capture of Kalinjar “fifty thousand kaniz va ghulam, having suffered
slavery, were rewarded with the honor of Islam” – which meant that enslaved
captives were forced into conversion to Islam and conversion accelerated the
growth of Muslim population in India.
During Aibak’s rule of 20 Lunar years, he captured Hansi, Meerut, Delhi,
Ranthambhor and Kol, which accompanied similar massacres, destruction and
slave-taking. When Sultan Muizzuddin personally mounted a campaign against
Hindustan, Aibak proceeded as far as Peshawar to meet him, and the two together
attacked the Khokhar (Hindu) stronghold in the Koh-i-Jud or the Salt Range. The
Hindus (Khokhars) fled to the highest in the mountains. They were pursued. Those
that escaped the sword fled to the dense depth of the jungle; others were
massacred or taken captive. The result was a great plunder and many captives
sold as slaves. According to Farishtah 300 to 400 hundred thousand Khokhars were
converted to Islam by Muizzuddin.
Under Aibak most of Hindustan from Delhi to Gujarat, Lakhnauti to Lahore and
Bihar to Bengal were brought under the sway of the Turks. In every attack great
many people were killed and large number of women and children were captured as
slaves. In 1202 CE, Ikhtiyaruddin Bakhtiyar Khalji marched into Bihar and
attacked the University centers at Nalanda, Vikramshila and Uddandpur. The
Buddhist monks and Brahmans, identified by shaved head, taken as idolaters, were
massacred and the common people were captured and enslaved. Ibn Asir says that
Qutbuddin Aibak made ‘war against the provinces of Hind. He killed many, and
returned with prisoners and booty.” In Banaras, according to the same author,
“the slaughter of the Hindus was immense; none was spared except women and
children”. Fakhr-i-Mudabbir informs us that as a result of the Turkish
achievements under Muizzuddin and Aibak, even poor (Muslim) householder became
owner of numerous slaves.”
After Aibak, Sultan Iltutmish (rule 1210-1236) continued with his war against
the infidels and revolting territories including Ranthambhor (1226), Mandor
(near Jodhpur), Gwalior and Ujjan (1234-35). According to contemporary
chroniclers Minhaj Shiraj and Muhammad Farishtah, every campaign lead to general
massacres of those who resisted and the women and children were taken captives
and assets of the infidels were looted.
Minhaj Siraj writes that Ulugh Khan Balban’s “taking of captives and his capture
of the dependents of the great Ranas cannot be recounted”. Talking of his war in
Avadh against Trailokyavarman of the Chandela dynasty (Dalaki va Malaki of
Minhaj), the chronicler says that “All the infidels’ wives, sons and dependents…
and children… fell into the hands of the victors.” In 1253, in his campaign
against Ranthambhor also, Balban enslaved many people. In 1259, in an attack on
Haryana, many women and children were enslaved. Twice Balban led expeditions
against Kampil, Patiali, and Bhojpur, and in the process enslaved a large number
of women and children. In Katehar, he ordered a general massacre of the male
population of over eight years of age and carried away women and children. In
1260 CE, Ulugh Khan Balban marched with a large force on a campaign in the
region of Ranthambhor, Mewat and Siwalik. He made a proclamation that a soldier
who brought a live captive would be rewarded with two silver tankahs and one who
brought the head of a dead one would get one silver tankah. Soon 300-400 living
and dead were brought to his presence everyday.
Like Balban, other commanders of Iltutmish, or the “Shamsia Maliks of Hind” were
marching up and down the Hindustan, raiding towns and villages and enslaving
people. This was the situation prevailing from Lakhnauti to Lahore and from
Ajmer to Ujjain. The Hindus used to reclaim their lands after the Muslim
invaders had passed through them with fire and sword, and Turkish armies used to
repeat their attacks to regain control of the cities so lost. But the captives
once taken became slaves and then Musalmans for ever. The exact figures of such
slaves have not been mentioned and therefore cannot be computed. All that is
known is that they were captured in droves.
After the Iltutmish Sultans, war against the Hindu infidels and slave-taking
received further momentum under the Khaljis. Sultan Jalaluddin Khalji
(1290-1296) launched ruthless attacks against Hindus in Katehar, Ranthambhor,
Malwa, and Gwalior. According to Amir Khasrau [Miftah-ul-Fatuh], he sacked
temples, took booty and captured slaves making a “Hell of Paradise”.
Next Sultan Alauddin Khalji, a great war maker, sent a large army to Gujarat in
1299 in which all the major towns were sacked, temples destroyed, wealth looted
and large number of slaves of both sexes captured [Khwaja AM Isami,
Futu-us-Salatin, p. 243 ; Ziauddin Barani, Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi, pp. 251-52].
Away from the Indian front, the Christians of Damascus were killed or sold into
slavery and their Churches were burned down. Sir Steven Runciman records that
Sultan Baibars had promised the safety of the garrison of Safed if they
surrendered to the Muslims. When they surrendered, the Muslims fell upon the
population and massacred them. At the capture of Antioch by the Muslims, “Even
the Muslim Chroniclers were shocked by the carnage that followed”, says
Runciman. The Jews of Marrakesh were massacred in 1232. Following this, the Jews
of Morocco were persecuted, forced to convert or leave. The Jews of Tabriz were
obliged to convert in 1291 CE [Ibn Warraq; p. 227]
14th Century
The riots of 1321 in Cairo, in which several churches were destroyed, which in
turn, set on destruction of churches throughout Egypt resulting in desecration
of more than 50 churches. The Jews of Tabriz were again made to convert to Islam
in 1318 CE and those of Baghdad in 1333 and 1344.
Late 14th and the early 15th centuries witnessed the horrible barbarity of Amir
Tamur (aka, Tamurlane). Information about Timur comes mainly from “Zafer Nama”
written during early 15th century and his own diary, Mulfuzat-i-Timuri, which
are full of Koranic references in justification of his invasions, wars and mass
murders and destructions. He set out on his campaign in 1399 against India
solely because the Muslim rulers were, to him, too lenient towards the idolater
Hindu subjects. By the time, he reached Delhi; he had gathered around 100,000
pagan captives. A few thousands artisans and clever mechanics, including
builders and stone masons, were taken back to Samarkhand while the rest were
massacred in a single day [Mulfuzat-i-Timuri, trs ED, III, 447]. He built
victory pillars with the severed heads of the infidels. On his way out of India,
he pillaged Miraj, pulled down the monuments and flayed the Hindu inhabitants
alive. [Why I am Not a Muslim, ibn Warraq, p. 234-235].
In the Indian front, Sultan Allauddin Khaliji (1296-1316) continued his
terrorizing massacre, slave-taking and looting mission in the early 14th
century, which made him the greatest rulers of the so-called Sultanate period (c
1200-1500 CE). In the sack of reconstituted Somnath temple for a second time,
Wassaf recounts that the Muslim army captured 20,000 women and children as
salves. [Wassaf, Bk IV, p. 448]. In 1301 Ranthambhor was attacked and in 1303,
Chittor. In the Chittor attack 30,000 people were massacred in cold blood
[Khazain, Habib trs p 49], and women and children were taken captives. Similar
things happened in the attack of Malwa, Sevana and Jalor (1305-1311). According
to Shams Shiraj Afif in the days of the Khaljis, “the Turks, whenever they
please, can seize, buy or sell any Hindu.” [Nuh Sephr, trs, in ED III, 561]. No
wonder that 50,000 slave boys were engaged in his personal services and 70,000
slaves worked continuously in his buildings. Ziauddin Barani describes the
continuous arrival of batches of slaves in the markets of Delhi and elsewhere.
Following the Khaljis, the Tughlaqs ascended to the Sultanate and they
outstripped the notorious Khaljis in making wars against the Hindus and
enslaving them. Shihabuddin Ahmed Abbas writes of Muhammad Tughlaq, “The Sultan
never ceases to show the greatest zeal in making war upon the infidels…
Everyday, thousands of slaves are sold at a very slow price, so great is the
number of prisoners”. [Masalik-ul-Absar, E.D. III, 580]. He subjugated as far as
Dwarsamudra, Malabar, Kampil, Warangal, Lakhnauti, Satgaon, Sonargaon, Nagarkat
and Sambhal amongst the prominent places. [Qaraunab Turks, 96, 126, 129-30,
173]. He also ruthlessly put down 16 major rebellions. In each campaign, after
defeat and massacre of the opponent, slaves were captured with gusto. The famous
Muslim traveler Ibn Battutah testifies that in the defeat of Halajun rebellion
(of Lahore), the capture of the women of the rebels were sent to the far-off
Gwalior fort whom Battutah had seen there. [Battutah, p. 123]. The Tughlaqs
would capture the Hindu slaves round the years, convert them to Muslims and on
the two Eid-days, he will marry them off according to the Islamic tradition.
[Battutah, p. 63].
Firoz Tughlaq, who ascended to the throne in 1351, outstripped his father and
grandfather in slave-taking by all kind of methods and means, so much so that he
acquired 180,000 of them. Contemporary Shams Shiraj Afif further testifies that
during Firoz Tughlaq “Slaves became too numerous” and that the institution took
root in every centre of the country. [Afif, pp. 267-273]. Firoz Tughloq was
known to be relatively kind-hearted of the Sultans and yet according to Afif he
killed 180,000 Bengalis in his expedition in Bengal and had erected a Tower of
skulls [Lal, p. 73].
15th Century
Amir Timur’s barbarism continued in the 15th century. In 1400, Timur devastated
the country in and around Tifflis. In 1403, he returned to Tifflis to devastate
the country again and destroyed the 700 large villages and minor towns,
massacred the inhabitant and razed the Churches to the ground. Amir Timur
thoroughly and systematically destroyed the Christians and as a result, the
Nestorians and Jacobites of Mesopotamia have never recovered. At Sivas, 4,000
Christians were buried alive; at Tus, there were 10,000 victims. Historians
estimate the number of dead at Saray to be 100,000; at Baghdad 90,000 and at
Isfahan 70,000 [Why I am Not a Muslim, Ibn Warraq, pp. 234-235].
Over in Constantinople, Sultan Mehemet unleashed utter barbarism. When
Constantinople fell to the Muslim army, the Sultan allowed his soldiers to
massacre the population for three days. They poured into the city and slew every
men, women and children they met in the streets [Ruchimen, The Fall of
Constantinople, 1453, p. 145].
16th Century
The Muslim Sultanate of India became divided into a few largely independent
territories under different Muslim rulers during much of the 15th century,
although the condition of the Hindus never changed. War against the Hindu
community continued along with capture of slaves for selling. Then came
Zahiruddin Muhammad Babur, a descendent of the barbaric Amir Timur, who defeated
the fanatic Sikandar Lodi in 1526 and instituted the Mogul rule (1525 – 1707) in
India. Babur, an orthodox Muslim, continued the Jihadi wars against the Hindu
dominated regions of India. He continued with the destruction of the Hindu
temples, the prominent example is the much controversial Babri Mosque in
Ayodhya. Babur’s determination to exterminate the vestiges of Hindu idolatry was
explicitly narrated in his own diary before battle against Rana Sanga. Babur
wrote in Jihadi zeal, “I made public the resolution to abstain from wine. My
servants… dashed upon the earth, the flagons and the cups. They dashed them into
pieces as God willing, soon will be dashed, the Gods of the idolaters” [Babur
Nama, Vol II, p. 554-5]. Babur and his soldiers destroyed Hindu temples in many
parts of the country. [Babur Nama, Vol II, p. 340]. After winning the War
against Rana Sangha, Babur ordered the set-up of a Tower of slaughtered pagan
heads as a trophy for the victory. Similar tower of dead pagan heads was created
after the victory at Chanderi against Medini Rai [Baburnama, pp. 483-84, 596]
However, the misery and persecution of Hindu and other non-Muslims eased up a
little bit after emperor Akbar came to the throne in 1656, who abolished
discrimination, including Jizya, against the Hindus despite severe displeasure
and protests from the Ulema and Muslims in general. However, persecution against
the Hindus continued in various forms, especially his extreme eagerness and
success in capturing the lands under the non-Muslim control. In the attack of
Rana Pratap Singh in Rajastan; when the news of defeat of the Rajputs reached
the palace, a few hundred noble women set fire on themselves to commit Jauher,
in order to avoid being captured at the hands of Akbar’s lustful soldiers. Akbar
accumulated a mind-boggling 5,000 women in his harem through various means.
17th Century
The Jews of Yemen were forced to choose between death and conversion in 1678. In
1617 and 1622, the Jews of Persia were declared apostates and suffered a wave of
forced conversion and persecution. During the reign of Shah Abbas II
(1642-1666), all the Jews of Persia were forced to convert, between 1653 and
1666. Taverniar, the 17th century French traveler, records as to how in
Anatolia, “Everyday there were numerous Greeks who are forced to become Turks”.
Over in Persia, the persecution of the Zoroastrians got worse in the 17th
century. Persecutions included levying extra hefty taxes, frequent looting of
their homes and properties, forcing them to wear distinctive clothing,
prohibiting building new houses or repairing old ones.
In the Indian front, following Akbar’s death, the semblance of equality that
was instituted, started a reversal by his own son Jahanghir, which further
worsened under Shahjahan. Jahangir writes that 500-600 thousand people were
killed during the rule of Akbar and Jahangir. However, it was all undone when
Akbar’s great grandson Aurangzeb ascended throne in 1658. He instituted Islamic
Sharia as the ruling principle, reintroduced Jizya and launched a Jihadi
campaign of forced conversion of the non-Muslims and destruction of non-Muslim
religious institutions. When the Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur Singh went to
Aurangzeb’s palace to inquire about forced conversion of the Hindus of Kashmir,
he was tortured and executed in 1675. Aurangzeb’s rule saw destruction of nearly
10,000 Hindu, Jain and Buddhist temples. In the campaign of 1679-1680, 123
temples were destroyed in Udaipur, 63 in Chittor, 66 in Jaipur [Ibn Warraq, p.
224]. After defeating and taking Maratha king Sambhuraj and his minister
Kavikalash prisoner, their eyes were extracted, tongue were cut off and after a
fortnight’s torture, their limbs were hacked one by one and thrown to the dogs
(1689). [Lal, p. 75]
18th Century
Persecution of the Zoroastrians continued in the 18th century so much so that
their numbers “declined disastrously due to combined effects of massacres,
forced conversions, and emigration” [Encyclopedia of Islam, Ed II].
The Jews of Jedda were expelled between 1770 and 1786, who flew to Yemen. In
1790, Jews were massacred in Tetuan (Morocco).
Aurangzeb’s policy of persecution and destruction of temples continued in the
early 18th century until he died in 1707.
19th Century
In Persia, there was forced conversion of Jews in 1839. According the Bernard
Lewis, there was also forced conversion of Persian Jews in the 1840s.
In 1828, Jews of Baghdad were massacred. In 1834, a cycle of violence and
pillage began against the Jews and their properties in Safed. In 1839, massacre
of Jews occurred in Meshed (Iran). The survivors had to suffer forced
conversion. A massacre of the Jews took place in Barfurush in 1867. In 1840, the
Jews of Damascus suffered first in a series of blood libels, which spread to
many cities. Other outbreaks of violence, murder and pillage of the Jews and
their properties occurred in Morocco, Tunisia, Libya and the Arab countries.
Starting in the 7th century, the Armenian Christians suffered terribly in the
19th century. The Turks massacred about 250,000 Armenian Christians in 1894-1896
in a planned and methodical design. General pillage was unleashed. Villages were
burned and hundreds of Churches were plundered.
The Zoroastrians faced increased persecution too, such that they were living in
complete insecurity and poverty in the 19th century.
20th Century
Massacre of the Armenians continued in the early 20th century. In 1904 and in
1909 CE, about 30,000 Armenians were slaughtered in Adana. The most horrible
mass murder of Armenians occurred in 1915, which can be rightly described as the
first genocide of the 20th century. More than 1,000,000 (one million) Armenians
were systematically massacred – thousands were shot to death, drowned (included
Children), thrown over the cliffs and the survivors were deported or reduced to
slavery – which served as the model for Hitler’s massacre of the Jews in the
WW-II.
There is clear evidence of slavery persisting in Saudi Arabia and the Yemen even
in the 1950s. A report in a French Magazine in the 1990s gave an estimate of
45,000 Blacks are being kidnapped by the Muslims to be sold in slavery in the
Gulf states and the middle east [L Vie, no.2562, Oct 6, 1994].
Islam a legacy of incessant Jihad since it inception
To this long list of Islamic violence, we have to add another major incidence,
termed ‘Dewshirme’ which was instituted by the Ottoman Sultan Orkhan in 1330.
Following the Prophet’s tradition of one-fifth of the booty captured from the
infidels belonging to the State, Dewshrime consisted of periodic collection of
one-fifth of the Christian children over 7 years of age as the property of the
state. The Christian parents, belonging to Greek aristocracy, the Serbs,
Bulgarians, Armenians, and Albanians, were obligated to surrender 1/5th of their
children to the state every four years. They were converted to Islam and trained
as soldiers so that they can wage war against their own blood-brothers in their
adulthood. Some scholars say 12,000 while other claim 8,000 children were
collected every year under this scheme.
The Jihadi campaign Muhammad had initiated in the 620s until his death in 632,
there was not a single period of let-up ever since until this day as accounted
in the above chronology. The account of violence, persecution and massacre
listed above are only a tip of the iceberg that has occurred to the non-Muslim
subjects under the Muslim conquest and rule. Only the prominent events were
recorded by the contemporary historians and chroniclers and royal secretaries.
While there are numerous other violent incidences which the chroniclers have
cited with few details and are hard to make a grasp of the extent of death,
destruction and enslavement in those cases.
The Silent Persecution
Another serious form of persecution of the non-Muslims in Muslim countries has
received little attention that requires mention. I will discuss it in the
context of moderate Muslim countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan which will
apply to minorities of all Muslim countries across the globe. The
post-separation Hindu population in 1947 stood at 15% in Pakistan and 30% in
Bangladesh (East Bengal until 1971). However, the current Hindu population
stands at ~1% in Pakistan and ~10% in Bangladesh. On the other hand, the
proportion of the Muslim population in Hindu-dominated India has increased
instead.
This massive exodus of Hindu population from Pakistan and Bangladesh (East
Bengal) represent a very grave and yet unnoticed and uncared for persecution of
the minorities in Muslim countries. In recent time, multiple reports in news
media have given accounts of how the Hindus and other minorities are being
forced to convert to Islam in Pakistan. Living in the subcontinent Muslim
country, I have witnessed how a Hindu person, having lands and properties next
to an influential Muslim village leader, would be harassed by the latter such
that the latter would be forced to sell the land to the village leader and leave
the country in humiliation. He would not be allowed to sell his lands to a third
party and finally have to surrender the land to the Muslim leader at highly
reduced price than that on the market.
The second form of persecution that leads to exodus of Hindus is the rape of the
Hindu girls and women by the Muslims in the locality. Indeed, there is a massive
rape of Hindu women which is hardly reported to the media and the law agencies.
Of the nearly a dozen good-looking Hindu women I have known personally from
nearby quarters, about 75% of them were raped by the Muslims – which came to my
knowledge from various confidential sources. Surprisingly, as I was told of
these stories when I was a believing Muslim, such horrible incidences would not
strike our conscience with sadness and guilt but instead would make raunchy and
enjoyable pieces of gossips. The general attitude is that it is OK to rape Hindu
girls or they deserve to be humiliated by Muslims.
In a conservative society of the subcontinent, the rape of a woman is seen as a
great dishonor and humiliation to the victim’s party, not to the rapist. It
invariably brings life-long suffering to the victim. This social constraint
compels most of such rape cases being kept secret by the victims and their
families and relatives if possible. In cases, where the victims seeks to report
them to the law agency, there are threat of violence and death on the victim and
her family members which further lead to under reporting of the rapes of the
Hindu women in these countries. More importantly, a respectable father would
never like to see his daughter gets raped and would like to escape the chances
at any cost so long there is a means. Indeed, having been blessed with a
beautiful daughter is the greatest headache of the Hindu parents in these
countries, especially in the countryside. I have seen how the Hindu parents rush
to marry off their daughter at an early age, when the girl is a beautiful one.
In many cases, parents send their beautiful daughters to India at an early age
for studies. The main purpose is to keep them out of the reach of the Muslims,
where they normally get married and never return to the home country.
The other kind of the persecution is the kidnapping of the young Hindu girl by
Muslim men who like them and rape, forcefully marry and convert them to Islam
(http://www.hinduhumanrights.org/Pakistan/index.htm). As a growing-up Muslim, I
have witnessed the general notion amongst the Muslims that if you can convert
Hindu (or non-Muslim) to Islam through marriage or whatsoever means, Allah will
grant paradise to you and your past seven generations in the afterlife. Hence,
if there is a beautiful girl in the neighborhood, there is a general feeling
amongst the young Muslim boys that it will be auspicious to somehow marry this
girl and convert her to Islam to achieve a passport to paradise for your seven
generations. There is no greater way to serve to your parent, grandparents and
so on. This tendency often encourages Muslim youths to take recourse of
kidnapping the Hindu girls they like with assistance from illegal gangs, marry
them under coercion and convert them to Islam.
These constraints and difficulties keep minorities in a state of continuous
mental persecution, which they can neither complain about, nor bear with. Those
who have nominal means, make a journey across the border to the other side to
India to secure the safer and honorable future to the subsequent generations.
These kinds of silent or soft persecutions which result in such massive exodus
and displacement of minority population from their ancestral home in silence to
wherever they can to acquire better safety, constitutes a much graver form of
persecution than the much publicized terrorism and suicide bombing.
If we consider that Hindu birthrate is similar as Muslims in Bangladesh/East
Pakistan, a reduction of Hindus from 30% to 10% since 1947 means there have been
an effectively displacement of massive 30 million Hindu people from Bangladesh,
given current Bangladesh population stands at 150 millions. And this silent
terrorizing and persecution has never received much attention nor termed
terrorism, which indeed a tactical form of religious terrorism/persecution. And
this kind of persecution continues in Pakistan and Bangladesh without respite
and with increasing zeal.
This kind of soft terrorism occurs on the non-Muslim population in most
Muslim-dominated countries. Given that Pakistan Bangladesh are considered rather
moderate Muslim countries, in more fundamentalist Islamic countries, this
soft-terrorism is likely to be worse. However, in every country, such
persecution does not necessarily result in exodus of the non-Muslims, since
there may not be countries that are willing to give shelter like India
unofficially did to the Hindus of Pakistan Bangladesh.
It should be fathomed that this kind of grave and yet unnoticed and unreported
soft-terrorism by Muslims continues on such massive scales even in today’s world
of justice, massive media reporting, obligation for respecting human rights,
equality of all citizens and pressures from a whole groups of international
bodies, powerful democratic countries and rights groups. Hence, such
soft-terrorism, persecution and other forms of smaller scale violence against
the non-Muslim subjects have continued incessantly throughout the entire period
of Islamic conquest, domination and rule. The chronological details of the
Islamic violence, terrorism and persecution listed above would only form a
fraction of the real total.
There should not be any doubt by now that since late 620s, the violence that was
initiated by Prophet Muhammad had continued without respite ever since although
there may have been some depressions along the way. There must have also been
changes in the means of carrying out such terrorism and violence. However, there
is one notable difference. The terrorism perpetrated by the Muslims since the
early days of Islam to until the early 20th century was perpetrated by the
Muslim states. Indeed, it is an obligation of the Islamic state to uphold and
carry on the propagation of Islam through violence or whatsoever means as was
unleashed by Prophet Muhammad as head of a nascent Islamic state. However, since
those much more devastating terrorism and violence were perpetrated by the
Muslims states, they are not being recognized as terrorism.
However, the state-terrorism of Islam was brought to an end mainly by the
British which came to a virtual end when secular humanist Kemal Ataturk of
Turkey dissolved Islamic caliphate in 1924 and introduced secularism. Although
there has been a lull in the overt form of terrorism since then for several
decades, the soft form of Islamic terrorism has continued as reflected in the
steady decline of Hindu population in Pakistan and Bangladesh since 1947.
The development on the world stage especially after the WW-II, such as the
formation of UN, various human rights bodies etc. have changed the ways, means
and obligations of individual states. Thus although many Muslim countries got
back their sovereignty after the WW-II from the former European colonialists,
the Governments have been bounded up with all sorts of obligation and treaties
that demands respectable treatment of the citizens of any states, irrespective
of race, religion and color. Thus the Governments of the Muslim states are
unable to re-launch the same type of overt terrorism and violence against the
non-Muslims as used to be done in India in the days of bin Kasim, Sultan Mahmud,
the Khaljies, the Tughlaqs and the Mughals. Hardly have the Muslim Governments
failed to unleash overt terrorism to dominate and expand the Islamic religion,
it has changed hands from the state-body to underground fringe groups at the gap
of just 3-4 decades. The innovation and easy availability of guns, bombs,
rockets, missiles and other modern weapons and Muslim terrorist groups’ ruthless
usages of them have added further prominence to the present scourge of Islamic
violence.
Although Islamic terrorism started a surge in the 1980s in India, there was
little recognition of it as terrorism. But instead, a great part of the Eastern
and Western world recognized it as independence movement by Kashmiri Muslims. It
was a legitimate movement for self-determination. Then there started terrorism
in Chechnya, which again much of the world recognized as legitimate independence
movement by the Muslims of Chechnya.
Although there have been isolated terror attacks on Western (mainly US) targets
and nationals over the last couple of decades, they have occurred mainly in
overseas location, such as, in Lebanon, Yemen and Kenya etc. These terrorist
acts, despite being of big impact, did not get its deserving label of Islamic
terrorism until the attack of 9/11 in New York. Further uncovering of terrorist
cells all across the Western world has further heightened concerns and
media-hype of Islamic terrorism over the last few years.
The bottom-line is that Islamic terrorism that we see today is not a new
phenomenon. It has occurred continuously since the 7th century institution of
the Islamic faith. The only difference is that throughout the Islamic history,
the onus of terrorizing the non-Muslims were undertaken by the Islamic states.
The ferocity, destruction and violation have been of much greater scales in the
Islamic rulers’ devastating attacks of innocent infidel territories and
out-posts, slaughtering both military and civilian population (mainly men) in
tens of thousands, enslaving their children and women in great multitude and
destroying their religious institutions and forcing them to conversion. The
present scourge of terrorist atrocity is virtually negligible as compared to
those unleashed by the Islamic rulers on the infidels throughout the Islamic
history.

Psalm (119) is a treatise on how to obtain Yahweh’s favor. It speaks of walking with Yahweh, of observing His testimony, of knowing His Word, of keeping His prescriptions, of being cleansed and becoming upright - all of which are said to flow from a singular source: Scripture. But, now that we know who Yahushua was and is, and why He came, let’s return to Matthew’s account.

We find Yahushua’s disciples pointing to the Temple building and raving about it. Knowing that they are focused on the wrong Tabernacle, God says: "Truly I say to you, not one stone here shall be left upon another." Then, "sitting with Him on the Mount of Olives [overlooking the Temple Mount] the disciples came to Him asking: ‘Tell us when will these things be, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"

He answers all but one of their three questions directly, and with astonishing detail, saying that the time leading up to the last days and His physical return will be noted for "world wars, famines, hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, pandemics, riotous acts of lawlessness, acts of terrorism, signs in the sky, false prophets, a lukewarm assembly or "church," and an overall aversion to His name." All but one of these signs defines our time. The signs in the sky have yet to appear. But they will...

This list appears in both Matthew and Luke. Collectively the evangelists reveal: "Then (tote - at that time) He said, ‘Multitudes (ethnos - races, specifically Gentiles, peoples and nations; large groups based upon religious, political, cultural, or geographic ties) shall be awakened and rise up (egeiro - become aroused from a deadly sleep to stand up and make war) upon and against nations (ethnos - races and peoples), and royal rulers against royal rulers. You will hear about wars and rumors of wars. People will be terrorized (throeo - cry out loud, frightened and alarmed). And great (megas - big, powerful, and numerous) hurricanes, earthquakes, and tsunamis (seismos - shaking, commotion, rocking to and fro, and agitation on land and sea) shall come to exist (esomai) down against low (kata) places (topos - inhabited areas), and famines (limos - scarcity of harvests and food), and pestilence (loimos - infectious epidemic diseases that are virulent and devastating, destructive and pernicious plagues), and terrorist activity (phobetron - terrorism and alarming events) and great (megas) signs (semeion - indications, unusual occurrences, and wonders transcending the normal course of nature) shall be (esomai) from (apo - proceed out of) the sky (ouranos - the universe, the abode of stars, and the heavens). But (de) all these things just begin to initiate (arche) the birth pangs (odin)." (Matthew 23:6-8 and Luke 21:9-11)

The evidence suggests that these seven signs are listed in some semblance of chronological order, with the World War of the 1930s and 40s, which in actuality was humanity’s only global conflict, being the first fulfillment. Also, there is no assurance that the last of the seven, the signs in the sky, will be made manifest prior to the Tribulation. As we shall soon discover, there is considerable proof, Scriptural and scientific, that an asteroid alternatively named Apsinthos/Apophis will fulfill this prophecy. Further, the reference to "birth pangs" indicates that these signs will become more frequent and will increase in intensity as the end approaches. As an example, over the last fifteen years the frequency and magnitude of hurricanes and earthquakes have more than doubled on both scales.

The Second World War was similarly greater in magnitude and its travesties more frequent and widespread. The global conflict killed more people than all preceding wars combined. Today, the "rumor of war" is undoubtedly the fabricated "War of Terror," the first conflict ever waged against a tactic rather than a known enemy. The cause of terror is Islam. This satanic religion is also the substance of the "kingdom against kingdom" portion of the prophecy. Islamic monarchs form the last bastion of royal totalitarian rule - something that requires a cooperative religion to perpetrate. And they remain in conflict with one another.

The pestilence of HIV and AIDS has infected more people than any plague in human history. But a likely future fulfillment of the pandemic prediction is bird flu. The last time it spread worldwide, in 1918, 50 million people were laid waste in its wake. The current manifestation of this avian disease is predicted by world health leaders to claim as many as 200 million lives over the next twenty years.

While the war on terror is a complete farce, jihadist assaults have never been as substantial or as frequent as they are today. But rest assured, they will grow in frequency and intensity. And with them we will continue to experience famines. Both are the result of Islam, a religion so impoverished it has failed to give Muslims a reason to live, only a reason to die. There has never been a productive, self-sufficient Islamic economy in any nation at any time. So as Islam spreads rapidly throughout Asia, India, and Africa lawlessness, starvation, and terror will be its constant companion.

Is there anything wrong with fighting injustice with your bodies and money? Isn't that what armies are supposed to do? Why is everyone so quick to jump to conclusions that jihad is at every Muslims center of living? Where are the hadiths that speak of young men who went to the Prophet and wanted to join in jihad but were turned down because they had parents? Should I join the jihad?" He asked, "Do you have parents?" The man said, "Yes!" The Prophet(S) said, "then strive by (serving) them!" Sahih Al-Bukhari #5972 Jihad isn't supposed to be some wreckless war, but rather defensive or pre-emptive in order to protect the communities. The Muslims did not conquer the Persians or North Africans. They had hardly the numbers to do that. They assimilated it's people and gave them government roles. The Islamic empire reached the vast region of China through dimplamacy and economical ways. The real mujahideen fought against armies, not civilians. The real mujahideen were quick to initiate peace accords and pacts, not lead their people into disary as we seen in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Busted big time"? What is this, 1987?

Pam, it sure looks like you have been busted big time.

more islamic lies - if it was not war he was refering to, but inner spirit then why did moho exempt the elderly from it as it was to hard on them? seeking perfection through your inner spirit is not hard on the body. jihad means war so just quit spreading the same islamic lies about it.
if islamics actually told the truth once in a while it would be great.

Here you can see 20 qur'an suras each time you reload the pages at www.jihadspin.com But here is one of my favs: "When We wish to destroy a city, we first give warning to those of itspeople who live in comfort to accept our commands. But if they reject us, judgment is irrevocably passed,and we wage utter annihilation." (The Qur'an - Sura 17:16)

Pamela, Thank you for responding to posts on your thread. My question for you is:

What has happened to PBS "Islam vs. Islamists"?

"Further, I have repeated time and time again, which obviously isn't sufficient for Ross, that, yes, there are verses which pertain to war, from the stage of the Prophet's mission. After the community was secure from attack, a different paradigm was ennuciated -- that of intercommunal harmony, intermarriage, shared meals, etc."

This is untrue, Pamela. After Muhammad died in just 100 years muslims conquered : Palestine, Afghanistan, Persia, Syria, Egypt, North Africa, southern Italy, whole Spain and were stopped in... France!! None of these nations commited aggression against first muslims. Muhammad himself and the caliph Omar used to send letters to other rulers inviting them to Islam, and suggesting "insecurity" if they refused. You are in great error.

Pamela, he is suggesting that you ommitting violent verses, and sticking to ""inspiring ones" commit bidah

Ansar al-zindiqi

Are you suggesting that the words of the Qur'an and the Prophet are an innovation??

Or that there is only one valid way to be a "true believer?" Even the most extreme Muslims I know do not subscribe to that theory.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, given your handle and your participation over at faithfreedom (which is an org of ex-Muslims dedicated to pulling Muslims out of Islam), but I'd rather let current Muslims decide if I'm really a heretic or not. Most of them seem to disagree with you.

Victoria,

You're right - Believers who sit home and those who go out for Jihad in Allah's Cause are not equal."

However, which is greater? The Quran tells us it is the latter.

an-Nisa' 4:95
‏لايستوي القاعدون من المؤمنين غير اولى الضرر والمجاهدون في سبيل الله باموالهم وانفسهم فضل الله المجاهدين باموالهم وانفسهم على القاعدين درجة وكلا وعد الله الحسنى وفضل الله المجاهدين على القاعدين اجرا عظيما
La yastawee alqaAAidoona mina almu/mineena ghayru olee alddarari waalmujahidoona fee sabeeli Allahi bi-amwalihim waanfusihim faddala Allahu almujahideena bi-amwalihim waanfusihim AAala alqaAAideena darajatan wakullan waAAada Allahu alhusna wafaddala Allahu almujahideena AAala alqaAAideena ajran AAatheeman

Among the believers, those who stay at home other than those of difficult circumstances are not equal to those who strive for the cause of God in person or with their property. TO THOSE WHO STRIVE FOR HIS CAUSE IN PERSON OR WITH THEIR PROPERTY, GOD HAS GRANTED A HIGHER RANK than to those who stay at home. God has promised that everyone will receive his proper share of the reward but He will grant a much greater reward to those striving for His cause than to those who stay home (for no reason).

When you strive with your life and property - that means you put your life and property at risk. This means that Allah values violent jihad more than the 'inner' jihad.

Qasim

PAMELA:[t]he point of these posts is to give some insight into what in the Qur'an and the teachings of the Prophet inspire me. Obviously, I'm not going to post things that don't particularly inspire me.

ANSAR AL-ZINDIQI: You're using the word "inspire" in a neutral sense. In order to do that there's a bit of false consciousness that one must go by and it usually shows up when a person is faced with counter evidence to their claims. I must say that you are admitting to being extremely subjective in what "inspires" you. To the point of being a heretic by engaging in bidaa (innovation) and omitting what really inspires the "true believers".

Oh, really finally... the point of these posts is to give some insight into what in the Qur'an and the teachings of the Prophet inspire me. Obviously, I'm not going to post things that don't particularly inspire me. Or which I perceive as no longer relevant.

Oh, really finally... the point of these posts is to give some insight into what in the Qur'an and the teachings of the Prophet inspire me. Obviously, I'm not going to post things that don't particularly inspire me.

I don't have time to answer every single one of these, however, two should serve as an example:

Muslim:C40B20N4676
"Believers who sit home and those who go out for Jihad in Allah's Cause are not equal."

Bukhari:V4B52N45
"Someone asked, ‘Allah's Apostle, who is the best among the people?' He replied, ‘A believer who strives his utmost in Allah's Cause with his life and property.'"

I strive with my life (many hours out of my day) and my property (lots of money spent) in the way of Allah. I have never done anything violent in doing so -- mostly it's writing, demonstrations, interfaith dialogue, lecturing at churches and schools, or lobbying like I did last week in support of human and civil rights for the glbt community. People read jihad and substitute war, but these verses make as much sense when you understand them to be effort, hard work, struggle, etc in the cause of justice. With that understanding, it makes sense that someone who devotes hours every day to intercommunal harmony would get more rewards as it were than someone who stay at home watching game shows.

Further, I have repeated time and time again, which obviously isn't sufficient for Ross, that, yes, there are verses which pertain to war, from the stage of the Prophet's mission. After the community was secure from attack, a different paradigm was ennuciated -- that of intercommunal harmony, intermarriage, shared meals, etc.

Finally, half those sources, Ross, are obscure, never even heard of by Muslims, half are snippets that distort the meaning, and so on. Again, I've dealt with this in previous threads (particularly the one slay them where you find them which cutting totally distorts the meaning of the passage which goes on to say, but if they cease hostilities, then you do too.)

If the greater Jihad is that of the "inner struggle" how comes, that you get more reward from allah for the "lesser" Jihad?

Qur'an:4:95
"Not equal are those believers who sit at home and receive no injurious hurt, and those who strive hard, fighting Jihad in Allah's Cause with their wealth and lives. Allah has granted a rank higher to those who strive hard, fighting Jihad with their wealth and bodies to those who sit (at home). Unto each has Allah promised good, but He prefers Jihadists who strive hard and fight above those who sit home. He has distinguished his fighters with a huge reward."

Bukhari:V4B52N284-5
"When the Divine Inspiration: ‘Those of the believers who sit at home,' was revealed, Maktum came to the Prophet while he was dictating the verse. ‘O Allah's Apostle! If I were able, I would take part in Jihad.' So Allah sent down revelation to His Apostle: ‘...except those who are disabled, blind, or lame.'"

Muslim:C40B20N4676
"Believers who sit home and those who go out for Jihad in Allah's Cause are not equal."

Bukhari:V4B52N45
"Someone asked, ‘Allah's Apostle, who is the best among the people?' He replied, ‘A believer who strives his utmost in Allah's Cause with his life and property.'"

Bukhari:V4B52N94
"The Prophet said, ‘Whoever spends two things in Allah's Cause [his life and his wealth], will be called by all the gatekeepers of Paradise. They will say,"O so-and-so! Come here." Abu Bakr said, ‘O Allah's Apostle! Such persons will never be destroyed.' The Prophet said, ‘I hope you will be one of them.'"

Bukhari:V4B52N43
"Aisha said, ‘Apostle! We consider Jihad as the best deed. Should we not fight in Allah's Cause?' He said, ‘The best Jihad for women is the Hajj done as I have done it.'"