- Admin
- Administrator
Offline - From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
Slavery in Islam - A Look at the Facts: On A Practice That Should Be
Abolished Worldwide
INTRODUCTION:
Islam likes to charge apostate (counterfeit) so called Christianity
with condoning and practicing slavery which of course they did, but
turns away from the fact that Islam practiced slavery including
Muhammad (pbuh) himself and parts of Islam still practice slavery.
Of course, this is hypocritical on the part of Islam marking it as a
dishonest false religion that is like an Ostrich who hides its head in
sand if it does not want to see something.
It is the only major religion who still practices slavery, this taking
place in Africa to day in Sudan and elsewhere. In fact, this
situation is very bad in the Darfur section of the Sudan where not
only is slavery practiced by members of Islam, but rape by those who
are Muslims.
Let's look at the facts today:
SLAVERY - THE FACTS WITHIN ISLAM:
Now let's look at the facts as presented in an encyclopedia.
<<<"The major juristic schools of Islam have historically accepted the
institution of slavery[1]; however, in modern time this has become a
contentious issue Muhammad and those of his companions who could
afford it themselves owned slaves, and some of them acquired more by
conquest[stealing them.]. However, the Islamic dispensation
enormously improved the position of the Arabian slave through the
reforms of a humanitarian tendency both at the time of Muhammad and
the later early caliphs. In Islamic law, the topic of Islam and
slavery is covered at great length. The legal legislations brought
two major changes to the practice of slavery inherited from antiquity,
from pagan Rome, and from Byzantium, which were to have far-reaching
effects. Bernard Lewis considers these reforms to be the cause of
the vast improvements in the practice of slavery in Muslim lands.
The reforms also seriously limited the supply of new slaves.
The Qur'an considers emancipation of a slave to be a meritorious deed,
or as a condition of repentance for certain sins[but does not require
their emancipation]. The Qur'an and Hadith contain numerous passages
supporting this view. Muslim jurists considered slavery to be an
exceptional circumstance, with the basic assumption of freedom until
proven otherwise. Furthermore, as opposed to pre-Islamic slavery,
enslavement was limited to two scenarios: capture in war[stealing.],
or birth to slave parents (birth to parents where one was free and the
other not so would render the offspring free)[sounds like typical
slavery].
Slavery in Islam does not have racial or color component, although
this ideal has not always been put into practice. Nevertheless,
historically, black slaves could rise to important positions in Muslim
nations. In early Islamic Arabia, Slaves were often African blacks
from across the Red Sea, but by expansion of the Islamic empire in
later times, slaves could be Berbers from North Africa, Slavs from
Europe, Turks from Central Asia, or Circassians from the Caucasus.
The majority of slaves throughout the history of Arabia were, however,
of African origin. The Arab slave trade was most active in eastern
Africa, although by the end of the 19th century such activity had
reached a significantly low ebb. The slavery in the Arab World in
the 19th century has been documented by Dr. Christiaan Snouck
Hurgronje, an Arabist and a scholar of Indonesian affairs, who had
visited Mecca during his journey in the Hijaz. He states in his book
Mohammedanism that "Slaves in the Arab world are generally not that
different from servants and workers in Europe" and that their masters
"handled them with a genial humanity that made their lot no worse -
perhaps better, as more secure - than that of a factory worker in
nineteenth-century Europe."
It was in the early 20th century (post World War I) that slavery
gradually became outlawed and suppressed in Muslim lands, [b] largely
due to pressure exerted by Western nations such as Britain and France
(although the extent to which it died out and/or flared up again
is disputed)." [source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]>>>.
Also, researchers at Ohio State University (OSU) said the following:
<<<" WHEN EUROPEANS WERE SLAVES: RESEARCH SUGGESTS WHITE SLAVERY WAS
MUCH MORE COMMON THAN PREVIOUSLY BELIEVED
COLUMBUS, Ohio - A new study suggests that a million or more European
Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and
1780 - a far greater number than had ever been estimated before.
In a new book, Robert Davis, professor of history at Ohio State
University, developed a unique methodology to calculate the number of
white Christians who were enslaved along Africa's Barbary Coast,
arriving at much higher slave population estimates than any previous
studies had found.
Most other accounts of slavery along the Barbary coast didn't try to
estimate the number of slaves, or only looked at the number of slaves
in particular cities, Davis said. Most previously estimated slave
counts have thus tended to be in the thousands, or at most in the tens
of thousands. Davis, by contrast, has calculated that between 1
million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced
to work in North Africa from the 16th to 18th centuries.
Davis's new estimates appear in the book Christian Slaves, Muslim
Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and
Italy, 1500-1800 (Palgrave Macmillan).
"Much of what has been written gives the impression that there were
not many slaves and minimizes the impact that slavery had on Europe,"
Davis said. "Most accounts only look at slavery in one place, or only
for a short period of time. But when you take a broader, longer view,
the massive scope of this slavery and its powerful impact become
clear."
Davis said it is useful to compare this Mediterranean slavery to the
Atlantic slave trade that brought black Africans to the Americas. Over
the course of four centuries, the Atlantic slave trade was much larger
- about 10 to 12 million black Africans were brought to the Americas.
But from 1500 to 1650, when trans-Atlantic slaving was still in its
infancy, more white Christian slaves were probably taken to Barbary
than black African slaves to the Americas, according to Davis....
"Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who traveled in
the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy,
France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and
Iceland," he said.
Pirates (called corsairs)[members of Islam] from cities along the
Barbary Coast in north Africa - cities such as Tunis and Algiers -
would raid ships in the Mediterranean and Atlantic, as well as seaside
villages to capture men, women and children. The impact of these
attacks were devastating - France, England, and Spain each lost
thousands of ships, and long stretches of the Spanish and Italian
coasts were almost completely abandoned by their inhabitants. At
its peak, the destruction and depopulation of some areas probably
exceeded what European slavers would later inflict on the African
interior.
Although hundreds of thousands of Christian slaves were taken from
Mediterranean countries, Davis noted, the effects of Muslim slave
raids was felt much further away: it appears, for example, that
through most of the 17th century the English lost at least 400 sailors
a year to the slavers.[Islam should return these to England, but has
failed to do so or pay England.].
Even Americans were not immune. For example, one American slave
reported that 130 other American seamen had been enslaved by the
Algerians in the Mediterranean and Atlantic just between 1785 and
1793.
Davis said the vast scope of slavery in North Africa has been ignored
and minimized, in large part because it is on no one's agenda to
discuss what happened.
The enslavement of Europeans doesn't fit the general theme of European
world conquest and colonialism that is central to scholarship on the
early modern era, he said. Many of the countries that were victims of
slavery, such as France and Spain, would later conquer and colonize
the areas of North Africa where their citizens were once held as
slaves. Maybe because of this history, Western scholars have thought
of the Europeans primarily as "evil colonialists" and not as the
victims they sometimes were, Davis said.
Davis said another reason that Mediterranean slavery has been ignored
or minimized has been that there have not been good estimates of the
total number of people enslaved. People of the time - both Europeans
and the Barbary Coast slave owners - did not keep detailed,
trustworthy records of the number of slaves. In contrast, there are
extensive records that document the number of Africans brought to the
Americas as slaves....
"The only way I could come up with hard numbers is to turn the whole
problem upside down - figure out how many slaves they would have to
capture to maintain a certain level," he said. "It is not the best way
to make population estimates, but it is the only way with the limited
records available."...
The result is that between 1530 and 1780 there were almost certainly 1
million and quite possibly as many as 1.25 million white, European
Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast. Davis said
his research into the treatment of these slaves suggests that, for
most of them, their lives were every bit as difficult as that of
slaves in America....
Davis said his findings suggest that this invisible slavery of
European Christians deserves more attention from scholars. "We have
lost the sense of how large enslavement could loom for those who lived
around the Mediterranean and the threat they were under," he said.
"Slaves were still slaves, whether they are black or white, and
whether they suffered in America or North Africa."[source - Research,
Ohio State University by Jeff Grabmeier]>>>.
CONCLUSION:
Both apostate (counterfeit) so called Christians and Muslims starting
with Muhammad (pbuh) himself were equally guilty with respect the
slave trade, yet members point a finger at apostate (counterfeit)
Christians without realizing three fingers, maybe four, are pointing
back at themselves. This is dishonest hypocrisy on the part of
Islam.
Also, it is still being practiced by members of Islam, and the Islamic
authorities never throw out and/or clean their organization of these
wicked ones such as the members of Islam who kidnapped about 300 girls
from a private school in Nigeria and are trying to sell them.[/b]
- Admin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
NEW YORK POST HAS CORRECTLY IDENTIFIED ISLAM AS THE ENEMY OF MANKIND – READ THE PROOF
Once again, Islamist terrorists have zeroed in on what they regard as a mortal threat: girls going to school.
Now these men are threatening to sell into slavery the 300 Nigerian girls they have taken from their school. It’s part of their larger war against the West and modernity. In their twisted brand of Islam, a girl going to school to learn how to read and write and think for herself is an enemy.
In this, the terrorists of Boko Haram are brothers to the 9/11 hijackers — and their Taliban patrons, who also outlawed education for girls and chopped off the fingertips of Afghan women caught in the high crime of wearing nail polish.
The hostage-taking also confirms something we learned from the State Department’s most recent report on terror. While core al Qaeda may have been “degraded,” al Qaeda as a driving ideology has evolved and become more dispersed (and financially independent). We have cut off the beast’s head only to find others sprouting up in its place.
Today al Qaeda affiliates are attacking all over Africa, whether the target be a natural-gas plant in Algeria, a shopping center in Kenya or a World Cup party in Uganda. Some of these attacks killed Americans.
We kid ourselves if we pretend that groups such as Boko Haram are merely a local problem.
The 9/11 attacks originating from the mountains of Afghanistan ought to have taught us what happens when we downplay the death and mayhem that terrorists can inflict even from remote parts of the world. Any Islamist war on modernity will sooner or later target America.
So while we’re encouraged that the Obama administration is offering FBI agents, military personnel and other assistance, it’s not enough. The captive schoolgirls are a test of the world’s resolve and seriousness.
Either the world returns them safely to their families, or the terrorists who want to impose a grim Islamist future on one of Africa’s largest nations will be emboldened.
The Nigerian government, too, needs to be helped, encouraged or dragged into doing whatever it takes to rescue these girls. The protests are encouraging, suggesting the Nigerian people themselves are bent on not allowing a corrupt and ineffective government to get away with business as usual.
These terrified girls in Nigeria have become our girls.
And if we don’t regard them the same way we would 300 girls from Brooklyn or Chicago who had been abducted from their school by Islamist terrorists, the horrors we see in Africa today will become America’s horror tomorrow.
[source - retrieved from on 5/8/2014]
What should be done? Islam should be dissolved in the interest of mankind.
REALITY:
Guilt Comes On Organizations That Fail To Clean House Of The Wicked Ones:
INTRODUCTION:
First, The world we live in is ruled by the wicked one as testified to by 1 John 5:19, “And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.” (Authorized King James Bible; AV). If we pick up a newspaper in any country, we find reports of cruelty and violence on an unprecedented scale. Man’s inhumanity to man is troubling for a righteous person to contemplate as testified to at Ecclesiastes 8:9, “All this have I seen, and applied my heart unto every work that is done under the sun: there is a time wherein one man ruleth over another to his own hurt.” (AV).
Second, Most individuals and/or groups seek to avoid responsibility for their own actions rather than take corrective actions. This also applies to so called religious groups that seek to absolve themselves of responsibility for the wrong actions of members, but fail, willingly, to take action against these wrong doers by purging themselves of these wicked ones.
THE REALITY:
If a religion fails to clean house of evil and wicked men when they are discovered, and especially of evil and wicked men/women taking the lead in a congregation, and/or congregations such as Pastors, Ministers, Sheiks, Imams, Bishops, Cardinals, Etc., then the religion is responsible for their wrong doing. Some religions such as Islam have never cleaned house of evil and wicked individuals when they are discovered and that religion has been violent since its beginning, and many of its members lust for violence in such acts as beheading of others, suscide bombers, makers of IEDs, etc. do to the teachings of their groups religious leaders. One notable example of an evil and wicked individual Islam well knows of who is a leader of a large group of members of Islam is Sheik Osama bin Ladin. Of course, Islam, is NOT the only religion that fails to take effective action against evil and wicked individuals and leaders of groups among them, another is the Catholic and Angalican churches that for many years just moved pedophiles to a new congregation when they were uncovered as the world's news media has so well identified. Groups seeking to keep themselves clean of evil and wicked individuals that sneak into their group take the appropriate action; to wit, they throw them out.
Now many religions seek to escape reality by claiming they have no provisions within their religion for purging out these wicked ones, but this is no excuse since it is their failure to provide measures for purging out these wicked ones and no one else’s.
Now let’s look at one such religion that tries to escape their responsibility for cleaning house so to speak.
ISLAM FAILS TO CLEAN HOUSE:
Now of course it is important to recognize that not all Muslims are terrorist and jihadists nor refuse to recognize the property rights of others, it is likewise equally important to recognize that all jihadists are members of Islam. Islam is totally responsible for their actions as they tacitly approve of their evil wrong doing and have never cleaned house of these wicked ones. To wit, by not doing so, they have taken on the responsibility for their wrongful actions upon themselves. Yes, of course they are not the only religion that has failed to clean house; thus taking on the guilt of these wrong doers. Any religion, no exception, which fails to clean house is nothing but an evil false religion. And as previously stated, ‘Now many religions seek to escape reality by claiming they have no provisions within their religion for purging out these wicked ones, but this is no excuse since it is their failure to provide measures for purging out these wicked ones and no one else’s.’
CONCLUSION:
Many are just fooling themself, it is not what either the Bible or the Bible knockoff the Qur'an actually say, but how religious leaders be they priest and/or imams or muftis or what ever teach the people is the interpretation of what is written either in the Bible or the bible knockoff the Qur'an that matters and governs actions. It matters not what the Bible and/or the Bible knockoff really say. People go by what they are taught by their religious leaders. Take the genocide committed by the Roman Catholic Church at the direction of their supreme religious leader, the pope (Pope Innocent III (1160 or 1161 – 16 July 1216)), what mattered was not that the Bible clearly said at Exodus 20:13, "Thou shalt not kill." (Authorized King James Bible; AV), but what their religious leaders told them. Therefore, it is the religion which is at fault, irregardless of what their particular holy book, be it the Bible or the Bible knockoff the Qur'an may say. Neither in so called Christianity or in Islam are most individuals actions really governed in any way by what their particular holy book really says, but they are governed by the interpretation of their religious leaders. Thus, knowing this reality, one would be either just plain stupid and/or dumb to even bother looking at a particular religion's holy book and expect the members would conform to it. Take the Rig Vede and find me for example a Hindu actually conforming to it instead of the interpretation given to it by his religious leaders, like looking for a needle in the haystack per K.S. Lal, India's greatest historian.
Likewise the failure to clean house of evil ones puts their wrongs directly upon the organization failing to throw out evil/wicked ones when they are found out.
INTERESTING:
One female member of Islam clearly showed that she can not bear to hear the truth as follows:
“Im sick of your long baseless stories. [[How are they baseless, when they are the truth?]] Don't stereotype Muslims and don't interpret Islam based on how the majority of Muslims today are living. If you want to know the truth, read the Quran with an open mind. Till then, don't utter another word against Islam.”
But I asked her about Sura 9:29 – 30, which reads as:
Sura 9:29 (Surat At-Tawbah) Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled. Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled. [[Jizyah is a tax Islam wants to levy on non-Muslims.]]
Sura 9:30 The Jews say, "Ezra is the son of Allah "; and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the son of Allah ." That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded? [[Here is a lie in the Quran as no where do the Jews say Ezra is the son of Allah; nor do the Christians say the Messiah is the son of Allah. They both say Ezra and the Messiah are the sons of Almighty God (YHWH) .]]
But no answer as it clearly shows up Islam for what it is; to wit, a false religion that wants freedom of religion for itself, but definitely does NOT want to extend this freedom to others.
Now to know the truth, go to:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org!
- •
Thread Starter- Admin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
BRUTAL REALITY – ISLAM WILL NOT GIVE OTHERS FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND HUMAN RIGHTS – READ REALITY
INTRODUCTION TO REALITY:
Genuine true followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ believe in and practice – do onto others as you would have them do onto you.
Whereas, Islam believe in and practice – do onto others as you would NOT want them to do unto you.
WICKED WAY EVEN WRITTEN INTO THE QURAN AT MANY PLACES:
From an encyclopedia giving many versions of the evil Quran on the subject at Sura 9:29. “The consensus opinion of Muslim scholars justifies the imposition of tribute on non-Muslims who fall under the Muslim rule in terms of the verse 9:29 of the Qur'an.[1] This verse has been thus an important source of the Islamic laws on dhimmis.
Different translations of the verse read as:[2]
SAHIH INTERNATIONAL: Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
MUHSIN KHAN: Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
YUSUF ALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
DR. GHALI: Fight the ones who do not believe in Allah nor in the Last Day, and do not prohibit whatever Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, and do not practice (Literally: to have as a religion) the religion of Truth-from among the ones to whom the Book was brought-until they give the tax out of hand (i.e., by a ready money payment, or in token of submission) and have been belittled.. [source - retrieved from on 5/16/2014]
This is but one salient example of evil and wicked things against others found in the evil Quran.
ONE EXAMPLE OF 1,000 TH. OF DO ONTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD NOT WANT THEM TO DO ONTO YOU BY ISLAM:
By MOHAMMED SAEED and HAMZA HENDAWI1 hour ago [Associated Press]
KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) — A pregnant Sudanese woman who married a Christian man was sentenced to death Thursday after she refused to recant her Christian faith, her lawyer said.
Meriam Ibrahim, whose father was Muslim but mother was an Orthodox Christian from Ethiopia, was convicted of "apostasy" on Sunday and given four days to repent and escape death, said lawyer Al-Shareef Ali al-Shareef Mohammed.
The 26 year old, who is eight months pregnant, was sentenced after that grace period expired, Mohammed said.
Amnesty International immediately condemned the sentence, calling it "abhorrent." The U.S. State Department said it was "deeply disturbed" by the sentencing and called on the government to respect the right to freedom of religion.
Mohammed, the lawyer, called the conviction rushed and legally flawed since the judge refused to hear key defense witnesses and ignored constitutional provisions on freedom of worship and equality among citizens.
Ibrahim and Wani married in a formal church ceremony in 2011 and have a son, 18-month-old Martin, who is with her in jail. The couple runs several businesses, including a farm, south of Khartoum.
Sudan's penal code criminalizes the conversion of Muslims into other religions, which is punishable by death.
As in many Muslim nations, Muslim women in Sudan are prohibited from marrying non-Muslims, though Muslim men can marry outside their faith. By law, children must follow their father's religion.
Sudan introduced Islamic Shariah laws in the early 1980s under the rule of autocrat Jaafar Nimeiri, a move that contributed to the resumption of an insurgency in the mostly animist and Christian south of Sudan. An earlier round of civil war lasted 17 years and ended in 1972. The south seceded in 2011 to become the world's newest nation, South Sudan.
Sudanese President Omar Bashir, an Islamist who seized power in a 1989 military coup, says his country will implement Islam more strictly now that the non-Muslim south is gone.
A number of Sudanese have been convicted of apostasy in recent years, but they all escaped execution by recanting their new faith. Religious thinker and politician Mahmoud Mohammed Taha, a critic of Nimeiri and his interpretation of Shariah, was sentenced to death after his conviction of apostasy. He was executed in 1985 at the age of 76.
Mohammed said he intends to appeal Ibrahim's conviction.
"The judge has exceeded his mandate when he ruled that Meriam's marriage was void because her husband was out of her faith," Mohammed told The Associated Press. "He was thinking more of Islamic Shariah laws than of the country's laws and its constitution."
He said Ibrahim's Muslim father left her mother when she was a child and her mother raised her as a Christian.
The court in the capital, Khartoum, also ordered that Ibrahim be given 100 lashes for having what it considers sexual relations with her husband, Daniel Wani, a Christian from southern Sudan who has U.S. citizenship, according to the lawyer and judicial officials who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations. Wani was acquitted of a charge of harboring an apostate, according to another defense lawyer, Eman Abdul-Rahim.
Wani fled to the United States as a child to escape the civil war in southern Sudan but later returned, she said.
Amnesty called the sentence a "flagrant breach of international human rights law."
"The fact that a woman could be sentenced to death for her religious choice, and to flogging for being married to a man of an allegedly different religion, is abhorrent and should never be even considered," Amnesty said in a statement, quoting its Sudan researcher, Manar Idriss.
Ibrahim's case first came to the attention of authorities in August, when members of her father's family complained that she was born a Muslim but married a Christian man.
They claimed that her birth name was "Afdal" and that she changed it to Meriam. Mohammed said the document produced by relatives to show she was given a Muslim name at birth was a fake. Ibrahim refused to answer Judge Abbas Khalifa when he called her "Afdal" during Thursday's hearing. Meriam is a common name for Muslims and Christians alike.
"I was never a Muslim. I was raised a Christian from the start," she said.
Authorities first charged her with having illegitimate sex last year but she remained free pending trial. She was charged with apostasy and jailed in February after she declared in court that Christianity was the only religion she knew. [source - retrieved from on 5/15/2014]
MEMBERS OF ISLAM RAIL AGAINST SLIGHT AND/OR PRECEIVED WRONGS AGAINST THEM IN NON-MUSLIM LANDS:
They feel they are superior to others even though they are immigrants in the United Kingdom (UK) and want government funded public schools just for them; whereas, Methodist, Quakers, etc. have never requested such special privilages. Of course this is just what they should not have as they should integrate into society.
As I have said before, “Immigrants are NOT per-say the problem, I myself am an immigrant, but ISOLATIONIST immigrants are the problem. ####### and is fellow members are the problem as they are ISOLATIONIST, he has just written many long nonsense post trying to justify special advantages to remain ISOLATIONIST at public expense which is pure anti-social nonsense. He and his followers need to integrate into regular society like myself and the Sheiks have. Every religious group could claim they want state funded schools for their group and if implemented we would have literally hundreds of schools to replace a few integrated public schools – this is just anti social nonsense that would result in excessive cost to the state both monetarily and socially and prevent a cohesive society. As I previously told him, “####### you are way out in left field, no one cares whether you drink or do not eat pork – I do not either – but you have NOT integrated with the people around you. Whereas, I have integrated – that in no way implies that you must adopt their bad ways - and have experienced no prejudice. It is high time you wake up to reality. As for your comments on history, they are simply a so what – wake up. I live with the people of the land, instead of isolated communities of my people, and that is what your people should do. Wake up, get real. Your big problem is you can not accept REALITY, and shrug off unpleasant facts when presented. The British Sheiks you should use as an example and start imitating them instead of being ISOLATIONIST.” A good example of this problem is Muslim’s Prima-Donna superior attitude of wanting state supported schools just for Muslims. You do NOT SEE other religions requesting same. In fact, this is just what the government should not provide as it only makes them more ISOLATIONIST, and this is not what is needed; to wit, integration is what is needed just as the British Sheiks have done.
THEY CLAIM TO PAY TAXES, BUT FAIL TO MENTION THEY COST SOCIETY MUCH MORE THAN THEY PAY IN:
All the expenses borne by the U.K. due to Islam such as security, soldiers murdered on streets in U.K. by them, NATO expenses made necessary by them, expenses and deaths due to bombed out underground trains, buses, and human bombs, and other wrongs by them far out weigh what ever taxes they pay in to the U.K.
REAL SOLUTION TO GIVE WORLD RELIEF AND PEACE FROM ISLAM’S WICKED ACTS:
Dissolve Islam and give the world a measure of greater peace and less stress.
For details on Dissolving Islam, go to,
Now to know the truth, go to:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org!
- •
Thread Starter- Admin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
Hi Everyone
I received an email from a member of Islam containing many untruths. One of which was that Americans attacked the World Trade Center and NOT members of Islam which is so absurd and utterly ridiculas, but read my informative answer. Note: his original email is below my answer.
The ISOLATIONIST are pushing nonsense once more. As I said before, “Immigrants are NOT per-say the problem, I myself am an immigrant, but ISOLATIONIST immigrants such as Iftikhar are the problem. Iftihar and is fellow members are the problem as they are ISOLATIONIST, he has just written a long nonsense post trying to justify special advantages to remain ISOLATIONIST at public expense which is pure anti-social nonsense. He and his followers need to integrate into regular society like myself and the Sheiks have. Every religious group could claim they want state funded schools for their group and if implemented we would have literally hundreds of schools to replace a few integrated public schools – this is just anti social nonsense that would result in excessive cost to the state both monetarily and socially and prevent a cohesive society. As I previously told him, “Iftihar you are way out in left field, no one cares whether you drink or do not eat pork – I do not either – but you have NOT integrated with the people around you. Whereas, I have integrated – that in no way implies that you must adopt their bad ways - and have experienced no prejudice. It is high time you wake up to reality. As for your comments on history, they are simply a so what – wake up. I live with the people of the land, instead of isolated communities of my people, and that is what your people should do. Wake up, get real. Your big problem is you can not accept REALITY, and shrug off unpleasant facts when presented. The British Sheiks you should use as an example and start imitating them instead of being ISOLATIONIST.” A good example of this problem is their Prima-Donna superior attitude of wanting state supported schools just for Muslims. You do NOT SEE other religions requesting same. In fact, this is just what the government should not provide as it only makes them more ISOLATIONIST, and this is not what is needed; to wit, integration is what is needed just as the British Sheiks have done.
(1) This ISOLATIONIST said the following nonsense. “twin towers wasn't Muslim either - that was the Americans –“ what an outright LIE.
REALITY – ALL THE INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE WERE NOT AMERICAN BUT MEMBERS OF ISLAM, now let’s look at some of the facts:
The September 11 attacks were carried out by 19 hijackers, with planning and organization of the attacks involving numerous additional members of al-Qaeda. The first hijackers to arrive in the United States were Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, who settled in the San Diego area in January 2000. They were followed by Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah, who all arrived early in the summer of 2000, in order to undertake flight training in south Florida. The fourth pilot, Hani Hanjour, arrived in San Diego in December 2000. The other muscle hijackers, who were trained to help overpower and take over the aircraft, all arrived in the spring and early summer of 2001.
Initial selection
Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were both experienced and respected jihadists in the eyes of al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden. Mihdhar and Hazmi both had previous experience fighting on Bosnia, and had trained during the 1990s at camps in Afghanistan.[1] When Bin Laden committed to the September 11 attacks plot idea, he assigned both Mihdhar and Hazmi to the plot.[2] Both were so eager to participate in operations within the United States, that they obtained visas in April 1999.[3] Once selected, Mihdhar and Hazmi were sent to the Mes Aynak training camp in Afghanistan. In late 1999, Hazmi, Attash and Yemeni went to Karachi, Pakistan to see Mohammed, who instructed them on Western culture and travel; however, Mihdhar did not go to Karachi, instead returning to Yemen.[2]
American Airlines Flight 11
Main article: American Airlines Flight 11
Two flight attendants called the American Airlines reservation desk during the hijacking. Betty Ong reported that "the four hijackers had come from first-class seats: 2A, 2B, 9A, and 9B."[4] Flight attendant Amy Sweeney called a flight services manager at Logan Airport and described them as Middle Eastern.[4] She gave the staff the seat numbers and they pulled up the ticket and credit card info of the hijackers, identifying Mohamed Atta al-Sayed.[5]
Mohamed Atta was heard speaking over the air traffic control system, broadcasting messages he intended for the passengers.[6]
We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport, nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.
Nobody move please. We are going back to the airport, don't try to make any stupid moves.
American Airlines Flight 77
Two hijackers, Hani Hanjour and Majed Moqed were identified by clerks as having bought single, first-class tickets for Flight 77 from Advance Travel Service in Totowa, NJ with $1,842.25 in cash.[4] Renee May, a flight attendant on Flight 77, used a cell phone to call her mother in Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane.[8] Passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States, stating the flight had been hijacked and the hijackers had knives and box cutters.[9] Two of the passengers had been on the FBI's terrorist-alert list: Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi.
Forensic remains of the five hijackers were found at the Pentagon, along with remains of the victims.[10]
Now that we have covered 2 of the four planes piloted by Muslims, let’s look at the big picture of all involved, all non-American members of Islam:
hijackers in the September 11 attacks
Flight 11
Mohamed Atta Satam al-Suqami Waleed al-Shehri Wail al-Shehri Abdulaziz al-Omari
Flight 175
Marwan al-Shehhi Fayez Banihammad Mohand al-Shehri Hamza al-Ghamdi Ahmed al-Ghamdi
Flight 77
Hani Hanjour Khalid al-Mihdhar Majed Moqed Nawaf al-Hazmi Salem al-Hazmi
Flight 93
Ziad Jarrah Ahmed al-Nami Saeed al-Ghamdi Ahmed al-Haznawi
20th hijacker
suspects Ramzi Binalshibh Mohamed al-Kahtani Zacarias Moussaoui Mushabib al-Hamlan Zakariya Essabar Ammar al-Baluchi Walid Muhammad Salih Bin 'Attash Khalid al Zahrani
For more details, go to, Today Is The Anniversary Of The Attack On America
As can be seen this individual is telling untruth once more. Apparently he wants the opportunity of having Muslim teachers teach lies like this – this should absolutely be prevented.
(2) He said, “They need Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental period. It is nothing to do with segregation or racism.” So his ilk can teach them untruths like the Americans did the 9/11/2001 attack and Brits blew up buses and underground rail cars in London. NOW THE BIG QUESTION – WHY IS HE SO AGAINST THE TRUTH? As to ‘role models,’ does he mean habitual liars?
(3) As to native languages of their parents, these should be taught at home. I was brought up in a home where English was NOT the language spoken there, but after moving to an English speaking country, I intentionally immersed my self at school in English so as to master the language. I made sure to choose schools where no one spoke my native language to force myself to progress in this language as quickly as possible. You need to know the language of the country you are living in and not that of the country your parents immigrated from and/or yourself did.
(4) The public school is NOT for teaching any religion. That should be the responsibility of the parents and the religious leaders at what ever religion you belong to.
(5) He said, “Out of every 100 Muslims, 45 are from Pakistan, there is a dire need for them to learn Urdu but Muslims from other parts of the sub-continent also need to learn Urdu because of its vast amount of literature and poetry.” Yes, that is true, but why the need when much more literature and poetry is available in English. This was a silly statement as it could be said about many languages including my own.
(6) He said, “Stop this hate against Muslims. It is not them who are terrorists.”
Of course he is NOT telling the truth. How so? Over 90% of the religious terrorist attacks are by Muslims. If anyone doubts this just check the world news.
For details, go to, Islam The Source Of About 95% Of The Religious Inspired Violence In The World: AT
(7) REALITY - Genuine true followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ believe in and practice – do onto others as you would have them do onto you.
Whereas, Islam believe in and practice – do onto others as you would NOT want them to do unto you.
WICKED WAY EVEN WRITTEN INTO THE QURAN AT MANY PLACES:
From an encyclopedia giving many versions of the evil Quran on the subject at Sura 9:29. “The consensus opinion of Muslim scholars justifies the imposition of tribute on non-Muslims who fall under the Muslim rule in terms of the verse 9:29 of the Qur'an.[1] This verse has been thus an important source of the Islamic laws on dhimmis.
Different translations of the verse read as:[2]
SAHIH INTERNATIONAL: Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
MUHSIN KHAN: Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
YUSUF ALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
DR. GHALI: Fight the ones who do not believe in Allah nor in the Last Day, and do not prohibit whatever Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, and do not practice (Literally: to have as a religion) the religion of Truth-from among the ones to whom the Book was brought-until they give the tax out of hand (i.e., by a ready money payment, or in token of submission) and have been belittled.. [source - retrieved from on 5/16/2014]
This is but one salient example of evil and wicked things against others found in the evil Quran.
Now to know the truth, go to:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org!
PS: I CHALLENGE ANYONE TO SHOW A FACTUAL ERROR IN WHAT I WROTE AND/OR TO PROVE ANY OF HIS UNTRUTHS.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++ WHAT HE SAID
Iftikhar Ahmad shared a link: "Commented on: BNP splinter group...": "Without Muslim schools. Muslim children are not going to develop spiritual, linguistic and cultural Identities. They need Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental period. It is nothing to do with segregation or racism. Let them develop their identity before they are exposed to the wider world, otherwise, they would be lost in the Western Jungle.
The whole world belongs to Muslims. A Muslim is a citizen of this tiny global village. He/she does not want to become notoriously monolingual Brit. A Muslim is well versed in standard English, Arabic, Urdu and other community languages. He needs to learn and be well versed in standard English and not local accent to follow the National Curriculum and go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. At the same time he/she needs to learn and be well versed in Arabic to recite and understand the Holy Quran and offer prayers five times a day. On top of that he/she needs to learn and be well versed in Urdu and other community languages to keep in touch with their cultural heritage and enjoy the beauty of their literature and poetry. Out of every 100 Muslims, 45 are from Pakistan, there is a dire need for them to learn Urdu but Muslims from other parts of the sub-continent also need to learn Urdu because of its vast amount of literature and poetry.
Stop this hate against Muslims. It is not them who are terrorists , but all those who imply they are with the help of media you try bringing others to your side giving false details - twin towers wasn't Muslim either - that was the Americans - you will not win as Islam Will forever grow and prove it is peaceful through the will of God (Allah SWT)... amen. This is undermining confidence in the Muslim community and increasing Islamophobia. This is another example of the media whipping up hysteria against the UK Muslim community. The way our Govt treating British Muslims is as if all Muslims are terrorists unless they prove otherwise. Govt should focus on its job. Governors of this school worked hard to help a failing school achieve outstanding rating from Ofsted. Please fix Ofsted and stop demonising Muslims. Nick Clegg on LBC radio indicated that the DFE is full of right wing ideologues and extremist loons. Islamic schools protect Muslim children from the onslaught of Euro centrism, homosexuality, racism, and secular traditions. All education systems appear to be indoctrination systems. I went to a good private school. Guess how we were 'encouraged' to think about politics! Having a Muslim name in UK is a crime. All UK job application forms have sections ask your race and religions. Most UK employers simply reject your applications just by looking at this section.
Native Brits must learn to respect and tolerate those who are different. The needs and demands of the Muslim community are different from those of natives. Muslims are in Britain not to give up their cultural heritage. They must integrate in their new home country, learn new languages and apply for political representation -- without forgetting their cultural heritage. It is important to learn Standard English, but their languages should not be neglected. They need Masajid and grave yards. Muslim children not only need halal meat or Eid Holidays but they need state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers as role models during their development period also. There is no place for a non-Muslim child or a teacher in a Muslim school.
IA
London School of Islamics Trust
- •
Thread Starter- Admin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
BRUTAL REALITY – ISLAM WILL NOT GIVE OTHERS FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND HUMAN RIGHTS – READ REALITY
INTRODUCTION TO REALITY:
Genuine true followers of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ believe in and practice – do onto others as you would have them do onto you.
Whereas, Islam believe in and practice – do onto others as you would NOT want them to do unto you.
WICKED WAY EVEN WRITTEN INTO THE QURAN AT MANY PLACES:
From an encyclopedia giving many versions of the evil Quran on the subject at Sura 9:29. “The consensus opinion of Muslim scholars justifies the imposition of tribute on non-Muslims who fall under the Muslim rule in terms of the verse 9:29 of the Qur'an.[1] This verse has been thus an important source of the Islamic laws on dhimmis.
Different translations of the verse read as:[2]
SAHIH INTERNATIONAL: Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.
MUHSIN KHAN: Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
YUSUF ALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
DR. GHALI: Fight the ones who do not believe in Allah nor in the Last Day, and do not prohibit whatever Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, and do not practice (Literally: to have as a religion) the religion of Truth-from among the ones to whom the Book was brought-until they give the tax out of hand (i.e., by a ready money payment, or in token of submission) and have been belittled.. [source - retrieved from on 5/16/2014]
This is but one salient example of evil and wicked things against others found in the evil Quran.
ONE EXAMPLE OF 1,000 TH. OF DO ONTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD NOT WANT THEM TO DO ONTO YOU BY ISLAM:
By MOHAMMED SAEED and HAMZA HENDAWI1 hour ago [Associated Press]
KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) — A pregnant Sudanese woman who married a Christian man was sentenced to death Thursday after she refused to recant her Christian faith, her lawyer said.
Meriam Ibrahim, whose father was Muslim but mother was an Orthodox Christian from Ethiopia, was convicted of "apostasy" on Sunday and given four days to repent and escape death, said lawyer Al-Shareef Ali al-Shareef Mohammed.
The 26 year old, who is eight months pregnant, was sentenced after that grace period expired, Mohammed said.
Amnesty International immediately condemned the sentence, calling it "abhorrent." The U.S. State Department said it was "deeply disturbed" by the sentencing and called on the government to respect the right to freedom of religion.
Mohammed, the lawyer, called the conviction rushed and legally flawed since the judge refused to hear key defense witnesses and ignored constitutional provisions on freedom of worship and equality among citizens.
Ibrahim and Wani married in a formal church ceremony in 2011 and have a son, 18-month-old Martin, who is with her in jail. The couple runs several businesses, including a farm, south of Khartoum.
Sudan's penal code criminalizes the conversion of Muslims into other religions, which is punishable by death.
As in many Muslim nations, Muslim women in Sudan are prohibited from marrying non-Muslims, though Muslim men can marry outside their faith. By law, children must follow their father's religion.
Sudan introduced Islamic Shariah laws in the early 1980s under the rule of autocrat Jaafar Nimeiri, a move that contributed to the resumption of an insurgency in the mostly animist and Christian south of Sudan. An earlier round of civil war lasted 17 years and ended in 1972. The south seceded in 2011 to become the world's newest nation, South Sudan.
Sudanese President Omar Bashir, an Islamist who seized power in a 1989 military coup, says his country will implement Islam more strictly now that the non-Muslim south is gone.
A number of Sudanese have been convicted of apostasy in recent years, but they all escaped execution by recanting their new faith. Religious thinker and politician Mahmoud Mohammed Taha, a critic of Nimeiri and his interpretation of Shariah, was sentenced to death after his conviction of apostasy. He was executed in 1985 at the age of 76.
Mohammed said he intends to appeal Ibrahim's conviction.
"The judge has exceeded his mandate when he ruled that Meriam's marriage was void because her husband was out of her faith," Mohammed told The Associated Press. "He was thinking more of Islamic Shariah laws than of the country's laws and its constitution."
He said Ibrahim's Muslim father left her mother when she was a child and her mother raised her as a Christian.
The court in the capital, Khartoum, also ordered that Ibrahim be given 100 lashes for having what it considers sexual relations with her husband, Daniel Wani, a Christian from southern Sudan who has U.S. citizenship, according to the lawyer and judicial officials who spoke on condition of anonymity in line with regulations. Wani was acquitted of a charge of harboring an apostate, according to another defense lawyer, Eman Abdul-Rahim.
Wani fled to the United States as a child to escape the civil war in southern Sudan but later returned, she said.
Amnesty called the sentence a "flagrant breach of international human rights law."
"The fact that a woman could be sentenced to death for her religious choice, and to flogging for being married to a man of an allegedly different religion, is abhorrent and should never be even considered," Amnesty said in a statement, quoting its Sudan researcher, Manar Idriss.
Ibrahim's case first came to the attention of authorities in August, when members of her father's family complained that she was born a Muslim but married a Christian man.
They claimed that her birth name was "Afdal" and that she changed it to Meriam. Mohammed said the document produced by relatives to show she was given a Muslim name at birth was a fake. Ibrahim refused to answer Judge Abbas Khalifa when he called her "Afdal" during Thursday's hearing. Meriam is a common name for Muslims and Christians alike.
"I was never a Muslim. I was raised a Christian from the start," she said.
Authorities first charged her with having illegitimate sex last year but she remained free pending trial. She was charged with apostasy and jailed in February after she declared in court that Christianity was the only religion she knew. [source - retrieved from on 5/15/2014]
MEMBERS OF ISLAM RAIL AGAINST SLIGHT AND/OR PRECEIVED WRONGS AGAINST THEM IN NON-MUSLIM LANDS:
They feel they are superior to others even though they are immigrants in the United Kingdom (UK) and want government funded public schools just for them; whereas, Methodist, Quakers, etc. have never requested such special privilages. Of course this is just what they should not have as they should integrate into society.
As I have said before, “Immigrants are NOT per-say the problem, I myself am an immigrant, but ISOLATIONIST immigrants are the problem. ####### and is fellow members are the problem as they are ISOLATIONIST, he has just written many long nonsense post trying to justify special advantages to remain ISOLATIONIST at public expense which is pure anti-social nonsense. He and his followers need to integrate into regular society like myself and the Sheiks have. Every religious group could claim they want state funded schools for their group and if implemented we would have literally hundreds of schools to replace a few integrated public schools – this is just anti social nonsense that would result in excessive cost to the state both monetarily and socially and prevent a cohesive society. As I previously told him, “####### you are way out in left field, no one cares whether you drink or do not eat pork – I do not either – but you have NOT integrated with the people around you. Whereas, I have integrated – that in no way implies that you must adopt their bad ways - and have experienced no prejudice. It is high time you wake up to reality. As for your comments on history, they are simply a so what – wake up. I live with the people of the land, instead of isolated communities of my people, and that is what your people should do. Wake up, get real. Your big problem is you can not accept REALITY, and shrug off unpleasant facts when presented. The British Sheiks you should use as an example and start imitating them instead of being ISOLATIONIST.” A good example of this problem is Muslim’s Prima-Donna superior attitude of wanting state supported schools just for Muslims. You do NOT SEE other religions requesting same. In fact, this is just what the government should not provide as it only makes them more ISOLATIONIST, and this is not what is needed; to wit, integration is what is needed just as the British Sheiks have done.
THEY CLAIM TO PAY TAXES, BUT FAIL TO MENTION THEY COST SOCIETY MUCH MORE THAN THEY PAY IN:
All the expenses borne by the U.K. due to Islam such as security, soldiers murdered on streets in U.K. by them, NATO expenses made necessary by them, expenses and deaths due to bombed out underground trains, buses, and human bombs, and other wrongs by them far out weigh what ever taxes they pay in to the U.K.
REAL SOLUTION TO GIVE WORLD RELIEF AND PEACE FROM ISLAM’S WICKED ACTS:
Dissolve Islam and give the world a measure of greater peace and less stress.
For details on Dissolving Islam, go to,
NOW TO KNOW THE TRUTH, GO TO:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org!
- •
Thread Starter- Admin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
LEARN WHY MANY IS ISLAM THINK IT ALRIGHT TO LIE IN PURSUIT OF RELIGIOUS OBJECTIVES SUCH AS WORLD DOMINATION BY ISLAM:
WHAT IS TAQIYYA AND HOW DOES IT EXCUSE LYING AND TREACHEROUS DEALING:
Let’s look at what the evil and treacherous practice of Taqiyya is:
<<”How Taqiyya Alters Islam's Rules of War, by Raymond Ibrahim
Middle East Quarterly, Winter 2010, [source - retrieved from on 1/10/2010]
Islam must seem a paradoxical religion to non-Muslims. On the one hand, it is constantly being portrayed as the religion of peace; on the other, its adherents are responsible for the majority of terror attacks around the world. Apologists for Islam emphasize that it is a faith built upon high ethical standards; others stress that it is a religion of the law. Islam's dual notions of truth and falsehood further reveal its paradoxical nature: While the Qur'an is against believers deceiving other believers—for "surely God guides not him who is prodigal and a liar"[1]—deception directed at non-Muslims, generally known in Arabic as taqiyya, also has Qur'anic support and falls within the legal category of things that are permissible for Muslims.
Muslim deception can be viewed as a slightly less than noble means to the glorious end of Islamic hegemony under Shari'a, which is seen as good for both Muslims and non-Muslims. In this sense, lying in the service of altruism is permissible. In a recent example, Muslim cleric Mahmoud al-Masri publicly recounted a story where a Muslim lied and misled a Jew into converting to Islam, calling it a "beautiful trick."
Taqiyya offers two basic uses. The better known revolves around dissembling over one's religious identity when in fear of persecution. Such has been the historical usage of taqiyya among Shi'i communities whenever and wherever their Sunni rivals have outnumbered and thus threatened them. Conversely, Sunni Muslims, far from suffering persecution have, whenever capability allowed, waged jihad against the realm of unbelief; and it is here that they have deployed taqiyya—not as dissimulation but as active deceit. In fact, deceit, which is doctrinally grounded in Islam, is often depicted as being equal—sometimes superior—to other universal military virtues, such as courage, fortitude, or self-sacrifice.
Yet if Muslims are exhorted to be truthful, how can deceit not only be prevalent but have divine sanction? What exactly is taqiyya? How is it justified by scholars and those who make use of it? How does it fit into a broader conception of Islam's code of ethics, especially in relation to the non-Muslim? More to the point, what ramifications does the doctrine of taqiyya have for all interaction between Muslims and non-Muslims?
The Doctrine of Taqiyya
According to Shari'a—the body of legal rulings that defines how a Muslim should behave in all circumstances—deception is not only permitted in certain situations but may be deemed obligatory in others. Contrary to early Christian tradition, for instance, Muslims who were forced to choose between recanting Islam or suffering persecution were permitted to lie and feign apostasy. Other jurists have decreed that Muslims are obligated to lie in order to preserve themselves,[2] based on Qur'anic verses forbidding Muslims from being instrumental in their own deaths.[3]
This is the classic definition of the doctrine of taqiyya. Based on an Arabic word denoting fear, taqiyya has long been understood, especially by Western academics, as something to resort to in times of religious persecution and, for the most part, used in this sense by minority Shi'i groups living among hostile Sunni majorities.[4] Taqiyya allowed the Shi'a to dissemble their religious affiliation in front of the Sunnis on a regular basis, not merely by keeping clandestine about their own beliefs but by actively praying and behaving as if they were Sunnis.
However, one of the few books devoted to the subject, At-Taqiyya fi'l-Islam (Dissimulation in Islam) makes it clear that taqiyya is not limited to Shi'a dissimulating in fear of persecution. Written by Sami Mukaram, a former Islamic studies professor at the American University of Beirut and author of some twenty-five books on Islam, the book clearly demonstrates the ubiquity and broad applicability of taqiyya:
Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it … We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream … Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.[5]
Taqiyya is, therefore, not, as is often supposed, an exclusively Shi'i phenomenon. Of course, as a minority group interspersed among their Sunni enemies, the Shi'a have historically had more reason to dissemble. Conversely, Sunni Islam rapidly dominated vast empires from Spain to China. As a result, its followers were beholden to no one, had nothing to apologize for, and had no need to hide from the infidel nonbeliever (rare exceptions include Spain and Portugal during the Reconquista when Sunnis did dissimulate over their religious identity[6]). Ironically, however, Sunnis living in the West today find themselves in the place of the Shi'a: Now they are the minority surrounded by their traditional enemies—Christian infidels—even if the latter, as opposed to their Reconquista predecessors, rarely act on, let alone acknowledge, this historic enmity. In short, Sunnis are currently experiencing the general circumstances that made taqiyya integral to Shi'ism although without the physical threat that had so necessitated it.
The Articulation of Taqiyya
Qur'anic verse 3:28 is often seen as the primary verse that sanctions deception towards non-Muslims: "Let believers [Muslims] not take infidels [non-Muslims] for friends and allies instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with God—unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions."[7]
Muhammad ibn Jarir at-Tabari (d. 923), author of a standard and authoritative Qur'an commentary, explains verse 3:28 as follows:
If you [Muslims] are under their [non-Muslims'] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them with your tongue while harboring inner animosity for them … [know that] God has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels rather than other believers—except when infidels are above them [in authority]. Should that be the case, let them act friendly towards them while preserving their religion.[8]
Regarding Qur'an 3:28, Ibn Kathir (d. 1373), another prime authority on the Qur'an, writes, "Whoever at any time or place fears … evil [from non-Muslims] may protect himself through outward show." As proof of this, he quotes Muhammad's close companion Abu Darda, who said, "Let us grin in the face of some people while our hearts curse them." Another companion, simply known as Al-Hasan, said, "Doing taqiyya is acceptable till the Day of Judgment [i.e., in perpetuity]."[9]
Other prominent scholars, such as Abu 'Abdullah al-Qurtubi (1214-73) and Muhyi 'd-Din ibn al-Arabi (1165-1240), have extended taqiyya to cover deeds. In other words, Muslims can behave like infidels and worse—for example, by bowing down and worshiping idols and crosses, offering false testimony, and even exposing the weaknesses of their fellow Muslims to the infidel enemy—anything short of actually killing a Muslim: "Taqiyya, even if committed without duress, does not lead to a state of infidelity—even if it leads to sin deserving of hellfire."[10]
Deceit in Muhammad's Military Exploits
Muhammad—whose example as the "most perfect human" is to be followed in every detail—took an expedient view on lying. It is well known, for instance, that he permitted lying in three situations: to reconcile two or more quarreling parties, to placate one's wife, and in war.[11] According to one Arabic legal manual devoted to jihad as defined by the four schools of law, "The ulema agree that deception during warfare is legitimate … deception is a form of art in war."[12] Moreover, according to Mukaram, this deception is classified as taqiyya: "Taqiyya in order to dupe the enemy is permissible."[13]
Several ulema believe deceit is integral to the waging of war: Ibn al-'Arabi declares that "in the Hadith [sayings and actions of Muhammad], practicing deceit in war is well demonstrated. Indeed, its need is more stressed than the need for courage." Ibn al-Munir (d. 1333) writes, "War is deceit, i.e., the most complete and perfect war waged by a holy warrior is a war of deception, not confrontation, due to the latter's inherent danger, and the fact that one can attain victory through treachery without harm [to oneself]." And Ibn Hajar (d. 1448) counsels Muslims "to take great caution in war, while [publicly] lamenting and mourning in order to dupe the infidels."[14]
This Muslim notion that war is deceit goes back to the Battle of the Trench (627), which pitted Muhammad and his followers against several non-Muslim tribes known as Al-Ahzab. One of the Ahzab, Na'im ibn Mas'ud, went to the Muslim camp and converted to Islam. When Muhammad discovered that the Ahzab were unaware of their co-tribalist's conversion, he counseled Mas'ud to return and try to get the pagan forces to abandon the siege. It was then that Muhammad memorably declared, "For war is deceit." Mas'ud returned to the Ahzab without their knowing that he had switched sides and intentionally began to give his former kin and allies bad advice. He also went to great lengths to instigate quarrels between the various tribes until, thoroughly distrusting each other, they disbanded, lifted the siege from the Muslims, and saved Islam from destruction in an embryonic period.[15] Most recently, 9/11 accomplices, such as Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, rationalized their conspiratorial role in their defendant response by evoking their prophet's assertion that "war is deceit."
A more compelling expression of the legitimacy of deceiving infidels is the following anecdote. A poet, Ka'b ibn Ashraf, offended Muhammad, prompting the latter to exclaim, "Who will kill this man who has hurt God and his prophet?" A young Muslim named Muhammad ibn Maslama volunteered on condition that in order to get close enough to Ka'b to assassinate him, he be allowed to lie to the poet. Muhammad agreed. Ibn Maslama traveled to Ka'b and began to denigrate Islam and Muhammad. He carried on in this way till his disaffection became so convincing that Ka'b took him into his confidence. Soon thereafter, Ibn Maslama appeared with another Muslim and, while Ka'b's guard was down, killed him.[16]
Muhammad said other things that cast deception in a positive light, such as "God has commanded me to equivocate among the people just as he has commanded me to establish [religious] obligations"; and "I have been sent with obfuscation"; and "whoever lives his life in dissimulation dies a martyr."[17]
In short, the earliest historical records of Islam clearly attest to the prevalence of taqiyya as a form of Islamic warfare. Furthermore, early Muslims are often depicted as lying their way out of binds—usually by denying or insulting Islam or Muhammad—often to the approval of the latter, his only criterion being that their intentions (niya) be pure.[18] During wars with Christians, whenever the latter were in authority, the practice of taqiyya became even more integral. Mukaram states, "Taqiyya was used as a way to fend off danger from the Muslims, especially in critical times and when their borders were exposed to wars with the Byzantines and, afterwards, to the raids [crusades] of the Franks and others."[19]
Taqiyya in Qur'anic Revelation
The Qur'an itself is further testimony to taqiyya. Since God is believed to be the revealer of these verses, he is by default seen as the ultimate perpetrator of deceit—which is not surprising since he is described in the Qur'an as the best makar, that is, the best deceiver or schemer (e.g., 3:54, 8:30, 10:21).
While other scriptures contain contradictions, the Qur'an is the only holy book whose commentators have evolved a doctrine to account for the very visible shifts which occur from one injunction to another. No careful reader will remain unaware of the many contradictory verses in the Qur'an, most specifically the way in which peaceful and tolerant verses lie almost side by side with violent and intolerant ones. The ulema were initially baffled as to which verses to codify into the Shari'a worldview—the one that states there is no coercion in religion (2:256), or the ones that command believers to fight all non-Muslims till they either convert, or at least submit, to Islam (8:39, 9:5, 9:29). To get out of this quandary, the commentators developed the doctrine of abrogation, which essentially maintains that verses revealed later in Muhammad's career take precedence over earlier ones whenever there is a discrepancy. In order to document which verses abrogated which, a religious science devoted to the chronology of the Qur'an's verses evolved (known as an-Nasikh wa'l Mansukh, the abrogater and the abrogated).
But why the contradiction in the first place? The standard view is that in the early years of Islam, since Muhammad and his community were far outnumbered by their infidel competitors while living next to them in Mecca, a message of peace and coexistence was in order. However, after the Muslims migrated to Medina in 622 and grew in military strength, verses inciting them to go on the offensive were slowly "revealed"—in principle, sent down from God—always commensurate with Islam's growing capabilities. In juridical texts, these are categorized in stages: passivity vis-á-vis aggression; permission to fight back against aggressors; commands to fight aggressors; commands to fight all non-Muslims, whether the latter begin aggressions or not.[20] Growing Muslim might is the only variable that explains this progressive change in policy.
Other scholars put a gloss on this by arguing that over a twenty-two year period, the Qur'an was revealed piecemeal, from passive and spiritual verses to legal prescriptions and injunctions to spread the faith through jihad and conquest, simply to acclimate early Muslim converts to the duties of Islam, lest they be discouraged at the outset by the dramatic obligations that would appear in later verses.[21] Verses revealed towards the end of Muhammad's career—such as, "Warfare is prescribed for you though you hate it"[22]—would have been out of place when warfare was actually out of the question.
However interpreted, the standard view on Qur'anic abrogation concerning war and peace verses is that when Muslims are weak and in a minority position, they should preach and behave according to the ethos of the Meccan verses (peace and tolerance); when strong, however, they should go on the offensive on the basis of what is commanded in the Medinan verses (war and conquest). The vicissitudes of Islamic history are a testimony to this dichotomy, best captured by the popular Muslim notion, based on a hadith, that, if possible, jihad should be performed by the hand (force), if not, then by the tongue (through preaching); and, if that is not possible, then with the heart or one's intentions.[23]
War Is Eternal
That Islam legitimizes deceit during war is, of course, not all that astonishing; after all, as the Elizabethan writer John Lyly put it, "All's fair in love and war."[24] Other non-Muslim philosophers and strategists—such as Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, and Thomas Hobbes—justified deceit in warfare. Deception of the enemy during war is only common sense. The crucial difference in Islam, however, is that war against the infidel is a perpetual affair—until, in the words of the Qur'an, "all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to God."[25] In his entry on jihad from the Encyclopaedia of Islam, Emile Tyan states: "The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily."[26]
Moreover, going back to the doctrine of abrogation, Muslim scholars such as Ibn Salama (d. 1020) agree that Qur'an 9:5, known as ayat as-sayf or the sword verse, has abrogated some 124 of the more peaceful Meccan verses, including "every other verse in the Qur'an, which commands or implies anything less than a total offensive against the nonbelievers."[27] In fact, all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence agree that "jihad is when Muslims wage war on infidels, after having called on them to embrace Islam or at least pay tribute [jizya] and live in submission, and the infidels refuse."[28]
Obligatory jihad is best expressed by Islam's dichotomized worldview that pits the realm of Islam against the realm of war. The first, dar al-Islam, is the "realm of submission," the world where Shari'a governs; the second, dar al-Harb (the realm of war), is the non-Islamic world. A struggle continues until the realm of Islam subsumes the non-Islamic world—a perpetual affair that continues to the present day. The renowned Muslim historian and philosopher Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406) clearly articulates this division:
In the Muslim community, jihad is a religious duty because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the jihad was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense. But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.[29]
Finally and all evidence aside, lest it still appear unreasonable for a faith with over one billion adherents to obligate unprovoked warfare in its name, it is worth noting that the expansionist jihad is seen as an altruistic endeavor, not unlike the nineteenth century ideology of "the white man's burden." The logic is that the world, whether under democracy, socialism, communism, or any other system of governance, is inevitably living in bondage—a great sin, since the good of all humanity is found in living in accordance to God's law. In this context, Muslim deception can be viewed as a slightly less than noble means to a glorious end—Islamic hegemony under Shari'a rule, which is seen as good for both Muslims and non-Muslims.
This view has an ancient pedigree: Soon after the death of Muhammad (634), as the jihad fighters burst out of the Arabian peninsula, a soon-to-be conquered Persian commander asked the invading Muslims what they wanted. They memorably replied as follows:
God has sent us and brought us here so that we may free those who desire from servitude to earthly rulers and make them servants of God, that we may change their poverty into wealth and free them from the tyranny and chaos of [false] religions and bring them to the justice of Islam. He has sent us to bring his religion to all his creatures and call them to Islam. Whoever accepts it from us will be safe, and we shall leave him alone; but whoever refuses, we shall fight until we fulfill the promise of God.[30]
Fourteen hundred years later— in March 2009—Saudi legal expert Basem Alem publicly echoed this view:
As a member of the true religion, I have a greater right to invade [others] in order to impose a certain way of life [according to Shari'a], which history has proven to be the best and most just of all civilizations. This is the true meaning of offensive jihad. When we wage jihad, it is not in order to convert people to Islam, but in order to liberate them from the dark slavery in which they live.[31]
And it should go without saying that taqiyya in the service of altruism is permissible. For example, only recently, after publicly recounting a story where a Muslim tricked a Jew into converting to Islam—warning him that if he tried to abandon Islam, Muslims would kill him as an apostate—Muslim cleric Mahmoud al-Masri called it a "beautiful trick."[32] After all, from an Islamic point of view, it was the Jew who, in the end, benefitted from the deception, which brought him to Islam.
Treaties and Truces
The perpetual nature of jihad is highlighted by the fact that, based on the 10-year treaty of Hudaybiya (628), ratified between Muhammad and his Quraysh opponents in Mecca, most jurists are agreed that ten years is the maximum amount of time Muslims can be at peace with infidels; once the treaty has expired, the situation needs to be reappraised. Based on Muhammad's example of breaking the treaty after two years (by claiming a Quraysh infraction), the sole function of the truce is to buy weakened Muslims time to regroup before renewing the offensive:[33] "By their very nature, treaties must be of temporary duration, for in Muslim legal theory, the normal relations between Muslim and non-Muslim territories are not peaceful, but warlike."[34] Hence "the fuqaha [jurists] are agreed that open-ended truces are illegitimate if Muslims have the strength to renew the war against them [non-Muslims]."[35]
Even though Shari'a mandates Muslims to abide by treaties, they have a way out, one open to abuse: If Muslims believe—even without solid evidence—that their opponents are about to break the treaty, they can preempt by breaking it first. Moreover, some Islamic schools of law, such as the Hanafi, assert that Muslim leaders may abrogate treaties merely if it seems advantageous for Islam.[36] This is reminiscent of the following canonical hadith: "If you ever take an oath to do something and later on you find that something else is better, then you should expiate your oath and do what is better."[37] And what is better, what is more altruistic, than to make God's word supreme by launching the jihad anew whenever possible? Traditionally, Muslim rulers held to a commitment to launch a jihad at least once every year. This ritual is most noted with the Ottoman sultans, who spent half their lives in the field.[38] So important was the duty of jihad that the sultans were not permitted to perform the pilgrimage to Mecca, an individual duty for each Muslim. Their leadership of the jihad allowed this communal duty to continue; without them, it would have fallen into desuetude.[39]
In short, the prerequisite for peace or reconciliation is Muslim advantage. This is made clear in an authoritative Sunni legal text, Umdat as-Salik, written by a fourteenth-century Egyptian scholar, Ahmad Ibn Naqib al-Misri: "There must be some benefit [maslaha] served in making a truce other than the status quo: 'So do not be fainthearted and call for peace when it is you who are uppermost [Qur'an 47:35].'"[40]
More recently, and of great significance for Western leaders advocating cooperation with Islamists, Yasser Arafat, soon after negotiating a peace treaty criticized as conceding too much to Israel, addressed an assembly of Muslims in a mosque in Johannesburg where he justified his actions: "I see this agreement as being no more than the agreement signed between our Prophet Muhammad and the Quraysh in Mecca."[41] In other words, like Muhammad, Arafat gave his word only to annul it once "something better" came along—that is, once the Palestinians became strong enough to renew the offensive and continue on the road to Jerusalem. Elsewhere, Hudaybiya has appeared as a keyword for radical Islamists. The Moro Islamic Liberation Front had three training camps within the Camp Abu Bakar complex in the Philippines, one of which was named Camp Hudaybiya.[42]
Hostility Disguised As Grievance
In their statements directed at European or American audiences, Islamists maintain that the terrorism they direct against the West is merely reciprocal treatment for decades of Western and Israeli oppression. Yet in writings directed to their fellow Muslims, this animus is presented, not as a reaction to military or political provocation but as a product of religious obligation.
For instance, when addressing Western audiences, Osama bin Laden lists any number of grievances as motivating his war on the West—from the oppression of the Palestinians to the Western exploitation of women, and even U.S. failure to sign the environmental Kyoto protocol—all things intelligible from a Western perspective. Never once, however, does he justify Al-Qaeda's attacks on Western targets simply because non-Muslim countries are infidel entities that must be subjugated. Indeed, he often initiates his messages to the West by saying, "Reciprocal treatment is part of justice" or "Peace to whoever follows guidance"[43]—though he means something entirely different than what his Western listeners understand by words such as "peace," "justice," or "guidance."
It is when bin Laden speaks to fellow Muslims that the truth comes out. When a group of prominent Muslims wrote an open letter to the American people soon after the strikes of 9/11, saying that Islam seeks to peacefully coexist,[44] bin Laden wrote to castigate them:
As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High's Word: "We [Muslims] renounce you [non-Muslims]. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us—till you believe in God alone" [Qur'an 60:4]. So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility—that is, battle—ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [i.e., a dhimmi, or protected minority], or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy! ... Such then is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred—directed from the Muslim to the infidel—is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them.[45]
Mainstream Islam's four schools of jurisprudence lend their support to this hostile Weltanschauung by speaking of the infidel in similar terms. Bin Laden's addresses to the West with his talk of justice and peace are clear instances of taqiyya. He is not only waging a physical jihad but a propaganda war, that is, a war of deceit. If he can convince the West that the current conflict is entirely its fault, he garners greater sympathy for his cause. At the same time, he knows that if Americans were to realize that nothing short of their submission can ever bring peace, his propaganda campaign would be quickly compromised. Hence the constant need to dissemble and to cite grievances, for, as bin Laden's prophet asserted, "War is deceit."
Implications
Taqiyya presents a range of ethical dilemmas. Anyone who truly believes that God justifies and, through his prophet's example, even encourages deception will not experience any ethical qualms over lying. Consider the case of 'Ali Mohammad, bin Laden's first "trainer" and long-time Al-Qaeda operative. An Egyptian, he was initially a member of Islamic Jihad and had served in the Egyptian army's military intelligence unit. After 1984, he worked for a time with the CIA in Germany. Though considered untrustworthy, he managed to get to California where he enlisted in the U.S. Army. It seems likely that he continued to work in some capacity for the CIA. He later trained jihadists in the United States and Afghanistan and was behind several terror attacks in Africa. People who knew him regarded him with "fear and awe for his incredible self-confidence, his inability to be intimidated, absolute ruthless determination to destroy the enemies of Islam, and his zealous belief in the tenets of militant Islamic fundamentalism."[46] Indeed, this sentence sums it all up: For a zealous belief in Islam's tenets, which legitimize deception in order to make God's word supreme, will certainly go a long way in creating "incredible self-confidence" when lying.[47]
Yet most Westerners continue to think that Muslim mores, laws, and ethical constraints are near identical to those of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Naively or arrogantly, today's multiculturalist leaders project their own worldview onto Islamists, thinking a handshake and smiles across a cup of coffee, as well as numerous concessions, are enough to dismantle the power of God's word and centuries of unchanging tradition. The fact remains: Right and wrong in Islam have little to do with universal standards but only with what Islam itself teaches—much of which is antithetical to Western norms.
It must, therefore, be accepted that, contrary to long-held academic assumptions, the doctrine of taqiyya goes far beyond Muslims engaging in religious dissimulation in the interest of self-preservation and encompasses deception of the infidel enemy in general. This phenomenon should provide a context for Shi'i Iran's zeal—taqiyya being especially second nature to Shi'ism—to acquire nuclear power while insisting that its motives are entirely peaceful.
Nor is taqiyya confined to overseas affairs. Walid Phares of the National Defense University has lamented that homegrown Islamists are operating unfettered on American soil due to their use of taqiyya: "Does our government know what this doctrine is all about and, more importantly, are authorities educating the body of our defense apparatus regarding this stealthy threat dormant among us?"[48] After the Fort Hood massacre, when Nidal Malik Hasan, an American-Muslim who exhibited numerous Islamist signs which were ignored, killed thirteen fellow servicemen and women, one is compelled to respond in the negative.
This, then, is the dilemma: Islamic law unambiguously splits the world into two perpetually warring halves—the Islamic world versus the non-Islamic—and holds it to be God's will for the former to subsume the latter. Yet if war with the infidel is a perpetual affair, if war is deceit, and if deeds are justified by intentions—any number of Muslims will naturally conclude that they have a divinely sanctioned right to deceive, so long as they believe their deception serves to aid Islam "until all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to God."[49] Such deception will further be seen as a means to an altruistic end. Muslim overtures for peace, dialogue, or even temporary truces must be seen in this light, evoking the practical observations of philosopher James Lorimer, uttered over a century ago: "So long as Islam endures, the reconciliation of its adherents, even with Jews and Christians, and still more with the rest of mankind, must continue to be an insoluble problem."[50]
In closing, whereas it may be more appropriate to talk of "war and peace" as natural corollaries in a Western context, when discussing Islam, it is more accurate to talk of "war and deceit." For, from an Islamic point of view, times of peace—that is, whenever Islam is significantly weaker than its infidel rivals—are times of feigned peace and pretense, in a word, taqiyya.
Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum.
[1] Qur'an 40:28.
[2] Fakhr ad-Din ar-Razi, At-Tafsir al-Kabir (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 2000), vol. 10, p. 98.
[3] Qur'an 2:195, 4:29.
[4] Paul E. Walker, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam in the Modern World, John Esposito, ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), vol. 4, s.v. "Taqiyah," pp. 186-7; Ibn Babuyah, A Shi'ite Creed, A. A. A. Fyzee, trans. (London: n.p., 1942), pp. 110-2; Etan Kohlberg, "Some Imami-Shi'i Views on Taqiyya," Journal of the American Oriental Society, 95 (1975): 395-402.
[5] Sami Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam (London: Mu'assisat at-Turath ad-Druzi, 2004), p. 7, author's translation.
[6] Devin Stewart, "Islam in Spain after the Reconquista," Emory University, p. 2, accessed Nov. 27, 2009.
[7] See also Quran 2:173, 2:185, 4:29, 16:106, 22:78, 40:28, verses cited by Muslim jurisprudents as legitimating taqiyya.
[8] Abu Ja'far Muhammad at-Tabari, Jami' al-Bayan 'an ta'wil ayi'l-Qur'an al-Ma'ruf: Tafsir at-Tabari (Beirut: Dar Ihya' at-Turath al-'Arabi, 2001), vol. 3, p. 267, author's translation.
[9] 'Imad ad-Din Isma'il Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur'an al-Karim (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 2001), vol. 1, p. 350, author's translation.
[10] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, pp. 30-7.
[11] Imam Muslim, "Kitab al-Birr wa's-Salat, Bab Tahrim al-Kidhb wa Bayan al-Mubih Minhu," Sahih Muslim, rev. ed., Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, trans. (New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, 2000).
[12] Ahmad Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi'l Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina (Cairo: Al-Azhar, 2003), p. 304, author's translation.
[13] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, p. 32.
[14] Raymond Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader (New York: Doubleday, 2007), pp. 142-3.
[15] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, pp. 32-3.
[16] Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad (Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1997), pp. 367-8.
[17] Shihab ad-Din Muhammad al-Alusi al-Baghdadi, Ruh al-Ma'ani fi Tafsir al-Qur'an al-'Azim wa' l-Saba' al-Mithani (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 2001), vol. 2, p. 118, author's translation.
[18] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, pp. 11-2.
[19] Ibid., pp. 41-2.
[20] Ibn Qayyim, Tafsir, in Abd al-'Aziz bin Nasir al-Jalil, At-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw' al-Kitab wa 's-Sunna (Riyahd: n.p., 2003), pp. 36-43.
[21] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fi 'l-Islam, p. 20.
[22] Qur'an 2: 216.
[23] Yahya bin Sharaf ad-Din an-Nawawi, An-Nawawi's Forty Hadiths, p. 16, accessed Aug. 1, 2009.
[24] John Lyly, Euphues: The Anatomy of Wit (London, 1578), p. 236.
[25] Qur'an 8:39.
[26] Emile Tyan, The Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden: Brill, 1960), vol. 2, s.v. "Djihad," pp. 538-40.
[27] David Bukay, "Peace or Jihad? Abrogation in Islam," Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2007, pp. 3-11, f.n. 58; David S. Powers, "The Exegetical Genre nasikh al-Qur'an wa-mansukhuhu," in Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qur'an, Andrew Rippin, ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), pp. 130-1.
[28] Jalil, At-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw' al-Kitab wa ' s-Sunna, p. 7.
[29] Ibn Khaldun, The Muqadimmah. An Introduction to History, Franz Rosenthal, trans. (New York: Pantheon, 1958), vol. 1, p. 473.
[30] Hugh Kennedy, The Great Arab Conquests (Philadelphia: Da Capo, 2007), p. 112.
[31] "Saudi Legal Expert Basem Alem: We Have the Right to Wage Offensive Jihad to Impose Our Way of Life," TV Monitor, clip 2108, Middle East Media Research Institute, trans., Mar. 26, 2009.
[32] "Egyptian Cleric Mahmoud Al-Masri Recommends Tricking Jews into Becoming Muslims," TV Monitor, clip 2268, Middle East Media Research Institute, trans., Aug. 10, 2009.
[33] Denis MacEoin, "Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance," Middle East Quarterly, Summer 2008, pp. 39-48.
[34] Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1955), p. 220.
[35] Ahmad Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi'l Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina, p. 461, author's translation.
[36] Ibid., p. 469.
[37] Muhammad al-Bukhari, "Judgements (Ahkaam)," Sahih al-Bukhari, book 89, M. Muhsin Khan, trans., accessed July 22, 2009.
[38] Michael Bonner, Jihad in Islamic History: Doctrines and Practice (Princeton: Woodstock Publishers, 2006), p. 148.
[39] Ahmed Akgündüz, "Why Did the Ottoman Sultans Not Make Hajj (Pilgrimage)?" accessed Nov. 9, 2009.
[40] Ahmad Ibn Naqib al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law (Beltsville: Amana Publications, 1994), p. 605.
[41] Daniel Pipes, "Lessons from the Prophet Muhammad's Diplomacy," Middle East Quarterly, Sept. 1999, pp. 65-72.
[42] Arabinda Acharya, "Training in Terror," IDSS Commentaries, Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, May 2, 2003.
[43] "Does hypocrite have a past tense?" for clip of Osama bin Laden, accessed Aug. 1, 2009.
[44] Ibrahim b. Muhammad al-Shahwan, et al, "Correspondence with Saudis: How We Can Coexist," AmericanValues.org, accessed July 28, 2009.
[45] Ibrahim, The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 43.
[46] Steven Emerson, "Osama bin Laden's Special Operations Man," Journal of Counterterrorism and Security International, Sept. 1, 1998.
[47] For lists of other infiltrators of U. S. organizations, see Daniel Pipes, "Islamists Penetrate Western Security," Mar. 9, 2008.
[48] Walid Phares, "North Carolina: Meet Taqiyya Jihad," International Analyst Network, July 30, 2009.
[49] Qur'an 8:39.
[50] James Lorimer, The Institutes of the Law of Nations: A Treatise of the Jural Relations of Separate Political Communities (Clark, N.J.: The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd., 2005), p. 124.”>>
WHO IS THE FATHER OF THE LIE?
Let's look at the Bible and uncover who is the originator of lying. Let's go to John 8:44, "You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies." (RSV). What was the first lie to someone who had the right to know? Satan the Devil lied to Eve and ultimately brought death to all of mankind by it as shown at Genesis 3:1-5, "Now the serpent was more subtle than any other wild creature that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God say, 'You shall not eat of any tree of the garden'?" 2 And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'" 4 But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."" (RSV). This was the first lie and it was rooted in selfishness and in wrong desire. Satan wanted the worship and adoration that belonged to God (YHWH) and his lie was designed to divert the love and obedience of the first human pair to Satan, the liar. He had presented himself as a benefactor, an angel of light; but he was neither.
All MALICIOUS lies uttered since that time are likewise done for selfish and wrong motives and to wrongly harm and/or discredit others. People tell lies to escape deserved punishment, to profit at the expense of others, and to gain and/or maintain some advantages either material rewards and/or the praise of men.
The most serious lies have been the religious lies. Why so? Because they endanger the future life of individuals deceived by them. These lies are such beliefs and fables of men such as a charismatic leader having direct communication with a deity or ex-Cathedra communications with a deity; that Almighty God (YHWH) and his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) are one and the same and/or co-equal and/or co-eternal, that the Virgin Mary remained ever virgin, that religious leaders are superior to others, that God (YHWH) blesses one nation over another nation today in war time-the so called patriotism, making idols out of sports and/or movie heroes, etc. As Jesus (Yeshua) Christ said at Matthew 23:15-22, "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you traverse sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves. 16 "Woe to you, blind guides, who say, 'If any one swears by the temple, it is nothing; but if any one swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.' 17 You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? 18 And you say, 'If any one swears by the altar, it is nothing; but if any one swears by the gift that is on the altar, he is bound by his oath.' 19 You blind men! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 So he who swears by the altar, swears by it and by everything on it; 21 and he who swears by the temple, swears by it and by him who dwells in it; 22 and he who swears by heaven, swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it." (RSV). Their lie involved an exchange of God's (YHWH's) truth for the 'lie.' This deception or falsehood is idolatory, and can cause a person to become a practicer of what is degrading and vile as revealed by Romans 1:24-32, "Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. 29 They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them." (RSV).
LIARS IN ACTION IN THE TIME OF JESUS (YESHUA):
The religious leaders in Judaism when Jesus (Yeshua) was on earth conducting his earthly ministry give a good example of what can happen when one substitutes a lie for the truth which he has abandoned. They became so deceitful and evil that they even schemed to get Jesus (Yeshua) put to death as recorded as a warning to us today at Matthew 12:14, "But the Pharisees went out and took counsel against him, how to destroy him." (RSV); and at Matthew 27:1-2, "When morning came, all the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death; 2 and they bound him and led him away and delivered him to Pilate the governor." (RSV); and at Matthew 27:62-65, " Next day, that is, after the day of Preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered before Pilate 63 and said, "Sir, we remember how that impostor said, while he was still alive, 'After three days I will rise again.' 64 Therefore order the sepulchre to be made secure until the third day, lest his disciples go and steal him away, and tell the people, 'He has risen from the dead,' and the last fraud will be worse than the first." 65 Pilate said to them, "You have a guard of soldiers; go, make it as secure as you can." (RSV); and at Mark 14:1, "It was now two days before the Passover and the feast of Unleavened Bread. And the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to arrest him by stealth, and kill him;" (RSV); and at Luke 20:19, "The scribes and the chief priests tried to lay hands on him at that very hour, but they feared the people; for they perceived that he had told this parable against them." (RSV).
HOWEVER, UNLIKE MEN, GOD (YHWH) CAN NOT LIE:
As shown at Numbers 23:19, God (YHWH) can not lie, "God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should repent. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfil it?" (RSV); and re-affirmed at Hebrews 6:13-18, "For when God made a promise to Abraham, since he had no one greater by whom to swear, he swore by himself, 14 saying, "Surely I will bless you and multiply you." 15 And thus Abraham, having patiently endured, obtained the promise. 16 Men indeed swear by a greater than themselves, and in all their disputes an oath is final for confirmation. 17 So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he interposed with an oath, 18 so that through two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible that God should prove false, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to seize the hope set before us." (RSV).
In fact, God (YHWH) hates a 'false tongue' as testified to at Proverbs 6:16-19, "There are six things which the LORD hates, seven which are an abomination to him: 17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, 19 a false witness who breathes out lies, and a man who sows discord among brothers." (RSV). We see a lot of these 'false tongues' today. Intolerant ones and religious bigots full of hate tell falsehoods against those we hate. We see this in political speeches, deceptive and false postings against others on the Internet and in pamphlets and other printed material; this is what God (YHWH) hates. This also applies to those giving false testimony to inflict damage and harm on others and malicious lying as testified to at Deuteronomy 19:15-21, " "A single witness shall not prevail against a man for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed; only on the evidence of two witnesses, or of three witnesses, shall a charge be sustained. 16 If a malicious witness rises against any man to accuse him of wrongdoing, 17 then both parties to the dispute shall appear before the LORD, before the priests and the judges who are in office in those days; 18 the judges shall inquire diligently, and if the witness is a false witness and has accused his brother falsely, 19 then you shall do to him as he had meant to do to his brother; so you shall purge the evil from the midst of you. 20 And the rest shall hear, and fear, and shall never again commit any such evil among you. 21 Your eye shall not pity; it shall be life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." (RSV); and at Leviticus 6:2-7, " "If any one sins and commits a breach of faith against the LORD by deceiving his neighbor in a matter of deposit or security, or through robbery, or if he has oppressed his neighbor 3 or has found what was lost and lied about it, swearing falsely--in any of all the things which men do and sin therein, 4 when one has sinned and become guilty, he shall restore what he took by robbery, or what he got by oppression, or the deposit which was committed to him, or the lost thing which he found, 5 or anything about which he has sworn falsely; he shall restore it in full, and shall add a fifth to it, and give it to him to whom it belongs, on the day of his guilt offering. 6 And he shall bring to the priest his guilt offering to the LORD, a ram without blemish out of the flock, valued by you at the price for a guilt offering; 7 and the priest shall make atonement for him before the LORD, and he shall be forgiven for any of the things which one may do and thereby become guilty." (RSV); and at Leviticus 19:11-12, ""You shall not steal, nor deal falsely, nor lie to one another. 12 And you shall not swear by my name falsely, and so profane the name of your God: I am the LORD." (RSV).
It is to be noted, God's (YHWH's) view of MALICIOUS lying has not changed. Those wishing to gain his approval must not engage in the practice of malicious lying as testified to at Psalms 5:6, "Thou destroyest those who speak lies; the LORD abhors bloodthirsty and deceitful men." (RSV); and at Proverbs 20:19, "He who goes about gossiping reveals secrets; therefore do not associate with one who speaks foolishly.' (RSV); and at Colossians 3:9, "Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old nature with its practices." (RSV); and at 1 Timothy 3:11, "Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old nature with its practices." (RSV); and at Revelation 21:8 & 27, "But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death." (RSV) & "But nothing unclean shall enter it, nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life." (RSV); and at Revelation 22:15, "Outside are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and every one who loves and practices falsehood." (RSV).
CONCLUSION:
In fact, God (YHWH) allows those who prefer falsehood to believe in the lie rather than in the truth about his Son, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ as shown by 2 Timothy 2:9-12, " the gospel for which I am suffering and wearing fetters like a criminal. But the word of God is not fettered. 10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain salvation in Christ Jesus with its eternal glory. 11 The saying is sure: If we have died with him, we shall also live with him; 12 if we endure, we shall also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us;" (RSV). This principle has been illustrated many times in the scriptures as shown WHEN LYING PROPHETS ASSURED King Ahab of certain success in war as recorded at 1 Kings 22:1-38, "For three years Syria and Israel continued without war. 2 But in the third year Jehosh'aphat the king of Judah came down to the king of Israel. 3 And the king of Israel said to his servants, "Do you know that Ramoth-gilead belongs to us, and we keep quiet and do not take it out of the hand of the king of Syria?" 4 And he said to Jehosh'aphat, "Will you go with me to battle at Ramoth-gilead?" And Jehosh'aphat said to the king of Israel, "I am as you are, my people as your people, my horses as your horses." 5 And Jehosh'aphat said to the king of Israel, "Inquire first for the word of the LORD." 6 Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, about four hundred men, and said to them, "Shall I go to battle against Ramoth-gilead, or shall I forbear?" And they said, "Go up; for the Lord will give it into the hand of the king." 7 But Jehosh'aphat said, "Is there not here another prophet of the LORD of whom we may inquire?" 8 And the king of Israel said to Jehosh'aphat, "There is yet one man by whom we may inquire of the LORD, Micai'ah the son of Imlah; but I hate him, for he never prophesies good concerning me, but evil." And Jehosh'aphat said, "Let not the king say so." 9 Then the king of Israel summoned an officer and said, "Bring quickly Micai'ah the son of Imlah." 10 Now the king of Israel and Jehosh'aphat the king of Judah were sitting on their thrones, arrayed in their robes, at the threshing floor at the entrance of the gate of Sama'ria; and all the prophets were prophesying before them. 11 And Zedeki'ah the son of Chena'anah made for himself horns of iron, and said, "Thus says the LORD, 'With these you shall push the Syrians until they are destroyed.'" 12 And all the prophets prophesied so, and said, "Go up to Ramoth-gilead and triumph; the LORD will give it into the hand of the king." 13 And the messenger who went to summon Micai'ah said to him, "Behold, the words of the prophets with one accord are favorable to the king; let your word be like the word of one of them, and speak favorably." 14 But Micai'ah said, "As the LORD lives, what the LORD says to me, that I will speak." 15 And when he had come to the king, the king said to him, "Micai'ah, shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall we forbear?" And he answered him, "Go up and triumph; the LORD will give it into the hand of the king." 16 But the king said to him, "How many times shall I adjure you that you speak to me nothing but the truth in the name of the LORD?" 17 And he said, "I saw all Israel scattered upon the mountains, as sheep that have no shepherd; and the LORD said, 'These have no master; let each return to his home in peace.'" 18 And the king of Israel said to Jehosh'aphat, "Did I not tell you that he would not prophesy good concerning me, but evil?" 19 And Micai'ah said, "Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left; 20 and the LORD said, 'Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?' And one said one thing, and another said another. 21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, saying, 'I will entice him.' 22 And the LORD said to him, 'By what means?' And he said, 'I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.' And he said, 'You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go forth and do so.' 23 Now therefore behold, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the LORD has spoken evil concerning you." 24 Then Zedeki'ah the son of Chena'anah came near and struck Micai'ah on the cheek, and said, "How did the Spirit of the LORD go from me to speak to you?" 25 And Micai'ah said, "Behold, you shall see on that day when you go into an inner chamber to hide yourself." 26 And the king of Israel said, "Seize Micai'ah, and take him back to Amon the governor of the city and to Jo'ash the king's son; 27 and say, 'Thus says the king, "Put this fellow in prison, and feed him with scant fare of bread and water, until I come in peace."'" 28 And Micai'ah said, "If you return in peace, the LORD has not spoken by me." And he said, "Hear, all you peoples!" 29 So the king of Israel and Jehosh'aphat the king of Judah went up to Ramoth-gilead. 30 And the king of Israel said to Jehosh'aphat, "I will disguise myself and go into battle, but you wear your robes." And the king of Israel disguised himself and went into battle. 31 Now the king of Syria had commanded the thirty-two captains of his chariots, "Fight with neither small nor great, but only with the king of Israel." 32 And when the captains of the chariots saw Jehosh'aphat, they said, "It is surely the king of Israel." So they turned to fight against him; and Jehosh'aphat cried out. 33 And when the captains of the chariots saw that it was not the king of Israel, they turned back from pursuing him. 34 But a certain man drew his bow at a venture, and struck the king of Israel between the scale armor and the breastplate; therefore he said to the driver of his chariot, "Turn about, and carry me out of the battle, for I am wounded." 35 And the battle grew hot that day, and the king was propped up in his chariot facing the Syrians, until at evening he died; and the blood of the wound flowed into the bottom of the chariot. 36 And about sunset a cry went through the army, "Every man to his city, and every man to his country!" 37 So the king died, and was brought to Sama'ria; and they buried the king in Sama'ria. 38 And they washed the chariot by the pool of Sama'ria, and the dogs licked up his blood, and the harlots washed themselves in it, according to the word of the LORD which he had spoken." (RSV); and at 2 Chronicles 18:1-34, "Now Jehosh'aphat had great riches and honor; and he made a marriage alliance with Ahab. 2 After some years he went down to Ahab in Sama'ria. And Ahab killed an abundance of sheep and oxen for him and for the people who were with him, and induced him to go up against Ramoth-gilead. 3 Ahab king of Israel said to Jehosh'aphat king of Judah, "Will you go with me to Ramoth-gilead?" He answered him, "I am as you are, my people as your people. We will be with you in the war." 4 And Jehosh'aphat said to the king of Israel, "Inquire first for the word of the LORD." 5 Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, four hundred men, and said to them, "Shall we go to battle against Ramoth-gilead, or shall I forbear?" And they said, "Go up; for God will give it into the hand of the king." 6 But Jehosh'aphat said, "Is there not here another prophet of the LORD of whom we may inquire?" 7 And the king of Israel said to Jehosh'aphat, "There is yet one man by whom we may inquire of the LORD, Micai'ah the son of Imlah; but I hate him, for he never prophesies good concerning me, but always evil." And Jehosh'aphat said, "Let not the king say so." 8 Then the king of Israel summoned an officer and said, "Bring quickly Micai'ah the son of Imlah." 9 Now the king of Israel and Jehosh'aphat the king of Judah were sitting on their thrones, arrayed in their robes; and they were sitting at the threshing floor at the entrance of the gate of Sama'ria; and all the prophets were prophesying before them. 10 And Zedeki'ah the son of Chena'anah made for himself horns of iron, and said, "Thus says the LORD, 'With these you shall push the Syrians until they are destroyed.'" 11 And all the prophets prophesied so, and said, "Go up to Ramoth-gilead and triumph; the LORD will give it into the hand of the king." 12 And the messenger who went to summon Micai'ah said to him, "Behold, the words of the prophets with one accord are favorable to the king; let your word be like the word of one of them, and speak favorably." 13 But Micai'ah said, "As the LORD lives, what my God says, that I will speak." 14 And when he had come to the king, the king said to him, "Micai'ah, shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I forbear?" And he answered, "Go up and triumph; they will be given into your hand." 15 But the king said to him, "How many times shall I adjure you that you speak to me nothing but the truth in the name of the LORD?" 16 And he said, "I saw all Israel scattered upon the mountains, as sheep that have no shepherd; and the LORD said, 'These have no master; let each return to his home in peace.'" 17 And the king of Israel said to Jehosh'aphat, "Did I not tell you that he would not prophesy good concerning me, but evil?" 18 And Micai'ah said, "Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing on his right hand and on his left; 19 and the LORD said, 'Who will entice Ahab the king of Israel, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?' And one said one thing, and another said another. 20 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD, saying, 'I will entice him.' And the LORD said to him, 'By what means?' 21 And he said, 'I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.' And he said, 'You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go forth and do so.' 22 Now therefore behold, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of these your prophets; the LORD has spoken evil concerning you." 23 Then Zedeki'ah the son of Chena'anah came near and struck Micai'ah on the cheek, and said, "Which way did the Spirit of the LORD go from me to speak to you?" 24 And Micai'ah said, "Behold, you shall see on that day when you go into an inner chamber to hide yourself." 25 And the king of Israel said, "Seize Micai'ah, and take him back to Amon the governor of the city and to Jo'ash the king's son; 26 and say, 'Thus says the king, Put this fellow in prison, and feed him with scant fare of bread and water, until I return in peace.'" 27 And Micai'ah said, "If you return in peace, the LORD has not spoken by me." And he said, "Hear, all you peoples!" 28 So the king of Israel and Jehosh'aphat the king of Judah went up to Ramoth-gilead. 29 And the king of Israel said to Jehosh'aphat, "I will disguise myself and go into battle, but you wear your robes." And the king of Israel disguised himself; and they went into battle. 30 Now the king of Syria had commanded the captains of his chariots, "Fight with neither small nor great, but only with the king of Israel." 31 And when the captains of the chariots saw Jehosh'aphat, they said, "It is the king of Israel." So they turned to fight against him; and Jehosh'aphat cried out, and the LORD helped him. God drew them away from him, 32 for when the captains of the chariots saw that it was not the king of Israel, they turned back from pursuing him. 33 But a certain man drew his bow at a venture, and struck the king of Israel between the scale armor and the breastplate; therefore he said to the driver of his chariot, "Turn about, and carry me out of the battle, for I am wounded." 34 And the battle grew hot that day, and the king of Israel propped himself up in his chariot facing the Syrians until evening; then at sunset he died" (RSV)..
As we can see, God (YHWH) revealed to Micaiah the facts, but allowed a spirit creature to become a deceptive spirit in the mouths of Ahab's prophets. They spoke, not the truth, but what Ahab wanted to hear. So as we can see from this lying to harm others in some way is always evil and wrong, but not telling the truth to those who are not entitled to know it is NOT necessarily wrong. However, making false accusations and lying to discredit and/or hurt is someway others is always wrong; as is lying to promote destructive myths and fables of men per 2 Corinthians 4:4, "In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the likeness of God." (RSV).
Therefore, we can readily see that Taqiyya is a practice from none other than Satan the Devil and that any religion or group using it is from NONE OTHER THAN SATAN THE DEVIL.
Now to know the truth, go to:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org!
- •
Thread Starter- Admin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
ISLAM DENYS HUMAN RIGHTS AND IS BEHIND ABOUT 95% OF THE RELIGIOUS INSPIRED VIOLENCE IN THE WORLD
INTRODUCTION:
Islam is a wicked religion that does NOT believe in human rights, and the only solution to ending their atrocities is to dissolve Islam in the interest of peace and human rights.
THE PARTIAL PROOF OF THE ABOVE:
Islam: 'Appalling and Abhorrent' in the Eyes of a Blind World?
by Raymond Ibrahim
Human Events
May 21, 2014
A few days ago in Sudan, an eight-month pregnant wife and mother was sentenced to death by hanging for refusing to renounce Christ and embrace Islam. According to theLA Times:
The court also ordered Ibrahim to be flogged for having sexual relations with her husband, since her marriage is not recognized by officials.
Ibrahim refused a court order Sunday giving her several days to renounce her Christian faith, which resulted in the sentencing Thursday….
Ibrahim, currently jailed with her son, will be allowed to give birth and raise her second child until the age of 2 years but then faces execution. Sudanese authorities refuse to allow Ibrahim's son to reside with her husband because the husband is Christian.
Tragic as this story is, it is also immensely commonplace in Islamic countries. Why? Because Islamic law does in fact punish the apostate from Islam—including with death—in accordance with the commands of the Muslim prophet Muhammad. Indeed, many Muslim clerics believe that "If the [death] penalty for apostasy was ignored, there would not be an Islam today; Islam would have ended on the death of the prophet," as top Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi once declared on live television.
Of more significance is the Amnesty International statement concerning Meriam Ibrahim's plight. While its criticism is aimed at Sudan's legal system, the statement unwittingly provides a glimpse of how the international community would view Islam if it could actually understand that these human rights abuses are not products of this or that government or regime, but of Islam itself.
According to the Amnesty International statement:
The fact that a woman has been sentenced to death for her religious choice, and to flogging for being married to a man of an allegedly different religion is appalling and abhorrent.
Adultery and apostasy are acts which should not be considered crimes at all. It is flagrant breach of international human rights law. The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, which includes the freedom to hold beliefs, is far-reaching and profound; it encompasses freedom of thought on all matters, personal conviction and the commitment to religion or belief (emphasis added).
If, as Amnesty International declares, flogging and executing a person, in this case a pregnant woman, because of her "religious choice" and marrying a man of a "different religion" are "appalling and abhorrent"; if they are a "flagrant breach of international human rights law"—what do we make of the fact that Muslim converts to Christianity are punished and sometimes killed all across the Islamic world?
Consider the following anecdotes, a few examples, most from 2013 alone (culled from my monthly "Muslim Persecution of Christians" series and listed in country alphabetical order):
Afghanistan: A member of Afghanistan's Parliament said that all Afghans who convert to Christianity should be executed. His exact words: "Afghani citizens continue to convert to Christianity in India. Numerous Afghanis have become Christians in India. This is an offense to Islamic Laws and according to the Quran they need to be executed." As one of many live examples, Said Musa, an amputee and father of six young children, was once charged with apostasy and pressured to renounce Christianity, but he refused. So he was imprisoned, suffering "sexual abuse, beatings, mockery, and sleep deprivation because of his faith in Jesus."
Algeria: The wife of Ali Touahir, a 52-year-old Muslim convert to Christianity, left him, taking their seven-year-old daughter, and is divorcing him in court. One of his wife's brothers openly threatened to kill apostate. The wife's lawyer asserted: "It is not possible that my client [the Muslim wife] still remain under the same roof with a man who has renounced his religion, as he became apostate; and we are not ignorant of the punishment that is due an apostate under sharia [death]."
Cameroon: Two Muslim converts to Christianity were shot dead and two others wounded, in the Christian-majority African nation where Muslims make approximately 20 percent of the population. One of them was previously threatened by the Nigerian Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram to return to Islam or "face Allah's wrath."
Egypt: A court sentenced an entire family—Nadia Mohamed Ali and her seven children—to fifteen years in prison for converting to Christianity. A born Christian, Nadia had earlier converted to Islam and married a Muslim man; reconverting back to Christianity after the death of her husband, she attempted to reflect this change formally on her identity card and her children's, which created suspicions among security, who arrested the family. Separately and days ago in Egypt, after a former Muslim woman on live television announced her apostasy and lack of faith in Muhammad as the "Messenger of Allah," she was insulted, ridiculed, and thrown off the set by the host.
Iran: Imprisoned American pastor Saeed Abedini was reported as "facing physical and psychological torture at the hands of captors demanding he renounce his beliefs." The 32-year-old married father of two, who left his home in Boise, Idaho, to help start an orphanage in his former country, once detailed "horrific pressures" and "death threats" in a letter to family members: "My eyes get blurry, my body does not have the strength to walk, and my steps become very weak and shaky… They are only waiting for one thing…for me to deny Christ. But they will never get this from me." The imprisonment and torture of Muslim converts to Christianity in Iran is quite common (recall the plight of Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani). According to Adnkronos News, "renouncing the Muslim faith is punishable with the death penalty [in Iran]. Over 300 Iranian converts to Christianity have been arrested over the past two years, according to opposition websites."
Kyrgyz: After a young Muslim girl converted to Christianity, her parents "wanted her to recant and renounce her faith in Christ, so they began to beat her systematically till she lost consciousness… It was winter when all of this happened, so her parents put her into a cold room and kept her there for several days. Still they were unable to break her spirit. They then started pulling her hair and put her face against the stove, burning her face. In spite of this, she remained faithful."
Morocco: A fatwa, or Islamic decree, by the government's top religious authority, calls for the execution of those Muslims who leave Islam, causing many Christian converts to live in fear. Lamented one Christian: "The fatwa showed us that our country is still living in the old centuries—no freedom, no democracy. Unfortunately, we feel that we aren't protected. We can be arrested or now even killed any time and everywhere. The majority of the Christian Moroccan leaders have the same feeling. We are more followed now by the secret police than before. Only the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ gives us courage and peace."
Pakistan: A 16-year-old Muslim boy who converted to Christianity was abducted in Peshawar by Taliban-linked Islamic militants "and his fate may already be marked, as he is considered 'guilty of apostasy.'" As one Pakistani pastor explained, "If a young Muslim converts to Christianity in Pakistan, he is forced to live in hiding. Every Muslim might feel compelled to kill him. The change of religion is not punished by the civil law, it is punishable by Islamic law. For this reason cases of Muslim conversion to Christianity are very rare and some convert in secret." Muhammad Kamran, a Muslim convert to Christianity, exemplifies the pastor's words. After he told his wife of his conversion, she abused and exposed him, resulting in his being severely beaten by local Muslims. In his words: "No one was willing to let me live the life I wanted [as a Christian]—they say Islam is not a religion of compulsion, but no one has been able to tell me why Muslims who don't find satisfaction in the religion [such as myself] become liable to be killed."
Saudi Arabia: After a woman was exposed as having converted to Christianity, she was sentenced to six years in prison and 300 lashes. Although she managed to flee the nation and went into hiding, the Christian Lebanese man accused of introducing her to Christianity received six years in prison and 300 lashes.
Somalia: The Al-Qaeda linked Al Shabaab ("The Youth"), which has vowed to cleanse the Horn of Africa of all Christian presence, has slaughtered countless Muslim converts to Christianity—men, women, and children—in the last few years. Most recently, Al Shabaab shot to death 42-year-old Fartun Omar, a widow and mother of five, for converting to Christianity. Months earlier, they had killed her husband for the same "crime," and had been hunting for the wife. In a separate incident, Al Shabaab publicly executed a 28-year-old man after determining that he had in fact become a Christian. Al Shabaab Muslims also seized Hassan Gulled, 25, for leaving Islam and converting to Christianity, andimprisoned him, and tortured him. According to local sources, "Al Shabaab have been torturing him to see whether he would deny his Christian faith. Since last week, no information has surfaced concerning Gulled. There is a possibility that he could have been killed."
Tanzania: At the time pregnant and with three children, Lukia Khalid explained how when she told her Muslim husband that she had converted to Christianity, "He threatened to kill me if I was to stay with him. I then decided to escape that night with my three children to a neighbor's house…. We left only with the clothes that we were wearing. The command was so urgent that we could not wait any longer. We had to leave immediately." Last heard, they were living in destitute conditions.
One can go on and on with examples (see Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christians, pages 96-135, for a more thorough expose, including on the doctrine and history of apostasy in Islam, and dozens of more recent examples).
Returning to Meriam Ibrahim, the pregnant Sudanese mother set to be executed for refusing to recant Christ and embrace Islam, some questions and observations are in order:
Are all the other anecdotes listed above not equally "appalling and abhorrent"—to use Amnesty International's words describing Meriam's specific plight? Are they not all a "flagrant breach of international human rights law"?
If so, and if the international community is actually serious about putting a stop to them, should it not try to ascertain the true source behind them?
After all, considering that Muslim converts to Christianity are being attacked all throughout the Islamic world—including in nations as diverse as Algeria, Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, and Kyrgyz—surely the source is not something as simple as "Sudan's legal system."
The fact is, Muslim converts to Christianity are even under attack in Europe. In Norway alone, for example, two Iranian converts out for a walk were stabbed with knives by masked men shouting "infidels!" One of the men stabbed had converted in Iran, was threatened there, and immigrated to Norway, thinking he could escape Islam's apostasy penalty. Earlier, an Afghan convert to Christianity was scalded with boiling water and acid at a Norwegian refugee processing center: "If you do not return to Islam, we will kill you," his attackers told him.
Of course, the true source for all these attacks on Muslim converts to Christianity—in nations that do not share race, language, culture, politics, or economics—is Islam itself. Anyone with common sense, anyone with the ability to be honest with oneself, must concede as much. There is no other reasonable way to explain such identical patterns of abuse in such a wide array of nations.
But so long as the international community and human rights organizations fail to employ some common sense and honesty—fail to call a spade a spade—so will they ensure that countless more innocent humans like Meriam Ibrahim continue to suffer "appalling and abhorrent" treatment, simply for trying to exercise their "right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion" under Islam.
Raymond Ibrahim, author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christians (Regnery, April, 2013) is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
Related Topics: Anti-Christianism, Islam, Radical Islam | Raymond IbrahimThis text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.
EMAIL RECEIVED FROM A MEMBER OF ISLAM:
I received an email from a member of Islam containing many untruths. One of which was that Americans attacked the World Trade Center and NOT members of Islam which is so absurd and utterly ridiculas, but read my informative answer. Note: his original email is below my answer.
The ISOLATIONIST are pushing nonsense once more. As I said before, “Immigrants are NOT per-say the problem, I myself am an immigrant, but ISOLATIONIST immigrants such as Iftikhar are the problem. Iftihar and is fellow members are the problem as they are ISOLATIONIST, he has just written a long nonsense post trying to justify special advantages to remain ISOLATIONIST at public expense which is pure anti-social nonsense. He and his followers need to integrate into regular society like myself and the Sheiks have. Every religious group could claim they want state funded schools for their group and if implemented we would have literally hundreds of schools to replace a few integrated public schools – this is just anti social nonsense that would result in excessive cost to the state both monetarily and socially and prevent a cohesive society. As I previously told him, “Iftihar you are way out in left field, no one cares whether you drink or do not eat pork – I do not either – but you have NOT integrated with the people around you. Whereas, I have integrated – that in no way implies that you must adopt their bad ways - and have experienced no prejudice. It is high time you wake up to reality. As for your comments on history, they are simply a so what – wake up. I live with the people of the land, instead of isolated communities of my people, and that is what your people should do. Wake up, get real. Your big problem is you can not accept REALITY, and shrug off unpleasant facts when presented. The British Sheiks you should use as an example and start imitating them instead of being ISOLATIONIST.” A good example of this problem is their Prima-Donna superior attitude of wanting state supported schools just for Muslims. You do NOT SEE other religions requesting same. In fact, this is just what the government should not provide as it only makes them more ISOLATIONIST, and this is not what is needed; to wit, integration is what is needed just as the British Sheiks have done.
(1) This ISOLATIONIST said the following nonsense. “twin towers wasn't Muslim either - that was the Americans –“ what an outright LIE.
REALITY – ALL THE INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE WERE NOT AMERICAN BUT MEMBERS OF ISLAM, now let’s look at some of the facts:
The September 11 attacks were carried out by 19 hijackers, with planning and organization of the attacks involving numerous additional members of al-Qaeda. The first hijackers to arrive in the United States were Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, who settled in the San Diego area in January 2000. They were followed by Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah, who all arrived early in the summer of 2000, in order to undertake flight training in south Florida. The fourth pilot, Hani Hanjour, arrived in San Diego in December 2000. The other muscle hijackers, who were trained to help overpower and take over the aircraft, all arrived in the spring and early summer of 2001.
Initial selection
Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were both experienced and respected jihadists in the eyes of al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden. Mihdhar and Hazmi both had previous experience fighting on Bosnia, and had trained during the 1990s at camps in Afghanistan.[1] When Bin Laden committed to the September 11 attacks plot idea, he assigned both Mihdhar and Hazmi to the plot.[2] Both were so eager to participate in operations within the United States, that they obtained visas in April 1999.[3] Once selected, Mihdhar and Hazmi were sent to the Mes Aynak training camp in Afghanistan. In late 1999, Hazmi, Attash and Yemeni went to Karachi, Pakistan to see Mohammed, who instructed them on Western culture and travel; however, Mihdhar did not go to Karachi, instead returning to Yemen.[2]
American Airlines Flight 11
Main article: American Airlines Flight 11
Two flight attendants called the American Airlines reservation desk during the hijacking. Betty Ong reported that "the four hijackers had come from first-class seats: 2A, 2B, 9A, and 9B."[4] Flight attendant Amy Sweeney called a flight services manager at Logan Airport and described them as Middle Eastern.[4] She gave the staff the seat numbers and they pulled up the ticket and credit card info of the hijackers, identifying Mohamed Atta al-Sayed.[5]
Mohamed Atta was heard speaking over the air traffic control system, broadcasting messages he intended for the passengers.[6]
We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport, nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.
Nobody move please. We are going back to the airport, don't try to make any stupid moves.
American Airlines Flight 77
Two hijackers, Hani Hanjour and Majed Moqed were identified by clerks as having bought single, first-class tickets for Flight 77 from Advance Travel Service in Totowa, NJ with $1,842.25 in cash.[4] Renee May, a flight attendant on Flight 77, used a cell phone to call her mother in Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane.[8] Passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States, stating the flight had been hijacked and the hijackers had knives and box cutters.[9] Two of the passengers had been on the FBI's terrorist-alert list: Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi.
Forensic remains of the five hijackers were found at the Pentagon, along with remains of the victims.[10]
Now that we have covered 2 of the four planes piloted by Muslims, let’s look at the big picture of all involved, all non-American members of Islam:
hijackers in the September 11 attacks
Flight 11
Mohamed Atta Satam al-Suqami Waleed al-Shehri Wail al-Shehri Abdulaziz al-Omari
Flight 175
Marwan al-Shehhi Fayez Banihammad Mohand al-Shehri Hamza al-Ghamdi Ahmed al-Ghamdi
Flight 77
Hani Hanjour Khalid al-Mihdhar Majed Moqed Nawaf al-Hazmi Salem al-Hazmi
Flight 93
Ziad Jarrah Ahmed al-Nami Saeed al-Ghamdi Ahmed al-Haznawi
20th hijacker
suspects Ramzi Binalshibh Mohamed al-Kahtani Zacarias Moussaoui Mushabib al-Hamlan Zakariya Essabar Ammar al-Baluchi Walid Muhammad Salih Bin 'Attash Khalid al Zahrani
For more details, go to, Today Is The Anniversary Of The Attack On America
As can be seen this individual is telling untruth once more. Apparently he wants the opportunity of having Muslim teachers teach lies like this – this should absolutely be prevented.
CONCLUSION:
They want their own schools in the United Kingdom (UK) and other non-Islamic countries so they can indoctrinate their youth to have of others as shown in the article above. Such an organization does not even deserve to continue to exist.
- •
Thread Starter- Admin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
LEARN THE TRUTH ABOUT ISLAM
I received an email from a member of Islam, Ifitkhar ###########, containing many untruths. One of which was that Americans attacked the World Trade Center and NOT members of Islam which is so absurd and utterly ridiculas, but read my informative answer.
FIRST, When this attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon occurred, TV showed Muslims celebrating in Cairo, Alexander, Amman, and many other cities in the Muslim world celebrating, and NOT anyone else. This clearly shows that although only about 25 individuals did the evil, their co-religionist were in complete agreement with the wicked act – i.e., they were co-conspirators after the fact. How wicked can a religion get?
SEE APPENDIX 1 FOR MORE DETAILS – BELOW:
SECOND, This individual’s claim is completely bogus and nothing but a whopping lie.
SEE APPENDIX 2 FOR MORE DETAILS – BELOW or go to “Anniversary Attack on America” at for an even more detailed account.
THIRD, This evil and unloving crime against humanity is actually called for in the hateful Quran.
SEE APPENDIX 3 FOR MORE DETAILS – BELOW OR go to,
APPENDIX 1:
Guilt Comes On Organizations That Fail To Clean House Of The Wicked Ones:
INTRODUCTION:
First, The world we live in is ruled by the wicked one as testified to by 1 John 5:19, “And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.” (Authorized King James Bible; AV). If we pick up a newspaper in any country, we find reports of cruelty and violence on an unprecedented scale. Man’s inhumanity to man is troubling for a righteous person to contemplate as testified to at Ecclesiastes 8:9, “All this have I seen, and applied my heart unto every work that is done under the sun: there is a time wherein one man ruleth over another to his own hurt.” (AV).
Second, Most individuals and/or groups seek to avoid responsibility for their own actions rather than take corrective actions. This also applies to so called religious groups that seek to absolve themselves of responsibility for the wrong actions of members, but fail, willingly, to take action against these wrong doers by purging themselves of these wicked ones.
THE REALITY:
If a religion fails to clean house of evil and wicked men when they are discovered, and especially of evil and wicked men/women taking the lead in a congregation, and/or congregations such as Pastors, Ministers, Sheiks, Imams, Bishops, Cardinals, Etc., then the religion is responsible for their wrong doing. Some religions such as Islam have never cleaned house of evil and wicked individuals when they are discovered and that religion has been violent since its beginning, and many of its members lust for violence in such acts as beheading of others, suscide bombers, makers of IEDs, etc. do to the teachings of their groups religious leaders. One notable example of an evil and wicked individual Islam well knows of who is a leader of a large group of members of Islam is Sheik Osama bin Ladin. Of course, Islam, is NOT the only religion that fails to take effective action against evil and wicked individuals and leaders of groups among them, another is the Catholic and Angalican churches that for many years just moved pedophiles to a new congregation when they were uncovered as the world's news media has so well identified. Groups seeking to keep themselves clean of evil and wicked individuals that sneak into their group take the appropriate action; to wit, they throw them out.
Now many religions seek to escape reality by claiming they have no provisions within their religion for purging out these wicked ones, but this is no excuse since it is their failure to provide measures for purging out these wicked ones and no one else’s.
Now let’s look at one such religion that tries to escape their responsibility for cleaning house so to speak.
ISLAM FAILS TO CLEAN HOUSE:
Now of course it is important to recognize that not all Muslims are terrorist and jihadists nor refuse to recognize the property rights of others, it is likewise equally important to recognize that all jihadists are members of Islam. Islam is totally responsible for their actions as they tacitly approve of their evil wrong doing and have never cleaned house of these wicked ones. To wit, by not doing so, they have taken on the responsibility for their wrongful actions upon themselves. Yes, of course they are not the only religion that has failed to clean house; thus taking on the guilt of these wrong doers. Any religion, no exception, which fails to clean house is nothing but an evil false religion. And as previously stated, ‘Now many religions seek to escape reality by claiming they have no provisions within their religion for purging out these wicked ones, but this is no excuse since it is their failure to provide measures for purging out these wicked ones and no one else’s.’
CONCLUSION:
Many are just fooling themself, it is not what either the Bible or the Bible knockoff the Qur'an actually say, but how religious leaders be they priest and/or imams or muftis or what ever teach the people is the interpretation of what is written either in the Bible or the bible knockoff the Qur'an that matters and governs actions. It matters not what the Bible and/or the Bible knockoff really say. People go by what they are taught by their religious leaders. Take the genocide committed by the Roman Catholic Church at the direction of their supreme religious leader, the pope (Pope Innocent III (1160 or 1161 – 16 July 1216)), what mattered was not that the Bible clearly said at Exodus 20:13, "Thou shalt not kill." (Authorized King James Bible; AV), but what their religious leaders told them. Therefore, it is the religion which is at fault, irregardless of what their particular holy book, be it the Bible or the Bible knockoff the Qur'an may say. Neither in so called Christianity or in Islam are most individuals actions really governed in any way by what their particular holy book really says, but they are governed by the interpretation of their religious leaders. Thus, knowing this reality, one would be either just plain stupid and/or dumb to even bother looking at a particular religion's holy book and expect the members would conform to it. Take the Rig Vede and find me for example a Hindu actually conforming to it instead of the interpretation given to it by his religious leaders, like looking for a needle in the haystack per K.S. Lal, India's greatest historian.
Likewise the failure to clean house of evil ones puts their wrongs directly upon the organization failing to throw out evil/wicked ones when they are found out.
APPENDIX 2:
The ISOLATIONIST are pushing nonsense once more. As I said before, “Immigrants are NOT per-say the problem, I myself am an immigrant, but ISOLATIONIST immigrants such as Iftikhar are the problem. Iftihar and is fellow members are the problem as they are ISOLATIONIST, he has just written a long nonsense post trying to justify special advantages to remain ISOLATIONIST at public expense which is pure anti-social nonsense. He and his followers need to integrate into regular society like myself and the Sheiks have. Every religious group could claim they want state funded schools for their group and if implemented we would have literally hundreds of schools to replace a few integrated public schools – this is just anti social nonsense that would result in excessive cost to the state both monetarily and socially and prevent a cohesive society. As I previously told him, “Iftihar you are way out in left field, no one cares whether you drink or do not eat pork – I do not either – but you have NOT integrated with the people around you. Whereas, I have integrated – that in no way implies that you must adopt their bad ways - and have experienced no prejudice. It is high time you wake up to reality. As for your comments on history, they are simply a so what – wake up. I live with the people of the land, instead of isolated communities of my people, and that is what your people should do. Wake up, get real. Your big problem is you can not accept REALITY, and shrug off unpleasant facts when presented. The British Sheiks you should use as an example and start imitating them instead of being ISOLATIONIST.” A good example of this problem is their Prima-Donna superior attitude of wanting state supported schools just for Muslims. You do NOT SEE other religions requesting same. In fact, this is just what the government should not provide as it only makes them more ISOLATIONIST, and this is not what is needed; to wit, integration is what is needed just as the British Sheiks have done.
(1) This ISOLATIONIST said the following nonsense. “twin towers wasn't Muslim either - that was the Americans –“ what an outright LIE.
REALITY – ALL THE INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE WERE NOT AMERICAN BUT MEMBERS OF ISLAM, now let’s look at some of the facts:
The September 11 attacks were carried out by 19 hijackers, with planning and organization of the attacks involving numerous additional members of al-Qaeda. The first hijackers to arrive in the United States were Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, who settled in the San Diego area in January 2000. They were followed by Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah, who all arrived early in the summer of 2000, in order to undertake flight training in south Florida. The fourth pilot, Hani Hanjour, arrived in San Diego in December 2000. The other muscle hijackers, who were trained to help overpower and take over the aircraft, all arrived in the spring and early summer of 2001.
Initial selection
Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were both experienced and respected jihadists in the eyes of al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden. Mihdhar and Hazmi both had previous experience fighting on Bosnia, and had trained during the 1990s at camps in Afghanistan.[1] When Bin Laden committed to the September 11 attacks plot idea, he assigned both Mihdhar and Hazmi to the plot.[2] Both were so eager to participate in operations within the United States, that they obtained visas in April 1999.[3] Once selected, Mihdhar and Hazmi were sent to the Mes Aynak training camp in Afghanistan. In late 1999, Hazmi, Attash and Yemeni went to Karachi, Pakistan to see Mohammed, who instructed them on Western culture and travel; however, Mihdhar did not go to Karachi, instead returning to Yemen.[2]
American Airlines Flight 11
Main article: American Airlines Flight 11
Two flight attendants called the American Airlines reservation desk during the hijacking. Betty Ong reported that "the four hijackers had come from first-class seats: 2A, 2B, 9A, and 9B."[4] Flight attendant Amy Sweeney called a flight services manager at Logan Airport and described them as Middle Eastern.[4] She gave the staff the seat numbers and they pulled up the ticket and credit card info of the hijackers, identifying Mohamed Atta al-Sayed.[5]
Mohamed Atta was heard speaking over the air traffic control system, broadcasting messages he intended for the passengers.[6]
We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport, nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.
Nobody move please. We are going back to the airport, don't try to make any stupid moves.
American Airlines Flight 77
Two hijackers, Hani Hanjour and Majed Moqed were identified by clerks as having bought single, first-class tickets for Flight 77 from Advance Travel Service in Totowa, NJ with $1,842.25 in cash.[4] Renee May, a flight attendant on Flight 77, used a cell phone to call her mother in Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane.[8] Passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States, stating the flight had been hijacked and the hijackers had knives and box cutters.[9] Two of the passengers had been on the FBI's terrorist-alert list: Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi.
Forensic remains of the five hijackers were found at the Pentagon, along with remains of the victims.[10]
Now that we have covered 2 of the four planes piloted by Muslims, let’s look at the big picture of all involved, all non-American members of Islam:
hijackers in the September 11 attacks
Flight 11
Mohamed Atta Satam al-Suqami Waleed al-Shehri Wail al-Shehri Abdulaziz al-Omari
Flight 175
Marwan al-Shehhi Fayez Banihammad Mohand al-Shehri Hamza al-Ghamdi Ahmed al-Ghamdi
Flight 77
Hani Hanjour Khalid al-Mihdhar Majed Moqed Nawaf al-Hazmi Salem al-Hazmi
Flight 93
Ziad Jarrah Ahmed al-Nami Saeed al-Ghamdi Ahmed al-Haznawi
20th hijacker
suspects Ramzi Binalshibh Mohamed al-Kahtani Zacarias Moussaoui Mushabib al-Hamlan Zakariya Essabar Ammar al-Baluchi Walid Muhammad Salih Bin 'Attash Khalid al Zahrani
For more details, go to, Today Is The Anniversary Of The Attack On America
As can be seen this individual is telling untruth once more. Apparently he wants the opportunity of having Muslim teachers teach lies like this – this should absolutely be prevented.
CONCLUSION:
They want their own schools in the United Kingdom (UK) and other non-Islamic countries so they can indoctrinate their youth to have of others as shown in the article above. Such an organization
APPENDIX 3
Does the Quran really contain dozens of verses promoting violence?
Summary Answer:
The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.
The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God, however this can work both ways. Most of today's Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.
Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy - and that of his companions - along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.
The Quran:
Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...
but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.
Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."
Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.
Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."
Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').
Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. Here is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.
Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"
Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."
Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).
Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?
Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"
Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.
Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."
Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."
Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."
Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."
Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."
Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars). This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had the power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.
Quran (9:14) - "Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."
Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.
Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.
Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"
Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.
Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).
Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.
Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."
Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer?
Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."
Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).
Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)
Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"
Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.
Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.
Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord. Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similitude. Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners," Those who reject Allah are to be subdued in battle. The verse goes on to say the only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is in order to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test. "But if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost."
Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you,"
Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.
Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. There are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' in verse 16.
Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "battle array" meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.
Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn - Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above). It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.
Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.
From the Hadith:
Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."
Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.
Bukhari (52:65) - The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause. Muhammad's words are the basis for offensive Jihad - spreading Islam by force. This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today.
Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'
Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)
Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious
Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah
Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."
Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah." [[But there is the true God, Almighty God (YHWH) which members of Islam Overlook]]
Bukhari (52:73) - "Allah's Apostle said, 'Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords'."
Bukhari (11:626) - [Muhammad said:] "I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes."
Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause..."
Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"
Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'"
Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)."
Muslim (19:4294) - "When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him... He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them."
Bukhari 1:35 "The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty ( if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise ( if he is killed)."
Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power." Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad's men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.
Tabari 9:69 "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us" The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.
Tabari 17:187 "'By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.' And they returned to their former religion." The words of a group of Christians who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the violence and looting committed in the name of Allah. The price of their decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: - Lest anyone think that cutting off someone's head while screaming 'Allah Akbar!' is a modern creation, here is an account of that very practice under Muhammad, who seems to approve.
Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid.
Saifur Rahman, The Sealed Nectar p.227-228 - "Embrace Islam... If you two accept Islam, you will remain in command of your country; but if your refuse my Call, you’ve got to remember that all of your possessions are perishable. My horsemen will appropriate your land, and my Prophethood will assume preponderance over your kingship." One of several letters from Muhammad to rulers of other countries. The significance is that the recipients were not making war or threatening Muslims. Their subsequent defeat and subjugation by Muhammad's armies was justified merely on the basis of their unbelief.
Additional Notes:
Other than the fact that Muslims haven't killed every non-Muslim under their domain, there is very little else that they can point to as proof that theirs is a peaceful, tolerant religion. Where Islam is dominant (as in the Middle East and Pakistan) religious minorities suffer brutal persecution with little resistance. Where Islam is in the minority (as in Thailand, the Philippines and Europe) there is the threat of violence if Muslim demands are not met. Either situation seems to provide a justification for religious terrorism, which is persistent and endemic to Islamic fundamentalism.
The reasons are obvious and begin with the Quran. Few verses of Islam's most sacred text can be construed to fit the contemporary virtues of religious tolerance and universal brotherhood. Those that do are earlier "Meccan" verses which are obviously abrogated by later ones. This is why Muslim apologists speak of the "risks" of trying to interpret the Quran without their "assistance" - even while claiming that it is a perfect book.
Far from being mere history or theological construct, the violent verses of the Quran have played a key role in very real massacre and genocide. This includes the brutal slaughter of tens of millions of Hindus for five centuries beginning around 1000 AD with Mahmud of Ghazni's bloody conquest. Both he and the later Tamerlane (Islam's Genghis Khan) slaughtered an untold number merely for defending their temples from destruction. Buddhism was very nearly wiped off the Indian subcontinent. Judaism and Christianity met the same fate (albeit more slowly) in areas conquered by Muslim armies, including the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Europe, including today's Turkey. Zoroastrianism, the ancient religion of a proud Persian people is despised by Muslims and barely survives in modern Iran.
So ingrained is violence in the religion that Islam has never really stopped being at war, either with other religions or with itself.
Muhammad was a military leader, laying siege to towns, massacring the men, raping their women, enslaving their children, and taking the property of others as his own. On several occasions he rejected offers of surrender from the besieged inhabitants and even butchered captives. He actually inspired his followers to battle when they did not feel it was right to fight, promising them slaves and booty if they did and threatening them with Hell if they did not. Muhammad allowed his men to rape traumatized women captured in battle, usually on the very day their husbands and family members were slaughtered.
It is important to emphasize that, for the most part, Muslim armies waged aggressive campaigns, and the religion's most dramatic military conquests were made by the actual companions of Muhammad in the decades following his death. The early Islamic principle of warfare was that the civilian population of a town was to be destroyed (ie. men executed, women and children taken as slaves) if they defended themselves. Although modern apologists often claim that Muslims are only supposed to attack in self-defense, this is an oxymoron that is flatly contradicted by the accounts of Islamic historians and others that go back to the time of Muhammad.
Consider the example of the Qurayza Jews, who were completely obliterated only five years after Muhammad arrived in Medina. Their leader opted to stay neutral when their town was besieged by a Meccan army that was sent to take revenge for Muhammad's deadly caravan raids. The tribe killed no one from either side and even surrendered peacefully to Muhammad after the Meccans had been turned back. Yet the prophet of Islam had every male member of the Qurayza beheaded, and every woman and child enslaved, even raping one of the captives himself (what Muslim apologists might refer to as "same day marriage").
One of Islam's most revered modern scholars, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, openly sanctions offensive Jihad: "In the Jihad which you are seeking, you look for the enemy and invade him. This type of Jihad takes place only when the Islamic state is invading other [countries] inorder to spread the word of Islam and to remove obstacles standing in its way." Elsewhere, he notes: "Islam has the right to take the initiative…this is God’s religion and it is for the whole world. It has the right to destroy all obstacles in the form of institutions and traditions … it attacks institutions and traditions to release human beings from their poisonous influences, which distort human nature and curtail human freedom. Those who say that Islamic Jihad was merely for the defense of the 'homeland of Islam' diminish the greatness of the Islamic way of life."
The widely respected Dictionary of Islam defines Jihad as "A religious war with those who are unbelievers in the mission of Muhammad. It is an incumbent religious duty, established in the Qur'an and in the Traditions as a divine institution, and enjoined specially for the purpose of advancing Islam and of repelling evil from Muslims…[Quoting from the Hanafi school, Hedaya, 2:140, 141.], "The destruction of the sword is incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as appears from various passages in the traditions which are generally received to this effect."
Muhammad's failure to leave a clear line of succession resulted in perpetual internal war following his death. Those who knew him best first fought to keep remote tribes from leaving Islam and reverting to their preferred religion (the Ridda or 'Apostasy wars'). Then, within the closer community, early Meccan converts battled later ones. Hostility developed between those immigrants who had traveled with Muhammad to Mecca and the Ansar at Medina who had helped them settle in. Finally there was a violent struggle within Muhammad's own family between his favorite wife and favorite daughter - a jagged schism that has left Shias and Sunnis at each others' throats to this day.
The strangest and most untrue thing that can be said about Islam is that it is a Religion of Peace. If every standard by which the West is judged and condemned (slavery, imperialism, intolerance, misogyny, sexual repression, warfare...) were applied equally to Islam, the verdict would be devastating. Islam never gives up what it conquers, be it religion, culture, language or life. Neither does it make apologies or any real effort at moral progress. It is the least open to dialogue and the most self-absorbed. It is convinced of its own perfection, yet brutally shuns self-examination and represses criticism.
This is what makes the Quran's verses of violence so dangerous. They are given the weight of divine command. While Muslim terrorists take them as literally as anything else in their holy book, and understand that Islam is incomplete without Jihad, moderates offer little to contradict them - outside of opinion. Indeed, what do they have? Speaking of peace and love may win over the ignorant, but when every twelfth verse of Islam's holiest book either speaks to Allah's hatred for non-Muslims or calls for their death, forced conversion, or subjugation, it's little wonder that sympathy for terrorism runs as deeply as it does in the broader community - even if most Muslims personally prefer not to interpret their religion in this way.
Although scholars like Ibn Khaldun, one of Islam's most respected philosophers, understood that"the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force", many other Muslims are either unaware or willfully ignorant of the Quran's near absence of verses that preach universal non-violence. Their understanding of Islam comes from what they are taught by others. In the West, it is typical for believers to think that their religion must be like Christianity - preaching the New Testament virtues of peace, love, and tolerance - because Muslims are taught that Islam is supposed to be superior in every way. They are somewhat surprised and embarrassed to learn that the evidence of the Quran and the bloody history of Islam are very much in contradiction to this.
Others simply accept the violence. In 1991, a Palestinian couple in America was convicted of stabbing their daughter to death for being too Westernized. A family friend came to their defense, excoriating the jury for not understanding the "culture", claiming that the father was merely following "the religion" and saying that the couple had to "discipline their daughter or lose respect." (source). In 2011, unrepentant Palestinian terrorists, responsible for the brutal murders of civilians, women and children explicitly in the name of Allah were treated to a luxurious "holy pilgrimage" to Mecca by the Saudi king - without a single Muslim voice raised in protest.
For their part, Western liberals would do well not to sacrifice critical thinking to the god of political correctness, or look for reasons to bring other religion down to the level of Islam merely to avoid the existential truth that this it is both different and dangerous.
There are just too many Muslims who take the Quran literally... and too many others who couldn't care less about the violence done in the name of Islam.
[source - retrieved from on 5/23/2014]
NOTE: I challenge anyone to show any factual errors in what I said.
- •
Thread Starter- Admin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
THE PRODUCT OF MUSLIM EDUCATION – THE MAKING OF SUICIDE BOMBERS OUT OF AMERICAN YOUTH.
This is why no public school should ever be a Muslim school under any circumstances.
The American Suicide Bomber Shows How Unprecedented Syria’s Civil War Really Is
* ARMIN ROSEN
* MAY 29, 2014, 5:36 PM
Twitter feed of Shiraz Maher
A picture claiming that an American man, Abu Huraira al Amriki, has become a suicide bomber in Syria.
This week likely saw the first American suicide bomber of Syria's ongoing civil war, which has killed upwards of 150,000 people. But the attacker, a still-anonymous individual known as "Abu Hurayra Al-Amriki" whom both terrorism experts and U.S. government officials believe to be an American, typifies some of what's made Syria's conflict so deadly and unique.
"Syria is attracting more foreign fighters than Afghanistan did in its heyday," says Thomas Joscelyn, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, referring to the 1980s campaign against Soviet occupation that helped launch Al Qaeda.
Syria is hardly the only civil conflict to attract foreign fighters — thousands of outsiders fought against the fascist takeover of Spain in the 1930s, while Greece's late 1940s civil war became a proxy for a larger conflict between the west and the communist bloc.
The fight against Syrian dictator Bashar Al Assad is perhaps the most international Jihadist struggle in modern history. Both Jabhat al Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), which control a large portion of eastern Syria, originated with Al Qaeda in Iraq. It has brought in over 11,000 foreigners, including suicide bombers from Britain and the Netherlands.
And this isn't the first American involved. Josceyln says as many as 100 Americans may be fighting in Syria, while the Daily Beast recently reported that a small handful of fighters have actually returned to the U.S.
An American suicide bomber could be a particularly useful recruitment tool. "They can show that an American did this in their propaganda in order to expand their outreach in the West," he told Business Insider of Syrian jihadist recruitment networks.
So far, about 1,700 foreign fighters have been killed in Syria, according to a dataset kept by Aaron Zelin of the Washington Institute for Near Eastern Studies. His data includes very few Americans aside from the perpetrator of this week's suicide attack.
Zelin says that American jihadists in Syria may be more conscious of surveillance and are not as active online as their Belgian, Dutch, or British counterparts — which is perhaps one reason why so little is currently known about "Abu Hurayra Al-Amriki."
He adds that Jihadists are not always enthusiastic about sharing the origins of their foreign fighters. "They've been trying obscure a lot of foreigners in terms of who they are and where they're coming from over the past four or five months," he told Business Insider.
In this case, the potential symbolism and propoganda value of "Al-Amriki" might have convinced Jidihasts to buck their standard procedure.
As Zelin notes, Abu Sulayman al Muhajir, one of Jabhat al Nusra's top Islamic law officials, has publicly confirmed that the bomber was an American. Sulayman is himself an Australian citizen, fighting for an organization with Iraqi origins. Wherever the bomber was from, or however he got to Syrian battlefield, Al-Amriki is a sign that the radical Islamist struggle against the Assad regime is truly global in its recruitment — even if its current goals are confined to overthrowing the regime in Damascus.
Read more: [source - retrieved from on 5/30/2014]
- •
Thread Starter- Admin
- Administrator
Offline
- From: Lake Park, Florida
- Registered: 10/02/2012
- Posts: 2,013
Re: Dissolve Islam and Give The World Some Needed Peace
INTOLERANCE CAN NOT BE APPEASED – EUROPE AND AMERICA HAVE YET TO LEARN THIS REALITY AND DEAL WITH IT
INTRODUCTION:
In the 30s Europe tried to appease intolerant Nazi Germany and their false concept of the super race and even let them take over Czechoslovak; This intolerant organization had the world fooled with respect their goals and Time Magazine even portrayed their leader, Adolph Hitler, as the Man of the Year . They fooled the rest of the world with respect their goal – WORLD DOMINATION.
Today, there is another group whose goal is WORLD DOMINATION and subjection to wicked and evil Shari Law – Islam. Both Europe and America are now trying to appease this wicked group masquerading as a religion; to wit, they have NOT LEARNED THEIR LESSON. Appeasement does NOT work against groups with wicked and evil intentions.
LET’S LOOK AT REALITY WITH REGARD TO ISLAM:
FIRST, Many wrongly believe it is only a radical fringe of Islam that has wicked and evil goals, but this is NOT the case. Yes, only about 25 individuals for example carried out the attacks and murders at the World Trade Center in NYC, and the Pentagon. However, when this attack, 9/11/2001, on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon occurred, TV showed Muslims celebrating in Cairo, Alexander, Amman, and many other cities in the Muslim world celebrating, and NOT anyone else. This clearly shows that although only about 25 individuals did the evil, their co-religionist were in complete agreement with the wicked act – i.e., they were co-conspirators after the fact. How wicked can a so called religion get?
SECOND, Recently, Islam’s wicked intolerance was highlighted by their intolerance shown against an innocent women in the Sudan. The news account, “KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) — A pregnant Sudanese woman who married a Christian man was sentenced to death Thursday after she refused to recant her Christian faith, her lawyer said.
Meriam Ibrahim, whose father was Muslim but mother was an Orthodox Christian from Ethiopia, was convicted of "apostasy" on Sunday and given four days to repent and escape death, said lawyer Al-Shareef Ali al-Shareef Mohammed.
The 26 year old, who is eight months pregnant, was sentenced after that grace period expired, Mohammed said…” [source - retrieved from on 5/15/2014]
As can be seen, this wicked intolerant so called religion does NOT believe in religious freedom for others, but only for its evil self. Groups like this can NOT be successfully appeased, a lesson that Europe and America need to learn.
THIRD, PROOF OF MUSLIM INTOLERANCE IN THE WORDS OF ONE OF ITS MEMBERS,
“Waheed, a Muslim in the U.K., wrote: "Dam fool of fools if Christianity is divine law....not a man made law that in Western world based on Christianity faith only allow you to have one wife but in order to enjoy endless lust of sex ( as it is a norm in Western world ) and you all persue that rule. Why Chritianity does not allow a brother to marry sister? It is God mad law. You are not a Chritian by faith if you don`t practice the guidance of BIBLE.......You are so proud of. Similarly, Islamic rules as set in Holy Quran that a Muslim fatith woman cannot wed a non Muslim man..... So this is the case and her punishment is death. If that burns your ass so be it and enjoy the burning." [source - retrieved from A Nasty Email on 6/11/2014]
As can be seen, he is completely intolerant and is in complete agreement with putting Meriam Ibrahim, a member of Orthodox Christianity to death for being a Christian. What wicked and evil intolerance, that one should believe that another should be put to death for refusing to recant her faith – proof positive that Islam does NOT believe in religious freedom for others.
FOURTH, This wicked and evil group even has the unmitigated gall to want government supported Muslim schools to teach this evil intolerance. One member of Islam, Iftikhar Ahmad of the London School of Islamics Trust, posted the following on facebook on 6/12.2014, “Bilingual Muslims children have a right, as much as any other faith group, to be taught their culture, languages and faith alongside a mainstream curriculum. More faith schools will be opened under sweeping reforms of the education system in England. There is a dire need for the growth of state funded Muslim schools to meet the growing needs and demands of the Muslim parents and children…,” but conveniently omitted the real purpose was to teach INTOLERANCE AND TO PROMOTE Shari Law. Of course, the above should come as no surprise as intolerant ISOLATIONIST always give as a façade apparently lofty motives for their wicked designs so as to mislead. However, to see REALITY, one must look at other culturally and language groups in the U.K.; the British Sheiks, Jains, Hindus, Buddhist, etc. who have made NO such ISOLATIONIST request with respect education, and only want a quality British education for their children and to integrate into British society.
FIFTH, One prominent member of Islam, Iftikhar, sent me an email with the following nonsense. “twin towers wasn't Muslim either - that was the Americans –“ what an outright LIE.
To get further details on this, either go to the World news or to APPENDIX 1
CONCLUSION:
This wicked and evil INTOLERANT group should not be appeased, but efforts should be made to bring them under control throughout the world. Also, unfortunately there are many good, but duped, individuals is this organization, evil Islam, so the assumption that all members of Islam are wicked and evil should not be made, any more that all Nazis were evil intolerant individuals, many were just duped by Hitler.
APPENNDIX 1
REALITY – ALL THE INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE WERE NOT AMERICAN BUT MEMBERS OF ISLAM, now let’s look at some of the facts:
The September 11 attacks were carried out by 19 hijackers, with planning and organization of the attacks involving numerous additional members of al-Qaeda. The first hijackers to arrive in the United States were Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, who settled in the San Diego area in January 2000. They were followed by Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah, who all arrived early in the summer of 2000, in order to undertake flight training in south Florida. The fourth pilot, Hani Hanjour, arrived in San Diego in December 2000. The other muscle hijackers, who were trained to help overpower and take over the aircraft, all arrived in the spring and early summer of 2001.
Initial selection
Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were both experienced and respected jihadists in the eyes of al-Qaeda leader, Osama bin Laden. Mihdhar and Hazmi both had previous experience fighting on Bosnia, and had trained during the 1990s at camps in Afghanistan.[1] When Bin Laden committed to the September 11 attacks plot idea, he assigned both Mihdhar and Hazmi to the plot.[2] Both were so eager to participate in operations within the United States, that they obtained visas in April 1999.[3] Once selected, Mihdhar and Hazmi were sent to the Mes Aynak training camp in Afghanistan. In late 1999, Hazmi, Attash and Yemeni went to Karachi, Pakistan to see Mohammed, who instructed them on Western culture and travel; however, Mihdhar did not go to Karachi, instead returning to Yemen.[2]
American Airlines Flight 11
Main article: American Airlines Flight 11
Two flight attendants called the American Airlines reservation desk during the hijacking. Betty Ong reported that "the four hijackers had come from first-class seats: 2A, 2B, 9A, and 9B."[4] Flight attendant Amy Sweeney called a flight services manager at Logan Airport and described them as Middle Eastern.[4] She gave the staff the seat numbers and they pulled up the ticket and credit card info of the hijackers, identifying Mohamed Atta al-Sayed.[5]
Mohamed Atta was heard speaking over the air traffic control system, broadcasting messages he intended for the passengers.[6]
We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport, nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.
Nobody move please. We are going back to the airport, don't try to make any stupid moves.
American Airlines Flight 77
Two hijackers, Hani Hanjour and Majed Moqed were identified by clerks as having bought single, first-class tickets for Flight 77 from Advance Travel Service in Totowa, NJ with $1,842.25 in cash.[4] Renee May, a flight attendant on Flight 77, used a cell phone to call her mother in Las Vegas. She said her flight was being hijacked by six individuals who had moved them to the rear of the plane.[8] Passenger Barbara Olson called her husband, Ted Olson, the solicitor general of the United States, stating the flight had been hijacked and the hijackers had knives and box cutters.[9] Two of the passengers had been on the FBI's terrorist-alert list: Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi.
Forensic remains of the five hijackers were found at the Pentagon, along with remains of the victims.[10]
Now that we have covered 2 of the four planes piloted by Muslims, let’s look at the big picture of all involved, all non-American members of Islam:
hijackers in the September 11 attacks
Flight 11
Mohamed Atta Satam al-Suqami Waleed al-Shehri Wail al-Shehri Abdulaziz al-Omari
Flight 175
Marwan al-Shehhi Fayez Banihammad Mohand al-Shehri Hamza al-Ghamdi Ahmed al-Ghamdi
Flight 77
Hani Hanjour Khalid al-Mihdhar Majed Moqed Nawaf al-Hazmi Salem al-Hazmi
Flight 93
Ziad Jarrah Ahmed al-Nami Saeed al-Ghamdi Ahmed al-Haznawi
20th hijacker
suspects Ramzi Binalshibh Mohamed al-Kahtani Zacarias Moussaoui Mushabib al-Hamlan Zakariya Essabar Ammar al-Baluchi Walid Muhammad Salih Bin 'Attash Khalid al Zahrani
For more details, go to, Today Is The Anniversary Of The Attack On America
As can be seen this individual is telling untruth once more. Apparently he wants the opportunity of having Muslim teachers teach lies like this – this should absolutely be prevented.
- •
Thread Starter