Kafir Slaughter is the Norm not Aberration


John R. Houk

© December 5, 2015

Islamic Terrorism. Yup, I wrote Islamic Terrorism.

The butchers of San Bernardino were following their Islamic tenets as handed down by their fake-prophet Mohammed.

When a Muslim or a group of Muslims attack a group of non-Muslims with the intent to hurt, maim, rape women and/or kill people because his/her perfect man – Mohammed – set the example in the Quran and explained in the Hadith and Sira; that is terrorism based on the tenets of Islam.

Here are some excerpts from an Answering Islam essay demonstrating ten reasons Islam is NOT a religion of peace as exposed in the Quran. I’m excerpting some explanatory notes, followed by the ten reasons (read the essay for the expanded explanation for each reason) and I’ll end with some justification explanations of the ten reasons:

… In order to prevent the standard, reflexive “out of context” defense from Muslim apologists, the context of each verse in the Quran is explained either in this article or in the links provided within each of the ten reasons. No verse is taken out of context, and Muslim translations are used.

Verifiable? The readers are invited to look up each verse in the Quran in multiple translations, by visiting the website www.quranbrowser.com and typing in references, like so: 61:10-12. (61 is the chapter or sura, and 10-12 are the verses).

But first we must answer a Muslim strategy. A Muslim missionary or polemicist who believes that Islam is the best religion in the world and who wants it to spread around the globe attempted to refute this top ten list. But attempting to refute such a list is like reviewing a book only from the last chapter. The reviewer has skipped over the hard work of reading all of the chapters. In the same way, the Muslim polemicist or missionary has skipped over the hard work found in the back-up articles and the links. This top ten list is only a summary of many articles and a lot of strenuous labor from the present author and many other authors. The answers to the Muslim’s criticisms are all found in these articles. So his criticism is hollow, and his scholarship is shallow, since he has not done the hard work. He certainly does not understand the Bible. Plus, he whitewashes Islam in his attempted refutation. The back-up articles will show how. Thus, he whitewashes Islam either deliberately or unknowingly, which means he does not know his own religion or he knows it, but covers it up. Whatever the case, the truth about the real Islam must get out.

10. Muhammad nicknames his weapons.

9. Muhammad commands in his Quran that adulterers and adulteresses should receive a hundred lashes.

8. Muhammad in his Quran permits husbands to beat their wives.

7. Muhammad in his Quran commands that the hands of male or female thieves should be cut off.

6. Muhammad assassinates poets and poetesses.

5. Muhammad in his Quran commands death or the cutting off of hands and feet for fighting and corrupting the land.

4. Muhammad aggressively attacks Meccan caravans.

3. Muhammad in his Quran promises sensuous Gardens for martyrs dying in a military holy war.

2. Muhammad unjustly executes around 600 male Jews and enslaves the women and children.

1. Muhammad launches his own Crusades.

What the ten reasons mean for us today

These ten aspects of violence that have burrowed into the hemorrhaging heart of early Islam have eight implications for us today. The first three are theological; the rest are practical.

The theological implications are as follows:

First, as each reason in this article has hinted at and the links explain more thoroughly, Christ never, ever engaged in such violence. For example, he never assassinated opponents, whipped adulterers, cut off the hands of thieves, or launched his own Crusades (what the Medieval Europeans did is not foundational to Christianity). Christ expresses the love of God. Therefore, Christians and all fair-minded persons have the right to question whether the true God would reveal the Quran when it contains such violent verses that conveniently support Muhammad’s violence, whereas the New Testament does not have such violence.

Second, Muslims believe that the New Testament is corrupted, whereas the Quran is inerrant. Even if we assume only for the sake of argument that these claims are true (but they actually are not), then why would reasonable seekers of the truth prefer the “pure” but violence-filled Quran over the “corrupted” but peaceful New Testament?

Before Muhammad is allowed to throw around unsubstantiated charges about alleged New Testament corruption, he and his Quran must pass a down-to-earth test regarding his dubious, violent practices. But he and it fail the test badly, as this article demonstrates, whereas Christ and the New Testament pass with a perfect score. Therefore, if Muhammad is so wrong about down-to-earth matters like whipping adulterers and cutting off the hands of thieves and beating wives, then he is likely wrong about unresearched accusations of New Testament corruption—and factually he is wrong.

Please refer to the articles listed on these pages for more information: [1], [2].

Third, since Muhammad who claims divine guidance is so wrong about practical matters, why should we believe him about theoretical matters like the deity of Christ and the Trinity, both of which he denies? Clearly, he was not divinely guided in practical matters because the true God would not degrade religion by endorsing such gruesome violence six hundred years after Christ came—the historical span is critical. Christ and the New Testament do not have even one example of such violence. Again, if Muhammad first fails the down-to-earth test, then he likely fails the theological or theoretical test—we have no reason to believe him in such high doctrines, especially since he was no theologian and his revelations are now empirically suspect.

The practical implications of the top ten reasons are READ ENTIRETY (Top ten reasons why Islam is NOT the religion of peace: Violence in Muhammad’s life and the Quran; By James M. Arlandson; Answering Islam)

Now let’s look at the reality of the Hadith encouraging Muslims into acts of violence especially toward non-Muslims:

Jihad in the Hadith

The Hadith are the recorded sayings and deeds of the Prophet Muhammad. It is second in authority only to the Qur’an and is often used to clarify things not specified in the Qur’an. The following is what Muhammad had to say about Jihad as recorded in the Hadith.

1) The second best deed is to participate in Jihad (Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25, Narrated Abu Huraira) – Allah’s Apostle was asked, “What is the best deed?” He replied, “To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, “What is the next in goodness? He replied, “To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah’s Cause.” The questioner again asked, “What is the next (in goodness)?” He replied, “To perform Hajj (Pilgrimage to Mecca) ‘Mubrur, (which is accepted by Allah and is performed with the intention of seeking Allah’s pleasure only and not to show off and without committing a sin and in accordance with the traditions of the Prophet).”

2) Muhammad said if someone leaves Islam, to kill them (Volume 4, Book 52, Number 260, Narrated Ikrima) – All burnt some people and this news reached IBn ‘Abbas, who said, “Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, ‘Don’t punish anybody with Allah’s Punishment.’ No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, “If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.”

3) Volume 1, Book 2, Number 35, Narrated Abu Huraira ”The Prophet said, The person who participates in holy battles in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and his Apostles, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise (if he is killed in the battle as a martyr). Had I not found it difficult for my followers, then I would not remain behind any saiya going for Jihad and I would have loved to be martyred in Allah’s cause and then made alive, and then martyred and then made alive, and then again martyred in His cause.”

4) Volume 3, Book 46, Number 726 ”Allah’s Apostle said, A pious slave gets a double reward. Abu Huraira added: By Him in Whose Hands my soul is but for Jihad (holy battles), Hajj, and my duty to serve my mother, I would have loved to die as a slave.”

5) Volume 9, Book 93, Number 555 ”Allah’s Apostle said, Allah guarantees (the person who carries out Jihad in His Cause and nothing compelled him to go out but Jihad in His Cause and the belief in His Word) that He will either admit him into Paradise or return him with reward or booty he has earned to his residence from where he went out.” (Jihad in the Quran and Hadith; Contender Ministries)

Just to confront the Muslim apologist that claims there is a Greater Jihad and a Lesser Jihad with the “Lesser” being the violent aggressive edict and the “Greater” being the primary directive of Islam of warring with self to be a better person, here are some excerpts that relates the truth about this deceptive hogwash:

… Next to the Qur’an in importance is the Hadith, which refers to collections of traditions about what Muhammad said, what he taught, and what he did. These collections are also called Sunna or “tradition”; hence the term Sunni Muslims, or “traditional” Muslims. …

Muslims naturally felt a need to preserve traditions about the Prophet from the time of the earliest witnesses. However, over the years since Muhammad’s death some of these traditions became embellished and others were fabricated. In the ninth century a number of Islamic scholars undertook the task of sifting the genuine traditions from the spurious and of gathering the former in written collections. In Sunni Islam six of these collections in particular are considered sahih (“reliable”). These sahih sittah (“reliable collections”) are:

o Sahih Bukhari, compiled by the Imam Muhammad ibn-Ismail al-Bukhari (810-870).

o Sahih Muslim, compiled by Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri (821-975).

o Sunan Abu Dawud, compiled by Abu Dawud as-Sijistani (d. 888).

o Sunan ibn Majah, compiled by Muhammad ibn Majah (d. 896).

o Sunan At-Tirmidhi, compiled by Abi ‘Eesaa Muhammad At-Tirmidhi (824-893).

o Sunan An-Nasai, compiled by Ahmad ibn Shu’ayb an-Nasai (d. 915).

All these collections of hadith are highly respected in the Sunni tradition, but the first two even more than the others, and so they are given the additional specific designation of sahih. And of those two, Sahih Bukhari is considered the most important and most reliable. Those ahadith occurring in both the Bukhari and Muslim collections have the highest status of all.

Only One Jihad

These compilations of hadith are voluminous, and they have a lot to say about jihad. However, before going to these classic collections, we should begin by looking at one hadith that is very often quoted to demonstrate a nonviolent meaning of jihad:

Upon his return from battle Muhammad said, “We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad (i.e. the struggle against the evil of one’s soul).” (1)

This is very often cited as a proof-text for the “real” meaning of jihad being inward, spiritual struggle. But there are two problems:

1. Even a “lesser” jihad is still jihad and thus a duty and a virtue.

2. Muhammad never made such a statement.

The hadith in which Muhammad is said to speak of “greater” vs. “lesser” jihad is of doubtful authenticity. It does not appear in any of the six collections of the sahih sittah. In fact, a number of scholars maintain that this hadith is a forgery (2). One scholar analyzes this hadith and considers a number of factors, such as chain of transmission and other more reliable, contradictory ahadith (3). …

This seems to leave little doubt as to how Muhammad understood jihad. But let us not make the case on just one example. There are many ahadith on jihad, and they make its meaning quite clear. First and foremost, jihad meant combat on the battlefield, and specifically against non-Muslims.

Jihad as Fighting the Nonbeliever

The following sequence of ahadith will clarify this. Many of these are extremely well attested, occurring multiple times in the most trusted collections, the Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. I will cite some of these multiple attestations just to show the high status of these ahadith.

Reading through the hadith on the subject of jihad, what we do not find is an exclusive emphasis on self-defense or on struggling with one’s desires. Jihad is physical combat, not just for self-defense but for the purpose of spreading Islam, and there is no greater virtue: READ ENTIRETY (Jihad in the Hadith; Peace with Realism – Updated website About Page)

The Sira includes the Sunna which are the sayings of Mohammed:

The easiest way to learn about Islam is to learn about Mohammed. His biography is called the Sira, and this book is a condensation of it.

The Islamic bible—the Trilogy

Islam is defined by the words of Allah in the Koran, and the words and actions of Mohammed, called the Sunna.

The Sunna is found in two collections of texts—the Sira (Mohammed’s life) and the Hadith. The Koran says 91 times that his words and actions are considered to be the divine pattern for humanity.

A hadith, or tradition, is a brief story about what Mohammed did or said. A collection of hadiths is called a Hadith. There are many collections of hadiths, but the most authoritative are those by Bukhari and Abu Muslim, the ones used in this book.

So the Trilogy is the Koran, the Sira and the Hadith. Most people think that the Koran is the bible of Islam, but it is only about 14% of the total textual doctrine. The Trilogy is the foundation and totality of Islam.

The Relative Sizes of the Trilogy Texts

Islam is defined by the words of Allah in the Koran, and the words and actions of Mohammed, the Sunna. (A Taste of Islam – The Life of Mohammed – The Sira; By Bill Warner; Center for the Study of Political Islam; © 2010 CSPI, LLC)

Here is an example of the wickedness of Islam displayed in the Sira courtesy the Australian Islamist Monitor:

And in the sira, endless examples of violence to others in offensive attacks: eg Sirat Rasul’allah by Ibn Ishaq.

Booty is made lawful as a gift from that compassionate allah (p 326-327 –which also notes allah telling Mohammad NOT to take prisoners until he has made slaughter in the earth —ie kill to manifest the religion!!). Page 464-466 records the beheading of ~800 males and one female, the enslavement of females and children and Mohammad taking a female for his enjoyment. This ‘pattern’ is repeated in other acts of slaughter, enslavement and rape eg p 493, p 511. In one attack over 6000 women and children plus animals were taken (p 592-593) with the remnants of the men ‘converting’ to try to retrieve their families!!! Mohammad handed out GIRLS for friends to enjoy (p 593) as sex with tiny girls is allowed in Islamic law eg Hedaya Vol 4 p 106. (see more in Islam’s genocidal slavery – Part A – Mohammad’s example 23-08-09 on site) Of some 48 -67 battles in those last 10 years, Mohammad ‘stayed home’ for some and led 27 yet still claimed 1/5th of the booty! But along with big battles were endless small attacks on others, murders, threats and demands for tribute or else! Simple farming communities were often suddenly attacked by these well armed Islamic ‘heroes.’

**Ibn Ishaq: p 572-3 (sirat rasulallah) “Muhammad is the man, an Apostle of my Lord……. Evil was the state of the B. Qasiy in Wajj…they lost the day …Fortunes change. We came upon them like lions of the thickets. The armies of Allah came openly……. almost flying at them in our rage…. We were as lions of Liya there until we destroyed them and al-Nusur were forced to surrender….. and blood flowed freely. In former days there was no battle like this. We slew B. Hutayt in the dust. ….Those who escaped were choked with terror. A multitude of them were slain. If they are guided to Islam….If they do NOT accept it THEY call for god’s war in which they will have no helper. As war destroyed the B. Sa’d and fate the clan of B. Ghaziya.” (the Muslim view is that those who resist allah/Islam CAUSE wars) (Islam is Conquest by Violence and Fear: Hadith, Sira, laws, comments part 2; By Circe; Australian Islamist Monitor; last updated – 5/9/11 18:47)

So figure it out! Islam is an inherently violent religion even if a majority of Muslims practice a peaceful version of their theopolitical religion. The reality is the Islam that Left Wingers, Multiculturalists and deceived Conservatives call “Moderate” Islam; IS NOT the true Islam of the Quran, Hadith and Sira.

In the light of the San Bernardino Massacre perpetrated by the Islamic terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook and his Pakistani wife Tashfeen Malik that went on a kafir killing spree, I became very irritated with the authorities – local, State and Federal – failing to state the obvious that this was an act of Islamic terrorism. Then of course that irritation became stoked when Obama and his Dem-Leftist cadres refused the term Islamic terrorism and followed that colossal public irresponsibility with blaming lax gun control laws for the shooting.

The gun control theme is especially idiotic considering the gun control laws in California are not exactly NRA friendly. Perhaps if

some of the good citizens of San Bernardino were packing, a couple of kafir-hating Muslims might have discovered their Allah deity is closer to an antichrist demon than a ludicrous promise of eternal virgins in Paradise fulfilling the carnal/fleshly desires of unrestrained sex and the taste of wine without becoming intoxicated quicker and with non-Muslim victims. (I’m unsure of any eternal promises for female shahids. Tough luck Tashfeen.)

I’ll culminate my thoughts by sharing the thoughts of Justin Smith I found on his Facebook page. Justin wrote his thoughts before the FBI struggled to admit the San Bernardino Massacre was an act of terrorism; however take note there is still the refusal to call the massacre an act of Islamic terrorism.

JRH 12/5/15

Please Support NCCR

****************************

Justin Smith Thoughts on San Bernardino Terrorist Attack

By Justin O. Smith

December 3, 2015 11:35am

Facebook Page

In light of the San Bernardino terrorist attack, I wish to reiterate the following:

Well – now. We see another example in Syed Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik of the only “contribution” I’ve seen Islam and Muslims give to America and the world over my entire lifetime — 58 years. Rest assured that this was more islamofascist terrorism, since all the evidence, the planning, the weapons and the explosive devices are indicative of such.

Most Americans, many of our leaders as well, are aware that terrorists infiltrating groups of refugees are only part of the problem. They are not speaking of imaginary space-aliens, when they cognitively and logically reason that the ideological doctrines within Islam, such as the mandated perpetual war between the House of Islam and the House of War (non-Muslims) and the supposed supremacy of Islam, creates the prime motivation for the endemic violence of Islam. Americans understand that the terrorists are found in the ranks of converts like Carlos Bledsoe, second and third generation U.S. Muslims like Anwar al-Awlaki and refugees like the Tsarnaev brothers; and, as such, it certainly does not make any sense to import tens of thousands of more potential terrorists, in the middle of a generational and civilizational war between Islamic and Western principles.

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan said that we shouldn’t be accepting “any Syrian refugees without complete assurance those we are welcoming intend us no harm”, but when dealing with the agents of Islam, “complete assurance” would be a false assurance. One cannot offer an assurance against Muslims insidiously infiltrating any neighborhood, as they frequent ballgames, movies and restaurants and act like normal citizens, until they unleash bloodbath upon bloodbath, just like the Abdeslam brothers did in France, terrorist bomber Ramzi Yousef did at the World Trade Center in 1993, nineteen terrorists did on 9/11 and Abdulazeez did at the Chattanooga Naval facility.

_______________________

Kafir Slaughter is the Norm not Aberration

John R. Houk

© December 5, 2015

_____________________

Justin Smith Thoughts on San Bernardino Terrorist Attack

© Justin O. Smith

Beheading in Islam


In Christianity when one thinks of the Cross one should first of all understand that Jesus Christ the Son of God (and the son of man via Mary) was condemned to do die on the Cross convicted of crimes He did not commit. This the Son of God’s sacrifice and redemption price as the only sinless man to restore all believing humanity to the Presence of God. Too often early Christians suffered the same fate as Christ on the Cross. In most cases not voluntarily but as lawbreakers adhering to their faith rather than submitting to the polytheism of the then Roman Empire. TODAY Christians under the control of the ISIS/Daesh Islamic State are being crucified for their faith.

In Islam TODAY the symbol that epitomizes lack of submission to that theopolitical faith is beheading. Below is a four and a half minute video of Bill Warner explaining how beheading is part and parcel to the very nature of Islam. After the video I am cross posting Warner’s link that shows Islamic revered writings – Quran, Hadith and Sira – glorifying beheadings.

JRH 8/28/15

Please Support NCCR

****************************

Beheading in Islam

By Bill Warner

August 11, 2015

Political Islam

When you hear of beheading, do you assume that Islam is involved? Beheading is an integral part of Islam. Mohammed repeatedly ordered people beheaded and the Koran even includes beheading. Beheading is threatened to settle arguments about Islam. Men were threatened with beheading if they did not become a Muslim. Beheading is mentioned nine times in the Hadith of Bukhari, once in the Koran and 41 times in the Sira. Beheading is recommended and common in the doctrine of Islam.

VIDEO: Beheading in Islam

Published by Political Islam

Published on Aug 11, 2015

To see the references go to:

+++

Beheading in the Koran, Sira and Hadith


Center for the Study of Political Islam

Beheadings in the hadiths of Bukhari

Nine (9) references

Volume 2, Book 23, Number 437:
Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

Then the Prophet said to him, “I have kept something (in my mind) for you, (can you tell me that?)” Ibn Saiyad said, “It is Al-Dukh (the smoke).” (2) The Prophet said, “Let you be in ignominy. You cannot cross your limits.” On that ‘Umar, said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Allow me to chop his head off.” The Prophet (p.b.u.h) said, “If he is he (i.e. Dajjal), then you cannot over-power him, and if he is not, then there is no use of murdering him.” (Ibn ‘Umar added): Later on Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) once again went along with Ubai bin Ka’b to the date-palm trees (garden) where Ibn Saiyad was staying. The Prophet (p.b.u.h) wanted to hear something from Ibn Saiyad before Ibn Saiyad could see him, and the Prophet (p.b.u.h) saw him lying covered with a sheet and from where his murmurs were heard. Ibn Saiyad’s mother saw Allah’s Apostle while he was hiding himself behind the trunks of the date-palm trees. She addressed Ibn Saiyad, “O Saf! (and this was the name of Ibn Saiyad) Here is Muhammad.” And with that Ibn Saiyad got up. The Prophet said, “Had this woman left him (Had she not disturbed him), then Ibn Saiyad would have revealed the reality of his case.

Volume 3, Book 48, Number 829:
Narrated Aisha:

 

(the wife of the Prophet) “Whenever Allah’s Apostle intended to go on a journey, he would draw lots amongst his wives and would take with him the one upon whom the lot fell. During a Ghazwa of his, he drew lots amongst us and the lot fell upon me, and I proceeded with him after Allah had decreed the use of the veil by women. I was carried in a Howdah (on the camel) and dismounted while still in it. When Allah’s Apostle was through with his Ghazwa and returned home, and we approached the city of Medina, Allah’s Apostle ordered us to proceed at night. When the order of setting off was given, I walked till I was past the army to answer the call of nature.

By Allah, I know nothing about my family but good, and they have accused a person about whom I know nothing except good, and he never entered my house except in my company.’

Sad bin Mu’adh got up and said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! by Allah, I will relieve you from him. If that man is from the tribe of the Aus, then we will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, the Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.’ On that Sad bin ‘Ubada, the chief of the Khazraj and before this incident, he had been a pious man, got up, motivated by his zeal for his tribe and said, ‘By Allah, you have told a lie; you cannot kill him, and you will never be able to kill him.’ On that Usaid bin Al-Hadir got up and said (to Sad bin ‘Ubada), ‘By Allah! you are a liar. By Allah, we will kill him; and you are a hypocrite, defending the hypocrites.’ On this the two tribes of Aus and Khazraj got excited and were about to fight each other, while Allah’s Apostle was standing on the pulpit. He got down and quietened them till they became silent and he kept quiet. On that day I kept on weeping so much so that neither did my tears stop, nor could I sleep.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 251:
Narrated ‘Ubaidullah bin Abi Rafi:

 

I heard ‘Ali saying, “Allah’s Apostle sent me, Az-Zubair and Al-Miqdad somewhere saying, ‘Proceed till you reach Rawdat Khakh. There you will find a lady with a letter. Take the letter from her.’ “So, we set out and our horses ran at full pace till we got at Ar-Rawda where we found the lady and said (to her). “Take out the letter.” She replied, “I have no letter with me.” We said, “Either you take out the letter or else we will take off your clothes.” So, she took it out of her braid. We brought the letter to Allah’s Apostle and it contained a statement from Hatib bin Abi Balta a to (sic) some of the Meccan pagans informing them of some of the intentions of Allah’s Apostle. Then Allah’s Apostle said, “O Hatib! What is this?” Hatib replied, “O Allah’s Apostle! Don’t hasten to give your judgment about me. I was a man closely connected with the Quraish, but I did not belong to this tribe, while the other emigrants with you, had their relatives in Mecca who would protect their dependents and property. So, I wanted to recompense for my lacking blood relation to them by doing them a favor so that they might protect my dependents. I did this neither because of disbelief not apostasy nor out of preferring Kufr (disbelief) to Islam.” Allah’s Apostle, said, “Hatib has told you the truth.” Umar said, O Allah’s Apostle! Allow me to chop off the head of this hypocrite.” Allah’s Apostle said, “Hatib participated in the battle of Badr, and who knows, perhaps Allah has already looked at the Badr warriors and said, ‘Do whatever you like, for I have forgiven you.”

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 290d:
Narrated Ibn ‘Umar:

 

Umar and a group of the companions of the Prophet set out with the Prophet to Ibn Saiyad. He found him playing with some boys near the hillocks of Bani Maghala. Ibn Saiyad at that time was nearing his puberty. He did not notice (the Prophet’s presence) till the Prophet stroked him on the back with his hand and said, “Ibn Saiyad! Do you testify that I am Allah’s Apostle?” Ibn Saiyad looked at him and said, “I testify that you are the Apostle of the illiterates.”

Then Ibn Saiyad asked the Prophet. “Do you testify that I am the apostle of Allah?” The Prophet said to him, “I believe in Allah and His Apostles.” Then the Prophet said (to Ibn Saiyad). “What do you see?” Ibn Saiyad replied, “True people and false ones visit me.” The Prophet said, “Your mind is confused as to this matter.” The Prophet added, “I have kept something (in my mind) for you.” Ibn Saiyad said, “It is Ad-Dukh.” The Prophet said (to him), “Shame be on you! You cannot cross your limits.” On that ‘Umar said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Allow me to chop his head off.” The Prophet said, “If he should be him (i.e. Ad-Dajjal) then you cannot overpower him, and should he not be him, then you are not going to benefit by murdering him.”

Volume 4, Book 55, Number 558:
Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:

 

The Prophet said, “I have been made victorious with As-Saba (i.e. an easterly wind) and the people of ‘Ad were destroyed by Ad-Dabur (i.e. a westerly wind).” Narrated Abu Said: Ali sent a piece of gold to the Prophet who distributed it among four persons: Al-Aqra’ bin Habis Al-Hanzali from the tribe of Mujashi, ‘Uyaina bin Badr Al-Fazari, Zaid At-Ta’i who belonged to (the tribe of) Bani Nahban, and ‘Alqama bin Ulatha Al-’Amir who belonged to (the tribe of) Bani Kilab. So the Quraish and the Ansar became angry and said, “He (i.e. the Prophet,) gives the chief of Najd and does not give us.” The Prophet said, “I give them) so as to attract their hearts (to Islam).” Then a man with sunken eyes, prominent checks, a raised forehead, a thick beard and a shaven head, came (in front of the Prophet) and said, “Be afraid of Allah, O Muhammad!” The Prophet ‘said “Who would obey Allah if I disobeyed Him? (Is it fair that) Allah has trusted all the people of the earth to me while, you do not trust me?” Somebody who, I think was Khalid bin Al-Walid, requested the Prophet to let him chop that man’s head off, but he prevented him. When the man left, the Prophet said, “Among the off-spring of this man will be some who will recite the Qur’an but the Qur’an will not reach beyond their throats (i.e. they will recite like parrots and will not understand it nor act on it), and they will renegade from the religion as an arrow goes through the game’s body. They will kill the Muslims but will not disturb the idolaters. If I should live up to their time’ I will kill them as the people of ‘Ad were killed (i.e. I will kill all of them).”

Volume 4, Book 56, Number 807:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

 

While we were with Allah’s Apostle who was distributing (i.e. some property), there came Dhu-l-Khuwaisira, a man from the tribe of Bani Tamim and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Do Justice.” The Prophet said, “Woe to you! Who could do justice if I did not? I would be a desperate loser if I did not do justice.” ‘Umar said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Allow me to chop his head off.” The Prophet said, “Leave him, for he has companions who pray and fast in such a way that you will consider your fasting negligible in comparison to theirs. They recite Qur’an but it does not go beyond their throats (i.e. they do not act on it) and they will desert Islam as an arrow goes through a victim’s body…

Volume 5, Book 57, Number 91:
Narrated Muhammad:

 

Anas bin Malik said, “The head of Al-Husain was brought to ‘Ubaidullah bin Ziyad and was put in a tray, and then Ibn Ziyad started playing with a stick at the nose and mouth of Al-Husain’s head and saying something about his handsome features.” Anas then said (to him), “Al-Husain resembled the Prophet more than the others did.” Anas added, “His (i.e. Al-Husain’s) hair was dyed with Wasma (i.e. a kind of plant used as a dye).”

Volume 5, Book 59, Number 399:
Narrated Jafar bin ‘Amr bin Umaiya:

 

I said, ‘I will go out to Musailamah so that I may kill him, and make amends for killing Hamza. So I went out with the people (to fight Musailamah and his followers) and then famous events took place concerning that battle. Suddenly I saw a man (i.e. Musailamah) standing near a gap in a wall. He looked like an ash-colored camel and his hair was dishevelled. So I threw my spear at him, driving it into his chest in between his breasts till it passed out through his shoulders, and then an Ansari man attacked him and struck him on the head with a sword. ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar said, ‘A slave girl on the roof of a house said: Alas! The chief of the believers (i.e. Musailamah) has been killed by a black slave.”

Volume 9, Book 93, Number 512:
Narrated Al-Mughira:

 

Sa’d bin ‘Ubada said, “If I saw a man with my wife, I would strike him (behead him) with the blade of my sword.” This news reached Allah’s Apostle who then said, “You people are astonished at Sa’d’s Ghira. By Allah, I have more Ghira than he, and Allah has more Ghira than I, and because of Allah’s Ghira, He has made unlawful Shameful deeds and sins (illegal sexual intercourse etc.) done in open and in secret. And there is none who likes that the people should repent to Him and beg His pardon than Allah, and for this reason He sent the warners and the givers of good news. And there is none who likes to be praised more than Allah does, and for this reason, Allah promised to grant Paradise (to the doers of good).” ‘Abdul Malik said, “No person has more Ghira than Allah.”

Beheadings in the Sira — The Life of Mohammed, A. Guillaume, Oxford University Press, 1982

Fourty-one (41) references

Abu Bakr was enraged and hit Finhas hard in the face, saying, ‘Were it not for the treaty between us I would cut off your head, you enemy of Allah!’ Finhas immediately went to the apostle and said, ‘Look, Muhammad, at what your companion has done.’ The apostle asked Abu Bakr what had impelled him to do such a thing and he answered: ‘The enemy of Allah spoke blasphemy. He alleged that Allah was poor and that they were rich and I was so angry that I hit his face.’ Finhas contradicted this and denied that he had said it, so Allah sent down refuting him and confirming what Abu Bakr had said: ‘Allah has heard the speech of those who say: “Allah is poor and we are rich.” We shall write what they say and their killing the prophets wrongfully and we shall say, Taste the punishment of burning.’– Page 263

This saying reached the apostle’s ears and he said to ‘Umar, ‘O Abu Hafs’-and ‘Umar said that this was the first time the apostle called him by this honorific-’ought the face of the apostle’s uncle to be marked with the sword?’ ‘Umar replied, ‘Let me off with his head! By God, the man is a false Muslim.’2 Abu Hudhayfa used to say, ‘I never felt safe after my words that day. I was always afraid unless martyrdom atoned for them.’ He was killed as a martyr in the battle of al-Yamama. – Page 301

My father Ishaq b. Yasar from men of B. Mazin b. Al-Najjar from Abu Da’ud al-Mazini, who was at Badr, told me: ‘I was pursuing a polytheist at Badr to smite him, when his head fell off before I could get at him with my sword, and I knew that someone else had killed him.’ – Page 303

Mu’awwidh b. ‘Afra’ passed Abu Jahl as he lay there helpless and smote him until he left him at his last gasp. He himself went on fighting until he was killed. Then ‘Abdullah b. Mas’ud passed by Abu Jahl when the apostle had ordered that he was to be searched for among the slain. I have heard that the apostle had told them that if he was hidden among the corpses they were to look for the trace of a scar on his knee. When they both were young they had been pressed together at the table of ‘Abdullah b. Jud’an. He was thinner than Abu Jahl and he gave him a push which sent him to his knees and one of them was scratched so deeply that it left a permanent scar. ‘Abdullah b. Mas’ud said that he found him at his last gasp and put his foot on his neck (for he had once clawed at him and punched him in Mecca), and said to him: ‘Has God put you to shame, you enemy of God?’ He replied ‘How has He shamed me? Am I anything more remarkable than a man you have killed?’ Tell me how the battle went. He told him that it went in favor of God and His apostle (374).

Men of B. Makhzum assert that Ibn Mas’ud used to say: He said to me, ‘You have climbed high, you little shepherd.’ Then I cut off his head and brought it to the apostle saying, ‘This is the head of the enemy of God, Abu Jahl.’ He said, ‘By God than Whom there is no other, is it?’ (This used to be his oath.) , Yes,’ I said, and I threw his head before the apostle and he gave thanks to God – Page 304

Then God said, ‘Then thy Lord revealed to the angels, I am with you so strengthen those that believe.’ i.e. help those that believe.

‘I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, so strike off their heads and cut off all their fingers, because they opposed God and His apostle and he who opposes God and His apostle (will find)God severe in punishment.’

Then He said, ‘O you who believe, when you meet those who disbelieve on the march, do not turn your backs. He who turns his back except in maneuvering or intending to join another section, incurs the wrath of God, and his destination is Hell, a miserable end.’ i.e. Inciting them against their enemy so that they should not withdraw from them when they met them, God having promised what He had promised. – Page 322

f B. Makhzum b. Yaaza: Abu Taw b. Hisham (Mu’adh b. ‘Ami struck off his leg. His son ‘Ikrima struck off Mu’adh’s hand and he threw it from him; then Mu’awwidh b. ‘Afra’ struck him so that he disabled him leaving him at the last gasp; then ‘Abdullah b. Mas’ud quickly dispatched him and cut off his head when the apostle ordered that search should be made among the slain for him); and al-’.As b. Hisham whom ‘Umar killed; and Yazid b. ‘Abdullah, an ally from B. Tamim (511); and Abu Musafi’ al-A. – Page 338

When we met there was no way out
Save with a thrust from dun-colored straight-fashioned shafts
And a blow with swords which severed their heads,
Swords that glittered as they smote.
We left the erring ‘Utba lying dead
And Shayba among the slain thrown in the well; – Page 340

Nothing matters if you fail to take revenge on ‘Amr’s slayers.
With waving swords flashing in Your hands like lightning
Sending heads flying as they glitter.
As it were the tracks of ants on their blades
When they are unsheathed against the evil-eyed enemy. -Page 341

Who will send a messenger from me
With news that a shrewd man will confirm?
Do not you know how I kept returning to the fight at Badr
When the swords flashed around you,
When the army’s leaders were left prostrate,
Their heads like slices of melon?
A gloomy fate, to the people’s hurt,
Came upon you in the valley of Badr;
My resolution saved them from disaster
And God’s help and a well-conceived plan.
I returned alone from al-Abwa’ – Page 536

The apostle said, ‘Kill any Jew that fails into your power.’ Thereupon Muhayyisa b. Mas’ud leapt upon Ibn Sunayna (579), a Jewish merchant with whom they had social and business relations, and killed him. Huwayyisa was not a Muslim at the time though he was the elder brother. When Muhayyisa killed him Huwayyisa began to beat him, saying, ‘You enemy of God, did you kill him when much of the fat on your belly comes from his wealth?’ Muhayyisa answered, ‘Had the one who ordered me to kill him ordered me to kill you I would have cut your head off.’ He said that this was the beginning of Huwayyisa’s acceptance of Islam. The other replied, ‘By God, if Muhammad had ordered you to kill me would you have killed me?’ He said, ‘Yes, by God, had he ordered me to cut off your head I would have done so.’ He exclaimed, ‘By God, a religion which can bring you to this is marvellous!’ and he became a Muslim. – Page 368

When (war) rubbed its breast in Quba”

And the slaughter waxed hot among the ‘Abdu’l-Ashhai.

Then they were nimble in flight

Like young ostriches running up a hill.

We killed a double number of their nobles

And adjusted the inequality of Badr.

I do not blame myself, but

Had we returned we should have made a clean sweep of them,

With Indian swords above their heads

Delivering blow after blow. – Page 408

What scared them suddenly in the valley was

Squadrons of horse coming forth to the battle.

They wanted to plunder our tents,

But protecting those tents that day were shattering blows.

They were tents that have always been protected,

If a people made for them they would be spoiled and meet our rage.

The heads of the Khazrajis that morning

By the side of Sal’ were like sliced melons,

And their hands holding Yamani swords were like barwaq – Page 622

Then he went to Quraysh and said to Abu Sufyan b. Harb and his company: ‘You know my affection for you and that I have left Muhammad. Now I have heard something which I think it my duty to tell you of by way of warning, but regard it as confidential.’ When they said that they would, he continued: ‘Mark my words, the Jews have regretted their action in opposing Muhammad and have sent to tell him so, saying: “Would you like us to get hold of some chiefs of the two tribes Quraysh and Ghatafan and hand them over to you so that you can cut their heads off? Then we can join you in exterminating the rest of them.’ He has sent word back to accept their offer; so if the Jews send to you to demand hostages, don’t send them a single man.’ – Page 459

Huyayy was brought out wearing a flowered robe (710) in which he had made holes about the size of the finger-tips in every part so that it should not be taken from him as spoil, I with his hands bound to his neck by a rope. When he saw the apostle he said, ‘By God, I do not blame myself for opposing you, but he who forsakes God will be forsaken.’ Then he went to the men and said, ‘God’s command is right. A book and a decree, and massacre have been written against the Sons of Israel.’ Then he sat down and his head was struck off. – Page 464

When he returned and told him that the apostle had spared his life he said, ‘What does an old man without family and without children want with life?’ Thabit went again to the apostle, who promised to give him his wife and children. When he told him he said, ‘How can a household in the Hijaz live without property?’ Thabit secured the apostle’s promise that his property would be restored and came and told him so, and he said, ‘O Thabit, what has become of him whose face was like a Chinese mirror in which the virgins of the tribe could see themselves, Ka ‘b b. Asad?’ ‘Killed,’ he said. ‘And what of the prince of the Desert and the Sown, Huyayy b. Akhtab?’ ‘Killed.’ ‘And what of our vanguard when we attacked and our rearguard when we fled (T. returned to the charge), ‘Azzal b. Samaw’al?’ ‘Killed.’ ‘And what of the two assemblies?’ meaning B. Ka’b b. Qurayza and B. ‘Amr b. Qurayza. ‘Killed.’ He said, ‘Then! ask of you, Thabit, by my claim on you that you join me with my people, for life holds no joy now that they are dead, and I cannot bear to wait another momentI to meet my loved ones.’ So Thabit went up to him and struck off his head.

When Abu Bakr heard of his words ‘until I meet my loved ones’ he said, ‘Yes, by Allah he will meet them in hell for ever and ever’ – Page 466

His mother said when his bier was being carried, as she was weeping:

Alas Umm Sa’d for Sa’d the brave and bold,

Leader glorious, knight ever ready,

Stepping into the breach, cutting heads to pieces. – Page 468

We besieged them for one whole month

Standing over them like conquerors.

Night and morning every day

We attacked them fully armed;

Sharp swords in our hands

Cutting through heads and skulls.

‘Twas as though their gleam when they were drawn – Page 470

Abu Qatada has been killed.’ The apostle said that it was not Abu Qatada but a man he had killed and covered with his mantle so that they might know that he was his prey. ‘Ukasha overtook Aubar and his son ‘Amr who were riding the same camel, and ran them through with his lance, killing the two of them at one stroke. They recovered some of the milch-camels. The apostle went forward until he halted at the mountain of Dhu Qarad, and the men joined him there, and he stopped there for a day and a night. Salama b. al-Akwa’ asked if he might go with a hundred men and recover the rest of the herd and cut off the heads of the band. – Page 488

Ka’b b. Malik said concerning the day of Dhu Qarad with reference to the horsemen:

Do the bastards think that we

Are not their equals in horsemanship?

We are men who think killing no shame,

We turn not from the piercing lances.

We feed the guest with choicest camels’ meat

And smite the heads of the haughty.

We turn back the conspicuous warriors in their pride

With blows that quash the zeal of the unyielding. – Page 489

‘Asim b. ‘Umar b. Qatada told me that ‘Abdullah came to the apostle, saying, ‘I have heard that you want to kill ‘Abdullah b. Ubayy for what you have heard about him. If you must do it, then order me to do it and I will bring you his head, for al-Khazraj know that they have no man more dutiful to his father than I, and I am afraid that if you order someone else to kill him my soul will not permit me to see his slayer waiking among men and I shall kill him, thus killing a believer for an unbeliever, and so I should go to hell.’ The apostle said: ‘Nay, but let us deal kindly with him and make much of his companionship while he is with us.’ After that it happened that if any misfortune befell it was his own people who re­proached and upbraided him roughly. The apostle said to ‘Umar when he heard of this state of things: ‘Now what do you think, ‘Umar? Had I killed him on the day you wanted me to kill him the leading men would have trembled with rage. If I ordered them to kill him today they would kill him.’ ‘Umar replied, ‘I know that the apostle’s order is more blessed than mine. – Page 492

Kinana b. al-Rabi’, who had the custody of the treasure of B. al-Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came (T. was brought) to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, ‘Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?’ he said Yes. The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr b. al-’Awwam, ‘Torture him until you extract what he has,’ so he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head, in revenge for his brother Mahmud. – Page 515

Get out of his way, you unbelievers, make way.2

Every good thing goes with His apostle.

O Lord I believe in his word,

I know God’s truth in accepting it.

We will fight you about its interpretation3

As we have fought you about its revelation

With strokes that will remove heads from shoulders

And make friend unmindful of friend – Page 531

It pained me though I did not see in Mecca’s valley

The men of Banu Ka’b with their heads cut off

By men who had not drawn their swords

And the many dead who were left unburied.2

Would that I knew if my help with its biting satire3

Would injure Suhayl b. ‘Amr, and Safwan

That old camel who groans from his arse.

This is the time for war-its girths are tightened.

Don’t feel safe from us, son of Umm Mujalid,

When its pure milk is extracted and its teeth are crooked.

Don’t be disappointed, for our swords

Will open the door to death – Page 544

The apostle summoned Hatib and asked him what induced him to act thus. He replied that he believed in God and His apostle and had never ceased to do so, but that he was not a man of standing among Quraysh and he had a son and a family there and that he had to deal prudently with them for their sakes. ‘Umar wanted to cut off his head as a hypocrite but the apostle said, ‘How do you know, ‘Umar; perhaps God looked favorably on those who were at Badr and said, “Do as you please, for I have forgiven you.’” – Page 545

Abu Sufyan was saying, ‘I have never seen such fires and such a camp before.’ Budayl was saying, ‘These, by God, are (the fires of) Khuza’a which war has kindled.’ Abu Sufyan was saying, ‘Khuza’a are too poor and few to have fires and camps like these.’ I recognized his voice and called to him and he recognized my voice. I told him that the apostle was here with his army and expressed concern for him and for Quraysh: ‘If he takes you he will behead you, so ride on the back of this mule so that I can take you to him and ask for you his protection.’ So he rode behind me and his two companions returned. – Page 547

I said to him, ‘Submit and testify that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is the apostle of God before you lose your head,’ so he did so. I pointed out to the apostle that Abu Sufyan was a man who liked to have some cause for pride and asked him to do something for him. He said, ‘He who enters Abu Sufyan’s house is safe, and he who locks his door is safe, and he who enters the mosque is safe.’ When he went off to go back the apostle told me to detain him in the narrow part of the wadi where the mountain projected1 so that God’s armies would pass by and he would see them; so I went and detained him where the prophet had ordered. – Page 547, 548

The latter hid him until he brought him to the apostle after the situation in Mecca was tranquil, and asked that he might be granted immunity. They allege that the apostle remained silent for a long time till finally he said yes. When ‘Uthman had left he said to his companions who were sitting around him, ‘I kept silent so that one of you might get up and strike off his head!’ One of the Ansar said, ‘Then why didn’t you give me a sign, O apostle of God?’ He answered that a prophet does not kill by pointing – Page 550

A traditionist of B. Jadhima who was one of our companions told me: ‘When Khalid ordered us to lay down our arms one of our men called Jahdam said, “Woe to you, B. Jadhima! This is Khalid. If you lay down your arms you will be bound, and after you have been bound you will be beheaded. By God, I’ll never lay down my arms.” Some of his people laid hold of him saying “Do you want to shed our blood? Everyone else has accepted Islam and laid down their arms; war is over and everybody is safe. “They persisted to the point of taking away his arms, and they them­selves laid down their arms at Khalid’s word.’ – Page 561

The same authority told me that she said: ‘May your life be prolonged seven and ten continuous years and eight thereafter.’ Then I took him away and he was beheaded. Abu Firas b. Abu Sunbula al-Aslami from some of their shaykhs from one who was present said: She went to him when he was beheaded and bent over him and kept on kissing him until she died at his side. – Page 564

The young man did not know him and Durayd asked him what he wanted and what was his name. He told him and said that he wanted to kill him, and struck him with his sword to no effect. Durayd said, ‘What a poor weapon your mother has given you! Take this sword of mine that is behind the saddle in the howdah and strike me with that above the spine and below the head, for that is the way I used to strike men. Then when you come to your mother tell her that you have killed Durayd b. al-Simma, for many’s the day I have protected your women.” – Page 574

A man with sharp weapons as though

When the enemy surrounded him he saw you.4

He attacked those of (his) kith and kin

Seeking only to please God and you.

I tell you I saw him charging in clouds of dust

Crushing the heads of the polytheists;

Now throttling with bare hands,

Now splitting their skulls with his sharp sword. – Page 577, 578

The day we trod down the unbelievers

And found no deviation or turning from the apostle’s order.

In a battle mid which the people heard only

Our exhortations to fight and the smashing of skulls

By swords that sent heads flying from their base

And severed the necks of warriors at a blow.

Often have we left the slain cut to pieces

And a widow crying Alas! over her husband.

‘Tis God not man we seek to please;

To Him belongs the seen and the unseen. – Page 580

By God’s command we smote those we met

In accordance with the best command.

When we met, O Hawazin,

We were saturating heads with fresh blood.

When you and B. Qasiy assembled

We crushed opposition like beaten leaves.

Some of your chiefs we slew

And we turned to kill both fugitive and standfast.

Al-Multath lay with outstretched hands,

His dying breath sounding like a gasping young camel. – Page 586

‘Asim b. ‘Umar b. Qatada told me that one of the Ansar leapt upon him asking to be allowed to behead the enemy of God, but the apostle told him to let him alone because he had come repentant breaking away from his past. Ka ‘b was angry at this tribe of the Ansar because of what this man had done and moreover the men of the Muhajirin spoke only well of him. – Page 598

Al-Zuhri alleged that when they brought him to crucify him he said:

Tell the chiefs of the Muslims that I

Surrender to my Lord my body and my bones.

Then they beheaded him and hung him up by that water.

May God have mercy on him! – Page 645

Then he said, ‘You are the people who when they were driven away pushed forward,’ and they remained silent, and none of them answered him. He repeated the words three times without getting an answer, and the fourth time Yazid b. Abdu’l-Madan said, ‘Yes, we are,’ and said it four times. The apostle said, ‘If Khalid had not written to me that you had accepted Islam and had not fought I would throw your heads beneath your feet.’ Yazid answered, ‘We do not praise you and we do not praise Khalid.’ – Page 646

Mas’ud al-Ashja’i from his father Nu’aym: I heard the apostle saying to them when he read his letter ‘What do you say about it?’ They said that they said the same as Musaylima. He replied, ‘By God, were it not that heralds are not to be killed I would behead the pair of you!’ Then he wrote to Musaylima: ‘From Muhammad the apostle of God to Musaylima the liar. Peace be upon him who follows the guidance. I The earth is God’s. He lets whom He will of His creatures inherit it and the result is to the pious.’2 This was at the end of the year 10. – Page 649

’Amr asked him who he was, and when he told him he said: ‘Let it be one of your uncles who is older than you, my nephew, for I don’t want to shed your blood.’ ‘Ali answered, ‘But I do want to shed your blood.’ He became angry, and drew his sword which flashed like fire, and advanced in his anger (it is said that he was mounted). ‘Ali said to him, ‘How can I fight you when you are on a horse? Dismount and be on a level with me.’ So he got off his horse and came at him and ‘Ali advanced with his shield. ‘Amr Aimed a blow which cut deeply into the shield so that the sword stuck in it and struck his head. But ‘Ali gave him a blow on the vein at the base of the neck and he fell to the ground. The dust rose and the apostle heard the cry, ‘Allah Akbar’ and knew that ‘Ali had killed him. [Suhayli continues:] As he came towards the apostle smiling with joy ‘U mar asked him if he had stripped him of his armor, for it was the best that could be found among the Arabs. He answered: ‘When I had struck him down he turned his private parts towards me and I felt ashamed to despoil him and moreover he had said that he did not want to shed my blood because my father was a friend of his. – Page 458

“I seem to see Ja’far when he got off his sorrel and hamstrung her and then fought until he was killed as he said:

Welcome Paradise so near,

Sweet and cool to drink its cheer.

Greeks will soon have much to fear Infidels, of descent unclear

When we meet their necks I’ll shear.’” – Page 534

I pierced Ibn Zafila b. al-Irash with a spear

Which went through him and then broke.

I gave his neck a blow

So that he bent like a bough of mimosa.

We led off the wives of his cousins

On the day of Raquqayn as sheep – Page 536

In a battle mid which the people heard only

Our exhortations to fight and the smashing of skulls

By swords that sent heads flying from their base

And severed the necks of warriors at a blow.

Often have we left the slain cut to pieces

And a widow crying Alas! over her husband.

‘Tis God not man we seek to please;

To Him belongs the seen and the unseen. – Page 580

 

Beheadings in the Koran

One (1) reference

8:12 God revealed His will to the angels, saying: ‘I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!’

______________________

Beheading in Islam

© 2007-2015 CSPI, LLC. all rights reserved.

 

Political Islam About Page

 

What is Islam?

Islam is a cultural, religious and political system. Only the political system is of interest to kafirs (non-Muslims) since it determines how we are defined and treated. The Islamic political system is contained in the Koran, the Hadith (the traditions of Mohammed) and his biography, the Sira.

 

Our Mission

Political Islam has subjugated other civilizations for 1400 years. Our mission is to educate the world about political Islam, its founder Mohammed, his political doctrine and his god, Allah.

 

The Five Principles

Islam’s Trilogy of three sacred texts is the Koran and two books about the life of Mohammed. When the Trilogy is sorted, categorized, arranged, rewritten and analyzed, it becomes apparent that five principles are the foundation of Islam.

 

All of Islam is based upon the Trilogy—KoranSira (Mohammed’s biography) and Hadith (his Traditions).


Most of the Islamic doctrine is political, not religious. Islam is a political ideology.

Islam divides the world into Muslims and unbelievers, kafirs.

 

Political Islam always has two different ways to treat kafirs—dualistic ethics. Kafirs can be abused in the worst ways or they can be treated like a good neighbor.

 

Kafirs must submit to Islam in READ THE REST

________________________

Beheading in the Koran, Sira and Hadith

 

© 2007-2015 CSPI, LLC

 

About Page – CSPI Publications

 

Books, eBooks, and Audio Books by Dr. Bill Warner are available online at politicalislam.com and from popular retail distributors.

 

More Info

 

About CSPI Books

 

Our books make Islam easy to understand. There is one sure way to knowing Islam — know Allah and know Mohammed. This used to be very hard to do, but just like science made computers easy to use, scientific analysis has made Allah and Mohammed accessible and interesting.

 

Allah is found in the Koran which is famous for being impossible to read, but today anyone with curiosity can pick it up, read it and comprehend it.

 

To know Islam, you must know Mohammed. His life, called the Sira, and sayings, called Hadith, are the foundations of Islam. It is more important to know Mohammed than the Koran. Our books will show you one of history’s interesting leaders.

 

Our books will give you ease of learning and a firm foundation of understanding.

 

Primary Doctrine Books

 

Islam has three sacred texts-the Koran, the Sira (life of Mohammed), and the Hadith (traditions of Mohammed). These are the foundations of Islam. All of Islamic religious and political doctrine are found in them.

 

Until now these books were unavailable to the average reader. The READ THE REST

Norwegian Bjorn Jansen Gets Islam Ideology


Björn Jansen. 4-30-2014

Bjorn Jansen
 
 
John R. Houk
© January 24, 2015
 
Today the Gatestone Institute sent an email update with three essays on it. The first is by Bjorn Jansen and the second and third essays are by Alan M. Dershowitz. To be honest I did not read Dershowitz’s contribution. I immediately was drawn to Mr. Jansen’s essay largely due to his last name. Mr. Jansen’s last name is similar to pseudonymous counterjihad essayist/blogger Fjordman’s actual name. Fjordman’s actual name is Peder Are Nøstvold Jensen (Full name from a somewhat uncomplimentary article in Wikipedia).
 
Fjordman has been one of my hero bloggers for years. His name actual name was exposed to the massacre perpetuated by Right Wing semi-Nazi aficionado Anders Breivik who murdered nearly a hundred in Norway with the deluded aim of inspiring a NWO revolution in Europe against Islam and European Muslims. Although Breivik killed mostly teenage Norwegians away at a camp I believe he sought to place the blame on Norway’s growing minority of Muslims. (Here’s a dialogue between myself and an atheist who did his best to associate Breivik with the Christian Right.)
 
Fjordman’s essays apparently were an inspiration for Breivik’s 1500 page manuscript discovered after his arrest. The manuscript lays out a plan for Christian-Odinists (which I equate with Nazi mysticism. Odinism: HERE and HERE) in Europe to rise up and slay Europe’s ruling elite to rid Europe of Muslims. Fjordman’s essays were the most numerous but not the only Counterjihad writer in the mix. Indeed much of Breivik’s manuscript are from the Counterjihadists in which contributes a distorted interpretation of the creation of a Nazi-like nationalist European state. Since Fjordman’s essays standout in Breivik’s manuscript, the multiculturist authorities of Left leaning Norway branded Fjordman as synonymous to Breivik’s agenda. This Norwegian branding of Fjordman led to his arrest, interrogation and confiscation of the Fjordman computer and writings in his home. The Norwegian police of course could not pin their suspicions on Fjordman because a careful reading of the Fjordman essays simply demonstrates an expose Islam nature and there is absolutely no incitement to execute violence against Muslims. However, if you have followed Europe’s concept of Civil Liberties, you would realize that exposing Islam is considered a hate-crime which many European Counterjihadists have had to defend their Free Speech in a Court of Law.
 
So … Anyway, Bjorn Jansen, the author of the Gateway Institute article, made me think of Peder Jensen. Indeed Mr. Jansen’s essay is quite like a Fjordman essay. Bjorn Jansen is a Norwegian politician that seems to have awakened to how Norway’s Muslim minority non-assimilation mentality is harming the native Norwegian culture. Jansen rightly accuses his fellow politicians of looking the other way to preserve their political multiculturalism of accepting all people and religion and that with the correct applied societal aims the diverse cultures will live in harmony. Considering what the Norwegian police did to Fjordman/Peder Jensen, this is quite the courageous stand by a Norwegian politician. Bjorn Jansen even mentions the contributions of European Counterjihad leaders but sadly does not mention Fjordman. I suspect the reason for this failure is because Fjordman has been vilified in Norwegian society as a Right Wing extremist when he is not.
 
Before I move on to the Bjorn Jansen cross post allow me to share some Norwegian Wikipedia info on him. The original is in Norwegian and is translated by Google:
 
Bjorn Jansen (Politicians)
 
Björn Jansen (* 1977 in Aachen) is a German local politician (SPD) and since 2009 acting mayor of Aachen.
 
Life and work
 
Björn Jansen holds a degree in business administration at the RWTH Aachen University and graduated in 2008 with a thesis on “Standardization of IT in the local environment” as a business graduate from. Since 2010 he has worked as a consultant in the energy and water.
 
After years Jansen was previously occurred in the SPD, he was elected at the municipal election, 2004 the Council of the City of Aachen. In 2009, he was able to repeat the success and was also next to Margrethe Schmeer (CDU) and Hilde Scheidt (Alliance 90 / The Greens) voted one of the three mayors. 2014 he was a candidate for the mayoral and was confirmed after losing an election again as Assistant Mayor. In the city of Aachen Council Jansen mainly engaged as Vice Chair of the Finance Committee and as a member of the audit committee.
 
In addition to his party affiliation in the SPD Björn Jansen also belongs to the Supervisory Board of the spa and bathing Aachen Society and the Association of Assembly of the Sparkasse Aachen and Deputy Chairman of the Board of Directors in the Student Union Aachen. He is also Chairman of the City Sports Federation Aachen e. V. and since 2011 also president of the newly established Regional Sports Federation Aachen e. V., in which it is the merger of the municipal and local sports organizations in the Aachen region is the Stadtsportbund Aachen.
 
Björn Jansen is married to Daniela Jansen, who in the 2012 state election in North Rhine-Westphalia won a direct mandate for the SPD Aachen. With her ​​he has two children.
 
… (Bjorn Jansen (Politicians); Wikipedia; This page was last modified on 19 June 2014 at 09:32 clock [Translated from Norwegian by Google Translate – Wikipedia links in article removed and indicated by bold text])
 
JRH 1/24/15

Please Support NCCR

*************************
Norway: The People’s Revolution vs. The “Religion of Peace”
 
By Bjorn Jansen
January 24, 2015 at 5:00 am
 
In Norway’s educational system, history is not a valued subject. It is included under either “Social Studies” or “Norwegian.” Many Norwegians are therefore unaware how their society and democracy were formed, or of the enormous prices paid to attain them. Recent generations seem to take them for granted.
 
Norway’s education system is … [Blog Editor: The original text is abbreviated from original because the entirety in the post.]
 
It seems that most people in Europe — in the wake of the Paris massacres at the magazine Charlie Hebdo and the kosher supermarket — have either forgotten, or never been taught, that Muslims have invaded Europe several times before. In the Eighth Century, the Moors (Muslims from North Africa) succeeded in conquering Spain and the early medieval French King, Charles Martel, fought and put a stop to the Moors’ invasion of France. It took 800 years to expel Islam from Spain; the final expulsion of the Moors from Andalusia occurred 1494. Later, the Ottomans made it to the gates of Vienna in 1683. How has Islam’s nature and history in Europe been forgotten?
 
Norway, like many other countries in Europe after World War II, has built up an expansive welfare state. It is based on the principle of shared values, shared goals and shared faith in the state. Historically, Norway has prided itself in being a largely classless society with a large middle class, and only a small upper class or nobility.
 
In Norway’s educational system, history is not a valued subject. It is included either under the umbrella of “social studies” or “Norwegian.” This downgrading, combined with the erosion and virtual removal of Christianity from the education system, means that many are unaware of how their society and democracy were formed, or of the enormous prices paid to attain them. Recent generations seem to take them for granted.
 
The development of the West, which began with Socrates in Athens; then proceeded to rule of law based on verifiable evidence and equal justice from Rome; then the theological debate that preceded the Reformation and the Renaissance; the Enlightenment and the growth of science — all of these, over hundreds of years, have shaped constitutions and created today’s democratic societies. Today’s constitutions, legal systems, codes of ethics, and even desired values for children, are based on the values and qualities expressed in both the Old and New Testament, but most young people are not aware of this.
 
Islam is an ideology. All nations have their own, although this may not be obvious to those who are born and brought up in them. What, then, is Norway’s post-war ideology (or idealism), and how does it permeate Norway’s society today?
 
Before large amounts of oil began to be extracted in the 1970s, Norway was largely a monocultural society. However, the last 40 years have been a high-speed transition to a multicultural society, whose previous solidarity and joint values are now being broken down and questioned by parallel and, in the case of Islam, some widely opposing values and goals.
 
With immigration comes a larger gap between the poorest and richest than before, but Norway retains its strong social values of equality and its dream of solidarity — perhaps a key reason why socialism still has such a strong hold on the country.
 
Norway’s education system is permeated in an idealistic vision of equality and a belief in cultural relativism: that everyone, every culture and every religion are of the same value. Schools and even preschools are obliged to work toward wiping out class differences. As the state opposes the idea of private schools, there is virtually no alternative to the state school. The majority of teachers are idealists who believe in the idealism they are obliged to preach.
 
Cultural and religious relativism prevail. Islam is presented in schoolbooks as “just another religion.” Key practices, such as washing before praying, and praying five times a day, are presented; but Mohammed’s biography, Islam’s ideology and agenda, the concept of the kafir [infidel] and all its aggressive contents are brushed under the carpet. Islam is presented as an attractive religion, not an ideology, and is portrayed as if has already been reformed, a situation that is just not the case.
 
There is no tradition of debate clubs in Norway; the result is pressure for consensus of views and thoughts. To debate, in England, is considered an art. Many schools have debate clubs, and there is no harm seen in disagreeing strongly, then still going after to the pub. In Norway, in the workplace, to disagree is not always a safe option. To express an opinion that runs against the stream can be associated with “being difficult,” “argumentative,” and that what you think is “wrong,” with unpleasant overtones of “you are wrongly programmed.”
 
Norway’s politicians are both younger and less experienced than their European counterparts, who mostly enter politics later in life after a career in business. Few of Norway’s politicians have an international perspective from higher education or a career apart from politics. Many have gone straight into politics from student days. They are raised in a society with a small population entrenched in a socialist consensus, and that presses for conformity. How then does one express dissent in a country whose politicians and media are rooted in socialist thinking; where discussing religion is a no-go; where politics has replaced religion, and where there is a small population ensuring conformity of thought, with the risk of being sanctioned for expressing other thoughts?
 
Most of the media has the same socialist outlook as Norway’s politicians. There is either complete ignorance or a blind refusal to go to the root of Islamic terrorism, or how Islam’s doctrine effects the socialisation, mindset and actions of Muslims. Despite the existence of informative, independent websites such as document.no and rights.no, the media refuses even to look at Islam’s doctrines.
 
Rather than investigate Islam for themselves, politicians in Norway have put their blind faith in what the imams in Norway say is Islam. Likewise Islamsk Råd, The Islamic Council of Norway, has been given media space to determine what Islam is or is not.
 
The last three years have seen an explosion in the knowledge of Islam by the man-in-the street, largely thanks to the internet, and inspired by key figures such as Geert Wilders, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Irshad Manji, Brother Rachid and Norway’s own Hege Storhaug. While no voice critical of Islam gets coverage in the media, recent coverage in the media of Germany’s populist PEGIDA movement (Patriotic Europeans against the Islamization of the West) has already started changing this lapse.
 
PEGIDA was started in Dresden last October by Lutz Bachman, who stepped down on January 21, 2015, after a photo of him posing as Hitler surfaced. Its wildfire popularity throughout Europe in just three months or existence seems due to the politicians’ and media’s neglect of their populace — especially the media’s refusal or inability to undertake independent investigative journalism.
 
Left-World Islamic Mission-Oslo - Right-Ubaydullah Hussain-Norway Islamist 
 
People are now discussing what exactly is preventing the European media from going to the root of Islam — discussing which elements of Islam’s key scriptures (the Koran, the sira and the hadith) are at conflict with the non-Muslim world.
 
If the media and politicians admit there is a problem, they will be forced to retract their belief in multiculturalism and apologize for voluntarily allowing a change in Norway’s demographics, with potentially many violent outcomes. They might have to admit that the media and politicians know of the dangers of Islam’s doctrines but do not dare to publish them; that maybe they have been collectively threatened and are afraid of the consequences. Other countries’ media might be afraid to talk about Islam’s doctrines because of their dependence on oil from the Middle East, but this is not the case for Norway.
 
PEGIDA’s followers can trigger a sorely needed debate on the unopened Pandora box of Islam’s doctrines. They can also ask questions that need to be asked, but that neither politicians nor the media have so far had the guts to ask. Caricatures and cartoons are only the symptom; we need to get to the root.
_____________________
Norwegian Bjorn Jansen Gets Islam Ideology
John R. Houk
© January 24, 2015
____________________
Norway: The People’s Revolution vs. The “Religion of Peace”
 
Bjorn Jansen is a journalist based in Norway.
 
Copyright © 2015 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved.
 
Edited by John R. Houk
 

Great Conmen and Moe Leave few Clues to being Slick


VIDEO: From Koran: Vivid description of what awaits Muslim Males in Heaven (Jannat Ki Hoor). [English subtitles]

 

I have to repost Dajjal’s comment to author Louis Rene Beres’ essay “The Jihadists’ Promise: Power over Death” that I had cross posted from the Gatestone Institute. Dajjal is not as gracious in his thoughts as I might be so you will get the point about Islam.

 

JRH 10/1/14

Please Support NCCR

*******************************

Great Conmen and Moe Leave few Clues to being Slick

[Arbitrary Editor’s Title]

 

By Dajjal

Comment posted: 9/24/14 11:41 AM

 

Reblogged this on Freedom Ain’t Free & Take Our Country Back and commented:

Great con men leave behind little clues as evidence of the fact that they are so slick that their marks will not wise up. Moe was no exception. The two Houries [Allah’s Brothel] each Shaheed receives in Allah’s celestial bordello grow new hymens, eat and drink without excreting and are always receptive. What happens when they get full?

 

The dwellers of the celestial bordello are 90 feet high and the males have perpetual priapism. Consider the blood pressure involved.

 

The guarantees of admission are participation in Jihad, drinking Moe’s blood and drinking his urine. The guarantee of getting into al-Firdhaus [the highest Islamic Paradise] is being killed in battle. Once a Muslim believer is dead, Moe has no worries about having to pay up.

 

If we delve deeply into the Koran, hadith and sira, we discover facts that should be fatal to Islam. Allah promised irreversible conquest in 13.41, tell that to Bulgaria, Greece, Israel, Romania and Spain. Their reconquests are blasphemy: proof of Allah’s impotence.

 

Moe was demon possessed [Point 4], feared insanity, suicidal, had a devil that only gave him good orders and revealed situational scripture. One of the verses supposedly handed down from Allah was composed by Umar, who later became caliph.

 

Moe revealed situational scripture to give divine sanction to his sexual peccadillos. He raped a widow right after torturing her husband to death. He sexually molested a six year old girl [Watch Documentary Exposé: Aisha and Muhammad]. He molested the body of his aunt in her grave [Raymond Ibrahim]. How in Hell can anyone believe that he was a divine prophet???

 

Those facts and more can be used to induce mass apostasy among the ummah. Who has the political will to exploit them? What is the alternative??

 

5:101. O you who believe! Ask not about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. But if you ask about them while the Qur’ân is being revealed, they will be made plain to you. Allâh has forgiven that, and Allâh is Oft­ Forgiving, Most Forbearing.

 

5:102. Before you, a community asked such questions, then on that account they became disbelievers.

 

Rub their snouts in the facts, send them to their texts to disprove the facts, which will only be confirmed.

 

QV 5.101102 and “The Quranic Concept of war” [See S.K. Malik] 60 give us clues what we must do.

___________________

Edited by John R. Houk

Links enclosed by brackets are by the Editor

 

© Dajjal

Islam: Radical and Moderate or just Islam


Chris Plante, Clare Lopez, Brigitte Gabriel & Frank Gaffney

John R. Houk

© June 21, 2014

 

Justin O. Smith shared a Right Scoop article that largely contained a video of a Heritage Foundation panel Townhall question-answer session with the topic being, “Benghazi: The Difference it makes is Accountability”. At the Right Scoop link the post takes about 9 minutes of the panel discussion that focused on a question form a self-indicated Moderate Muslim gal by the name of Saba Ahmed.

 

Saba Ahmed’s question is roughly: How does America fight an ideological war with weapons? (In full disclosure I probably just gave an insufficient paraphrase. You’ll have watch the video to hear the full gist of her question.)

 

Frank Gaffney JR was the first panel member to respond, but Right Scoop wants you to focus on the answer provided by panel member Brigitte Gabriel. Gabriel’s reply was greatly passionate making it clear that not all Muslims are radicalized. Roughly she explains that about 25% of Muslims are proponents of Radical Islam and that the other roughly 75% are Moderate. I have read at various sources that may imply there is disagreement with Gabriel’s percentages. The thinking being more like 10% radical and 90% moderate. Frankly, if you are into the percentages I suspect Gabriel’s figures are probably closer.

 

Gabrielle points out that the 25% of Radical Muslims still represents approximately hundreds of millions Muslims dedicated to killing Christians, Jews and Americans. That is a bunch of ridiculously angry people!

 

Gabriel says since there are so many Radical Muslims, the 75% Moderate Muslims are irrelevant in the sense that their peace-loving nature cannot compare to the violent hatred of the agenda of Radical Islam.

 

I’ll post the video below in order for you to see just how passionate Brigitte Gabriel’s explanation was to Saba Ahmed. BUT that which piqued my interest in the Justin Smith Facebook share of the Right Scoop post was his reaction to the concept of their being a division of Radicals and Moderates practicing the Islamic theopolitical religion. Justin categorically believes any difference between Radical and Moderate Muslims is a politically correct mentality that non-Muslims should view with extreme skepticism.

 

On my part I have wavered over the years between siding with counterjihad writers in the Brigitte Gabriel camp and the counterjihad writers that specifically read the Islamic text of the Quran, Hadith and Sira (Sunna) who are convinced ultimately that Islam is fully violent in nature. I have wavered because I have known Muslims that are very offended to be included in the group that are the Radical Muslim faithful. But then I witness on the news how huge populations of Muslims in Islamic lands go nutso-crazy over what the West – especially America – that would consider Free Speech issues like when some European Newspapers published parodies mocking Mohammed. Parodies I might add that were actually derived from Quranic, Hadith and Sira text that portrayed Mohammed in a negative light. Crowds went crazy in town squares, at Western Embassies of the host nations that published the cartoons, the publishers and cartoonists had to actually go into hiding in their own nation because of the death fatwas and assassination threats. AND the Mo-Cartoons is just one such issue in Muslims became howling lunatics over their prophet being shown in such a negative light.

 

These days I am leaning with the counterjihad writers that believe Islam is evil – period. My current reasoning for this are the Muslims own considered holy writings of the – wait for it – the Quran, Hadith and Sira.

 

So I have given you the gist of Brigitte Gabriel’s thoughts on Radical and Moderate Muslims. I might add those thoughts were quite convincing due to her passionate delivery. Below are Justin Smith’s thoughts on Gabriel’s impassioned reply. I do concur with Justin by the way; however I am reluctant to be as critical of the Radical-Moderate proponents in counterjihad writing. People like Brigitte Gabriel and Frank Gaffney JR are huge in the effort to educate Americans that there is a nefarious side to Islam. Whether or not you believe that Islamic nefarious side is limited to the practice of a few Radical Muslims or is the totality of the essence of Islamic theopolitical ideology is up to you. Dear God either way, understand the demands of Islam especially as required under Sharia Law is oppressively anti-Bill of Rights which means anti-U.S. Constitution. Allowing Muslims to practice the unconstitutional aspects of Sharia Law will transform America in ways that our traditional Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness will cease to exist.

 

Below are Justin’s response to Brigitte Gabriel which I will follow with the entire 9 minute and 17 seconds Youtube video of Saba Ahmed’s question followed by Frank Gaffney’s response and then by Gabriel’s passionate response. Brigitte Gabriel speaks at about the 4 minute 17 second point. Right Scoop has a video that just shows only the Gabriel portion of the video.

 

JRH 6/21/14

Please Support NCCR

********************************

Justin Smith: There are NO Moderate Muslims

(Title by Editor)

 

By Justin O. Smith

June 19, 2014 at 3:17pm

Justin Smith Facebook Page

 

I am one who does not subscribe to the belief there are “moderate” Muslims, however “peaceful” they may appear initially. Just as Ms. Gabriel remarked, this young Muslim woman essentially took the focus from the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi to make her point about so-called “peaceful” Muslims, even though she is a U.S. citizen. One sees this all too often – The Muslim is worried about Islamic and Muslim concerns, the concerns of their “ummah”/worldwide community, before they are worried for the nation; they are “peaceful”, until called upon, issued fatwas, to be otherwise.

 

I normally do not like disagreeing with fellow American Patriots, but I would ask the panel, just how in the hell do they think most of the known free world at the time was either conquered or under siege by 1500 A.D. by Islam and Its warriors? Ms. Gabriel says the “peaceful” Muslims were irrelevant and draws an excellent correlation between historical and cultural settings in Germany, Russia and Japan. But more than irrelevant, too often the “peaceful” Muslims, while not actively engaging in violence themselves, perhaps from their own fears, were silently cheering the jihadis on. Case in point, hundreds of thousands of Muslims danced on the rooftops of Europe, the Middle East and the U.S. when the World Trade Center collapsed.

 

Were the jubilant Muslims yelling “Allahu Akbar” as the Twin Towers crashed to the ground part of the 15-25% Ms. Gabrielle speaks about? How can anyone know the “REAL” statistical figure? From my studies alone, I place the most radical of Muslims at 400 million, but all 1.2 to 1.8 billion of them (depending on stat source) are “radical” in the sense that they always support Islam and the “ummah” over their host nation, whether through their tacit approval and vocal and financial support or through active and violent jihad. And for Gaffney to suggest that not all Muslims seek adherence to Sharia law is surreal. In order to be truly Muslim one is commanded by the Sira and Hadith and the Koran to follow the Sharia – Sharia is central to Islam for ALL Muslims.

 

Brigitte Gabriel gives FANTASTIC answer to Muslim woman claiming all Muslims are portrayed badly

This Heritage event on Benghazi has gotten a lot of press over the last day…

THE RIGHT SCOOP

 

VIDEO: Full Context: Benghazi Accountability Coalition Event

 

Posted by The Heritage Foundation

Published June 17, 2014

 

___________________________________

Islam: Radical and Moderate or just Islam

John R. Houk

© June 21, 2014

_________________________________

Justin Smith: There are NO Moderate Muslims

(Title by Editor)

 

© Justin O. Smith

 

Justin O. Smith is a concerned citizen with a B.S.-MTSU/ International Relations & Cultural Geography, ex-firefighter, U.S. Army and freelance writer.

Swing Those Doors of Ijtihad OPEN


General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi - Egypt 2

General Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi

 

John R. Houk

© January 31, 2014

 

General El-Sisi the head of the Egyptian military and current of head state gave a speech recently that is sure to be controversial in the Muslim world. The speech took place at Armed Forces’ Department of Moral Affairs. Here is a translated paragraph from The Clarion Project that should pique your interest:

 

“Religious discourse is the greatest battle and challenge facing the Egyptian people, pointing to the need for a new vision and a modern, comprehensive understanding of the religion of Islam—rather than relying on a discourse that has not changed for 800 years.” (Egypt’s El-Sisi Boldly Calls For Islamic Reformation; By RYAN MAURO; Clarion Project; 1/22/14)

 

The rest of Mauro’s article looks at the Muslim theological concept of Ijtihad. The theological concept is important because Ijtihad was the method of interpreting Islam’s holy writings and how to implement those interpretations. Apparently it is a process by which Muslim scholars provide a consensus legal interpretation. The problem that Ijtihad presents for Islam is that new Ijtihad interpretations was closed around the 10th century AD. The closed door means Islam stopped updating at about that time in history dooming the religion to a Mohammed-like medievalism, well forever. This is what General El-Sisi proposed to change.

 

I am not a Muslim scholar, rather I am a devout Christian that looks at Islam (really any religion or ideology) through the glasses of Biblical Christian Faith. I and many Counterjihad writers have come to the view that Islam based directly on the Quran, Hadith and Sunnah is a violent intolerant religion and since those writings are considered sacred – especially the Quran as the direct revelation of Allah – Islam will always inspire Muslims that subscribe to what the West calls radical Islam. It is my belief that Bill Warner of Political Islam provides the simplest explanation as to how Islam regards these considered holy writings:

 

 

The Islamic Bible—the Trilogy

 

Islam is defined by the words of Allah in the Koran, and the words and actions of Mohammed, called the Sunna.

 

The Sunna is found in two collections of texts—the Sira (Mohammed’s life) and the Hadith. The Koran says 91 times that his words and actions are considered to be the divine pattern for humanity.

 

A hadith, or tradition, is a brief story about what Mohammed did or said. A collection of hadiths is called a Hadith. There are many collections of hadiths, but the most authoritative are those by Bukhari and Abu Muslim, the ones used in this book.

 

So the Trilogy is the Koran, the Sira and the Hadith. Most people think that the Koran is the bible of Islam, but it is only about 14% of the total textual doctrine. The Trilogy is the foundation and totality of Islam.

 

clip_image001

 

No one text of the Trilogy can stand by itself; it is impossible to understand any one of the texts without the other supporting texts. The Koran, Sira, and Hadith are a seamless whole and speak with one voice. If it is in the Trilogy it is Islam. (A Taste of Islam: The Life of Mohammed, The Sira; By Bill Warner; Center for the Study of Political Islam; © 2010; Page 1)

 

I suspect General El-Sisi will be labeled a heretic or an apostate by the most Conservative Islamic sects that we Westerner label as radical Islam. It remains to be seen if General El-Sisi suggestions will move forward without some kind Islamic civil war especially among the majority Sunnis (Sunnis roughly make up 90% of Islam and the Shia sects represent about 10%).

 

Here is something that should place into context the difficulty of reopening this door to Ijtihad. The most influential elements of Islam in America come from what we call the Radical Islam. Primarily these influences are the Wahhabis represented by Saudi money and the Muslim Brotherhood which is now waging a terror campaign in Egypt due to their favored President Morsi being deposed by the Egyptian military after the Egyptian populace began to riot in protest over Morsi’s pro-Muslim Brotherhood initiative to Islamize Egyptian society and government to the strict adherence of the Quran, Hadith and Sira.

 

Muslim Apologists go out of their way to tell non-Muslim Americans that the core values of Islam is peace and that Radical Islam is an aberration from the “real” Islam. AND yet most of these apologists are often connected to Radical Islamic movements such as Saudi Wahhabis and the Salafist oriented Muslim Brotherhood. Saudi Wahhabi control over 80% of the Mosques in America and the Muslim Brotherhood picks up where the Saudis leave off with a direct lineage to the most influential Muslim organization in America (See Also The Muslim Brotherhood in America). As far as I am concerned Islam in America is radicalized regardless of the deception spouted by Muslim Apologists.

 

For your perusal below is a cross post of Mauro’s report on Egypt’s General El-Sisi and Ijtihad.

 

JRH 1/31/14

Please Support NCCR

*******************************

Egypt’s El-Sisi Boldly Calls For Islamic Reformation

Islam, said El-Sisi needs a modern understanding and should not rely on a discourse that has not changed for 800 years.

 

By Ryan Mauro

January 22, 2014

Clarion Project

 

General El-Sisi, the commander of the Egyptian Armed Forces and current head of state, is essentially calling for a reformation in Islam. His bold declaration comes as the Egyptian people approved a constitution in a vote that the Muslim Brotherhood boycotted.

 

The speech, which went unnoticed in the Western media, took place at the Armed Forces’ Department of Moral Affairs. In the speech, El-Sisi said:

 

“Religious discourse is the greatest battle and challenge facing the Egyptian people, pointing to the need for a new vision and a modern, comprehensive understanding of the religion of Islam—rather than relying on a discourse that has not changed for 800 years.”

 

Notice what El-Sisi did not say. He did not say Zionism or Western oppression is the greatest threat to Egypt, nor did he point to a specific group like Al-Qaeda or the Muslim Brotherhood. He accurately framed the struggle as an ideological one within Islam.

 

When he refers to the “discourse that has not changed for 800 years,” he’s referring to when the most qualified Islamic scholars of that time ruled that all questions about interpretation had been settled. The “gates” of ijtihad, the independent interpretation of Islam, ended by the year 1258. He wants the “gates” reopened, allowing for the critical examination that an Islamic reformation needs.

 

Elsewhere in the speech, Sisi “called on all who follow the true Islam to improve the image of this religion in front of the world, after Islam has been for decades convicted of violence and destruction around the world, due to the crimes falsely committed in the name of Islam.”

 

This is another important declaration. He attributes Islamic extremism to this lack of discourse. He doesn’t blame it on a Jewish conspiracy to defame Islam or describe it as an overreaction to non-Muslim aggression.

 

He is also pre-empting the Islamists’ inevitable attack that he is an apostate by stating that Muslims are advancing Islam by having this discourse and turning away from violence. He takes away the argument from extremists that they are the model of a devout Muslim.

 

The next question is whether El-Sisi has the standing in Muslim opinion to be listened to. For now, the answer is yes. The Egyptian military that he leads has a 70% favorability rating, while the Muslim Brotherhood’s rating is at 34%. He is almost certain to run for president and, at this stage, is likely to win.

 

When the military toppled President Morsi and El-Sisi announced the suspension of the Islamist-written constitution, he was joined by the Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar University, an institution that is basically the equivalent of the Vatican for Sunni Islam. To date, Al-Azhar has not broken with El-Sisi or condemned his remarks.

 

Other influential Egyptians may endorse El-Sisi’s view. In January 2011, former Egyptian Islamist Tawfik Hamid reported that 25 Islamic scholars, including teachers from Al-Azhar, said that Ijtihad needed to be resumed. The 10 points they listed for renewed examination included the separation of mosque and state, women’s rights, relations with non-Muslims and jihad.

 

Calls for reform and ijtihad can be heard beneath the visible surface of the Muslim world. In my own experience, I’ve heard many average Muslims endorse reformation but their views are not reflected in the national leadership.

 

Some of these reformist Muslims want to reopen the “gates” of ijtihad, while others say they never considered them closed to begin with. For example, Tunisian professor Dr. Muhamd El-Haddad, argues, “Daily life has evolved radically since the last millennium, but there has been no accompanying development in mainstream Muslim legal theory.”

 

Professor Ziauddin Sadar of London wrote in 2002 that that Islamic doctrine is “frozen in time” and there are three doctrinal pillars that need reform: “The elevation of the Shari’ah to the level of the Divine, with the consequent removal of agency from the believers, and the equation of Islam with the State.”

 

Those that argue that the “gates” were never closed include Malcolm Jardine, who wrote a thoroughly-researched essay on the topic. In 2006, the U.S.-based Nawawi Foundation published a study by Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah with the premise that Islam “never had a doorkeeper to close it in the first place.”

 

General El-Sisi and the overall backlash against the Islamists may spark what the world needs most: An Islamic reformation. It is not enough to topple Islamists. Their ideological underpinning must be debated and defeated. The determinations of scholars from 800 years can no longer be treated as eternal truth, but for what they really are—opinions influenced by the times in which they were made.

____________________________

Swing Those Doors of Ijtihad OPEN

John R. Houk

© January 31, 2014

_____________________________

Egypt’s El-Sisi Boldly Calls For Islamic Reformation

 

Ryan Mauro is the ClarionProject.org’s National Security Analyst, a fellow with the Clarion Project and is frequently interviewed on top-tier TV stations as an expert on counterterrorism and Islamic extremism.

 

Copyright © 2013 Clarion Project, Inc. All rights reserved.

 

ABOUT CLARION PROJECT

 

There are times that require people to step out of their comfort zone, to step up for justice, tolerance and moderation. We know going in that the repercussions of taking action will draw a rain of accusations and attacks from the forces we are confronting.

 

We do it anyway. We do it because it must be done.

 

Founded in 2006, the Clarion Project (formerly Clarion Fund Inc) is an independently funded, non-profit organization dedicated to exposing the dangers of Islamic extremism while providing a platform for the voices of moderation and promoting grassroots activism.

 

Clarion’s award-winning movies have been seen by over 50 million people. They grapple with issues such as religious persecution, human rights, women’s rights, the dangers of a nuclear Iran and what the concept of jihad means for the West. Our dynamic website, viewed by over 900,000 unique visitors in 2013, covers breaking news and provides commentary on relevant issues.

 

The Clarion Project draws together Middle East experts, scholars, human rights activists and Muslims to promote tolerance and moderation and challenge extremism.

Inoculating Against Islam


Islam a Disease Bumper Sticker

Vaccination toon

I have been meaning to cross post this Bill Warner essay on Islam for a few days and then out of sight – out of mind took over. Thanks to my membership in the Facebook group 1683 AD (closed group) I was reminded. I usually like to do a bit of an introduction; however a fellow member Diane has done well to do that in the group share of the article “Inoculating Against Islam”.

 

JRH 8/13/13

Please Support NCCR

*******************************

Intro to Inoculating Against Islam

 

By Diane Fatouros

8/11/13 12:48 PM

1683 AD

 

Excerpt |”Preventing conversion is easy to accomplish by inoculating anyone with what Islam really is. One reason that Kafirs (non-Muslims) convert is that they do not know the complete Islam. They are only told about the first stage of Islam – loving what Allah loves. Converts are never told that the final stage is to hate what Allah hates. Allah hates the Kafir and Kafir civilization, such as free speech and equal rights. The convert has been exposed to the “good stuff”, but does not know the full doctrine of a dualistic Islam. The other side of the “good stuff” is darkness such as jihad, abuse of women and slavery.”

_____________________

Inoculating Against Islam

 

By Bill Warner

August 13, 2013

Political Islam

 

Every (sic) since 9/11 Americans, including Christians, have been converting to Islam or become apologists for Islam. Can this be stopped and how?

 

There are many reasons they choose Islam. Islam is furiously masculine and today Christianity has become feminine, yin, in its approach to life. So, if you are a woman and want a more masculine man, you are much more apt to find that in Islam. Also, if you are a woman and want a husband, Muslims are the marrying kind. Then, there are people in this world who want discipline and Islam certainly gives structure. Once you get on the Islam train you no longer have to worry about choices. Islam tells you how to eat, have sex, brush your teeth, use the bathroom and every other aspect of life. There is also the social bonding of being in a tight knit group-club. These are a few of the reasons people convert.

 

Preventing conversion is easy to accomplish by inoculating anyone with what Islam really is. One reason that Kafirs (non-Muslims) convert is that they do not know the complete Islam. They are only told about the first stage of Islam – loving what Allah loves. Converts are never told that the final stage is to hate what Allah hates. Allah hates the Kafir and Kafir civilization, such as free speech and equal rights. The convert has been exposed to the “good stuff”, but does not know the full doctrine of a dualistic Islam. The other side of the “good stuff” is darkness such as jihad, abuse of women and slavery.

 

The problem is that we have all been told that we cannot understand Islam and that Islam is found in the Koran. We are told that it is way too complex and subtle. The only to know Islam is to ask a Muslim or an establishment “expert”. This is absolute garbage. Islam is Allah and Mohammed, pure and simple. To know Islam, know Allah and Mohammed. Allah is hard to understand, at first, but there is an easy shortcut. The Koran tells us that Mohammed is the perfect pattern of life for all Muslims and that every Muslim should imitate Mohammed. His life example is so important that it has a special name, the Sunna

 

If you count up all the words in the Koran and the words devoted to Mohammed, there is about six times more text devoted to Mohammed than to Allah. Mohammed solves the problem of how to know the true nature of Islam.

 

Everybody knows someone who has tried to read the Koran and never finished it. Islam seems like a tropical jungle, deep and complex. But that is not true, since Islam is both Allah and Mohammed.

 

Allah may be hard to understand, but anybody can understand Mohammed. The reason is simple. We have his official biography (called the Sira) and it is a fascinating, ripping read. After Mohammed is born he soon becomes an orphan. He married and became a successful businessman, then a prophet of Allah. He preached Islam for 13 years and converted 150 Muslims. Next he became a politician and jihadist for his last 10 years. When he died every Arab in Arabia was a Muslim. The Sira has religion, plots, spies, war, torture, secret agents, slavery, sex, jealousy and more. It is one of the world’s great stories.

 

Anyone, and I mean anyone, can understand the story of a man’s life. Mohammed is the perfect Muslim. When you understand Mohammed, you can easily understand the Koran and you can understand Islam.

 

This is how easy it is to know Mohammed. The original Sira is 800 pages long and difficult to read. But the book has been made easy to understand in a very short book of only 66 pages, called The Life of Mohammed. Everything is keyed by a small index number at the beginning of the paragraphs that lets you go the official text and confirm it. It is fact-based and is as true as it can be and is a short powerful book.

 

I ran an experiment. I paid $20 to a smart 12 year-old child to read The Life of Mohammed. After she read it, I had her read the Gospel of Matthew. It is important to know that she had never been to church or read the Bible. I then asked if she had to have new neighbor would she want it to be Jesus or Mohammed? She said she wanted Jesus and then justified her answer by using the facts from Matthew and The Life of Mohammed. She used fact-based reasoning.

 

That is the way you inoculate against Islam. Full knowledge of Mohammed causes anyone of reasonable morals to avoid him and Islam. Once you know how much suffering Mohammed caused to every neighbor, you do not want to follow him. So, to prevent a case of conversion to Islam, prescribe a dose of Mohammed.

 

The news is even better since a dose of the Sira can cure a Muslim of Islam. It works like this – most Muslims know almost nothing about Islam. If you know the full story of Mohammed, you know Islam and can tell a Muslim things about Mohammed that will unsettle them. Upon the first administration of Mohammed to a Muslim, they will deny the truth of it. But you can offer to show it to them in the Sira, the Sunna of Mohammed. Repeated dosage can cure Islam.

 

To inoculate against Islam, use a dose of Mohammed. To cure Islam, do the same. Don’t forget, a dose of Mohammed is so interesting that you will want to take some as well.

__________________________

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam

copyright (c) CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com
Use as needed, just give credit and do not edit.

www.politicalislam.com

 

Mission

 

Islam is a cultural, religious and political system. Only the political system is of interest to kafirs (non-Muslims) since it determines how we are defined and treated. The Islamic political system is contained in the Koran, the Hadith (the traditions of Mohammed) and his biography, the Sira.

 

Our mission is to educate the world about political Islam, its founder Mohammed, his political doctrine and his god, Allah.


Biography of Bill Warner

 

 

Thoughts on Darwish Chain Email – ‘Joys of Muslim Women’


Nonie Darwish - I will not submit

John R. Houk

© May 6, 2013

 

I received a chain email from a respected friend. The chain email has been around for awhile and its most common title is “Joys of Muslim Women.” The words of the chain email are attributed to Nonie Darwish. Darwish has become an esteemed Counterjihad writer and speaker. The term Counterjihad means Darwish is scores big on the Muslim and Leftist hate-meter which in turn means Muslim Apologists and Leftist Multiculturalists spew hate towards her by ironically accusing her of Hate Speech.

 

Briefly Nonie Darwish was born a Muslim in Egypt that also resided in Gaza. Gaza can be nicknamed Hamastan due to the Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Islamic terrorist group Hamas ruling Gaza.

 

Unfortunately the chain email attribution to Nonie Darwish is a falsehood. However, Darwish agrees that much of the information in the chain email is accurate. Here are some quotes from some fact check websites (that I might illuminate are leaning toward the Left and are quick to display the Islamic Apologist view that utilizes Taqiyya [deception] to contradict Counterjihadists with abrogated verses from the Quran).

 

Watch Nonie Darwish in a passionate indictment against Islam’s Shariah Law in this video:

 

Nonie Darwish and “Islamic Apartheid” at Temple University

 

 

Fact Checkers on Chain Email:

 

About.com Urban Legends

 

Analysis: Despite the attribution at the top (“Joys of Muslim Women by Nonie Darwish”), this text was not written by Muslim-turned-Christian human rights activist Nonie Darwish; indeed, the bottom two-thirds of it repeatedly refer to her in the third person. Darwish confirmed via email that she did not write the article, though it is, in her words, “to a large extent accurate.” She further stated that her 2009 book, Cruel and Usual Punishment, better represents her views.

 

It should be noted that while the email is at least partially based on Darwish’s personal experiences growing up in a Muslim country and reading the Qur’an, her claim that it’s to a large extent accurate also means that, even in her opinion, it’s not entirely accurate. To say the least, the text is hyperbolic, awash in generalizations, and makes extreme claims about Islam and Islamic practices that do not pertain to all Muslims.

 

For more on Nonie Darwish’s views in her own words, see Cruel and Usual Punishment (Interview) – FamilySecurityMatters.org, 8 January 2009.

 

For a differing view on the Islamic faith, see Myths About Islam by Christine Huda Dodge – About.com.

 

Snopes.com

 

 

clip_image002

 

 

Fact Check: Nonie Darwish and Enough Muslims to Elect a President in 20 years – Irregular Times

 

Posted by Jim Cook

January 23rd, 2011

 

In this morning’s e-mail, Irregular Times received the following message:

 

Joys of Muslim Women by Nonie Darwish…

 

In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the U.S. and Canada to elect the President or Prime Minister by themselves! Rest assured they will do so… You can look at how they have taken over several towns in the USA and Canada, Dearborn Mich. is one, Brampton, Ontario is another and there are others…

 

I think everyone in the U.S. and Canada should be required to read this, but with the ACLU, there is no way this will be widely publicized, unless each of us sends it on!

 

Claim: Nonie Darwish wrote this article, “The Joys of Muslim Women,” or any other piece of writing so titled.

Fact: Nonie Darwish has specifically denied this. The association of Nonie Darwish with this text is a hoax.

 

Claim: The ACLU is preventing the wide dissemination of the assertion I received by e-mail.

Fact: There is not any record of the ACLU agitating to restrict the dissemination of this text. It would not make sense for the ACLU to agitate to restrict dissemination of this text, since the ACLU is a major proponent of free speech, including freedom of speech for unpopular ideas across the political spectrum. As an empirical matter, a google search for the text “In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the U.S. to elect the President by themselves” turns up 17,900 results, indicating a rather wide dissemination. It is nearly impossible to prove that a conspiracy does not exist, so I leave it to you to decide between the two possibilities: Either the ACLU is carrying on a stealthy, invisible and utterly ineffectual campaign to quash the story we received by e-mail this morning, or the ACLU is not trying to quash it at all.

 

Claim: “In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the U.S. and Canada to elect the President or Prime Minister by themselves!”

Fact: This is a claim we looked at last September after someone used it as a justification of bans on mosque building:

 

As a mother and a grandmother, I worry. I learned that in 20 years with the rate of the birth population, we will be overtaken by Islam, and their goal is to get people in Congress and the Supreme Court to see that Shariah is implemented. My children and grandchildren will have to live under that.

 

The truth is that, according to the two most recent studies of religious populations in America, (the American Religious Identification Survey and the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey), Muslims make up only 0.6% of the adult population of the United States. That’s approximately 1.8 million out of about 300 million Americans.

 

Here’s a graph showing what we can expect the Muslim population of the United States to look like over the next twenty years if the American Muslim population follows the U.S. birth rate, the World birth rate, or the Saudi birth rate (three reasonable expectations):

 

clip_image003

 

The total U.S. population during the period will be somewhere in the range of 300-350 million. Clearly, unless a comet blasts into North America and Muslims put up their secret comet-debris-shields, there is no reasonable scenario under which the American Muslim population will come anywhere close to making up a majority in the next twenty years.

 

Conclusion: This article is once, twice, three times disconnected from reality.

 

If you want to read the chain email then you need to stick with me. I am posting it as I received it from my friend. Nonetheless, there are some allegations within the email that are simply meant to stir up an anti-Muslim sentiment among readers. The thing is exaggerated and false statistical stands do not need to be made. A careful examination of the Quran with an understanding of Islam’s dualistic theology; that the newest commands from Mohammed (or Allah depending on your perception) outweigh previous commands – the principle is Abrogation; know that although the Quran (See also Chronological Order) is considered the uncreated word of Allah by Muslims BUT the Hadith and Sira weigh in heavily in interpreting the Quran and realize that some Hadith are considered more accurate than others then become cognizant which of those Hadith are the most accepted. Muslim Apologists either knowingly lies by telling an abrogated verse (or surah) is the foundation of Islam. A Muslim theologian can lie with a straight face because Islam’s dualistic principles actually can make two opposites true if it serves the purpose of the moment. In Western thought theology is more singular in that the theological thought is either right or wrong and NOT both right dependent on circumstances.

 

As a reminder Nonie Darwish has said the chain email “Joys of Muslim Women” was not written by her but that the essence of its message is true. Now some of the claims in it are ridiculous yet the anti-woman aspect of the email is valid.

 

So without further adieu here is the text of that chain email sent to me by a friend.

 

JRH 5/6/13

Please Support NCCR

*********************************

20 years from now? Frightening!!!!

Sent to me: 5/5/2013 6:41 PM

 

I am guilty of thinking that each religion had one main prophet and a “golden rule”.  I am wrong.  The Muslim religion is spreading like the plague and it carries the same gruesome results if we do not stop it now.

 

20 years from now, I will be in Heaven – bye!!!

 

This was written by a woman born in Egypt as a Muslim. Make sure you read the paragraph (in red) towards the end.

 

Joys of Muslim Women
By Nonie Darwish

 

In the Muslim faith a Muslim man can marry a child as young as 1 year old and have sexual intimacy with this child. And then consummate the marriage by 9.

The dowry is given to the family in exchange for the woman (who becomes his slave) and for the purchase of the private parts of the woman, to use her as a toy.


Even though a woman is abused she cannot obtain a divorce.

To prove rape, the woman must have (4) male witnesses.

Often after a woman has been raped, she is returned to her family and the family must return the dowry. The family has the right to execute her (an honor killing) to restore the honor of the family. Husbands can beat their wives ‘at will’ and he does not have to say why he has beaten her.


The husband is permitted to have (4 wives) and a temporary wife for an hour (prostitute) at his discretion.


The Shariah Muslim law controls the private as well as the public life of the woman.

 

In the West World (America and Britain) Muslim men are starting to demand Shariah Law so the wife cannot obtain a divorce and he can have full and complete control of her. It is amazing and alarming how many of our sisters and daughters attending American Universities and British Universities are now marrying Muslim men and submitting themselves and their children unsuspectingly to the Shariah law.


By passing this on, enlightened American and British women may avoid becoming a slave under Shariah Law.

Ripping the West in Two.

Author and lecturer Nonie Darwish says the goal of radical Islamists is to impose Shariah law on the world, ripping Western law and liberty in two.


She recently authored the book, Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law. Darwish was born in Cairo and spent her childhood in Egypt and Gaza before immigrating to America in 1978, when she was eight years old. Her father died while leading covert attacks on Israel. He was a high-ranking Egyptian military officer stationed with his family in Gaza…


When he died, he was considered a “shahid,” a martyr for jihad. His posthumous status earned Nonie and her family an elevated position in Muslim society.


But Darwish developed a skeptical eye at an early age. She questioned her own Muslim culture and upbringing… She converted to Christianity after hearing a Christian preacher on television.


In her latest book, Darwish warns about creeping shariah law – what it is, what it means, and how it is manifested in Islamic countries.


For the West, she says radical Islamists are working to impose sharia on the world. If that happens, Western civilization will be destroyed. Westerners generally assume all religions encourage a respect for the dignity of each individual. Islamic law (Sharia) teaches that non-Muslims should be subjugated or killed in this world.


Peace and prosperity for one’s children is not as important as assuring that Islamic law rules everywhere in the Middle East and eventually in the world.


While Westerners tend to think that all religions encourage some form of the golden rule, Shariah teaches two systems of ethics – one for Muslims and another for non-Muslims. Building on tribal practices of the seventh century, Shariah encourages the side of humanity that wants to take from and subjugate others.


While Westerners tend to think in terms of religious people developing a personal understanding of and relationship with God, Shariah advocates executing people who ask difficult questions that could be interpreted as criticism.


It’s hard to imagine, that in this day and age, Islamic scholars agree that those who criticize Islam or choose to stop being Muslim should be executed. Sadly, while talk of an Islamic reformation is common and even assumed by many in the West, such murmurings in the Middle East that is silenced through intimidation.


While Westerners are accustomed to an increase in religious tolerance over time, Darwish explains how petro dollars are being used to grow an extremely intolerant form of political Islam in her native Egypt and elsewhere.


(In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in the U.S. and Britain to elect the President and Prime Minister by themselves! Rest assured they will do so… You can look at how they have taken over several towns in the US… Dearborn Mich. is one…and there are others… Britain has several cities now totally controlled by Muslims.)


I think everyone in the U.S. And Great Britain should be required to read this, but with the ACLU, there is no way this will be widely publicized, unless each of us sends it on!


It is too bad that so many are disillusioned with life and Christianity to accept Muslims as peaceful. Some may be but they have an army that is willing to shed blood in the name of Islam. The peaceful support the warriors with their finances and own kind of patriotism to their religion. While America and Britain are getting rid of Christianity from all public sites and erasing God from the lives of children, the Muslims are planning a great jihad on America and Britain.


This is your chance to make a difference! Pass it on to your email list or at least those you think will listen.


Some of those I’m sending it to WILL NOT! Put your head back under the covers so you can’t see the boogie man!

______________________

Chain email edited by John R. Houk

 

Islam is Peaceful Like a Rabid Dog


Crazy Islam

John R. Houk

© December 11, 2012

 

I began reading a post at Freedom Rings 1776 by Danny Jeffrey. As I was reading the post I had the intention of g+1-ing the post. However, the essay is so good that it has reawakened in me the context that Islam, as a religion is the vilest on earth.

 

Danny writes about the idiocy of Liberals accepting violence inherent among Muslims as an aberration rather than common. The Quran, Hadith and Sira are commands and recorded history for Muslims to follow. Acts of violence are promoted and in many cases commanded against those breaking Sharia Law or against a person that is a non-Muslim (infidel, kafir, dhimmi or whatever).

 

In fairness there is a lot of morality and peace promoted among Muslims in the Quran, Hadith and Sira as well; however “morality and peace” is for good Allah-submitted Muslims that are to reverence with honor Allah’s Prophet Mohammed (The Islam most Muslims practiced though contrary to their holy writings).  There is little to zero tolerance for breaking reverence to Mohammed and openly insulting Allah.

 

Islam is a martial religion. Jesus commands His believers to go into all the world and share the Good News of Salvation and Deliverance from the chains of this wicked world. Islam’s Allah wants his adherents to go into all the world with an army and offer acceptance to the submission of Allah peacefully. If there is a refusal to submit to Allah, the army will make the attempt to conquer the people. In the process of the conquest Allah tells Mohammed it is acceptable to pillage, rape, and where appropriate turn the conquered into slaves and where it is more expedient to kill the unbelieving conquered people.

 

This is how Islam was spread in its early days under Mohammed and his succeeding Caliphs. The spread of Islam was a bloody mess and especially on the Indian Sub-continent. The Hindus and Buddhists of India were considered polytheists and as such worse infidel than the People of the Book; i.e. Jews and Christians. Mohammed stole just enough stories from the Bible (the Book) and twisted them for Arab superiority with the hope of peacefully converting Jews and Christians to Islam.

 

Mohammed was not a Jew there was no way Jews would accept divine Prophethood from Mohammed. Not to mention the insult of changing the Word of God that the Promises of God came through Abraham and Isaac to Abraham and Ishmael considered the progenitor of Arabs.

 

The Christian distrust of Mohammed was based in part on the Jewish rejection. We Christians can add that Mohammed rejected Jesus Christ as the Son of God that died on the Cross.

 

18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the[a] Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things.[b] 21 I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and that no lie is of the truth.

22 Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son. (1 John 2: 18-22 NKJV)

 

1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess that[a] Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world. (1 John 4: 1-3 NKJV)

 

Once Mohammed figured out that persuasion was not going to convert Jews and Christians he mysteriously heard from Allah to offer three choices to the People of the Book: Convert willingly, Keep their religion but as a sub-class human that must submit to the rules of Allah OR Die.

 

As I said earlier Hindus and Buddhists did not fare so well with the ‘choice option’. Initially Hindus and Buddhists were offered convert, brutal slavery or die. After millions upon millions of India’s population were slaughtered someone came upon the bright idea of, ‘Wait a minute, if we exterminate all these polytheists we will not have people to do the labor needed to make the conquest thing operate well.’ Only then were Hindus and Buddhists (and whatever minor religion that developed on smaller scale) offered sub-human dhimmitude.

 

Danny Jeffrey makes reference to India’s tragedy in facing Muslims throughout history in a twenty minute video. Here is that video:

 

VIDEO: Islamic conquest of India. Bloodiest in the history of World (Full)

 

Danny effectively attacks the PC crowd that looks the other way about Islam. The information which I just wrote about is nothing compared to the WAKE-UP provided by Danny Jeffrey. Read Danny’s essay entitled “HONOR KILLINGS, RAPE GANGS, MUTILATIONS, AND THE RISE OF A DEATH CULT…ISLAM” and please realize that even a peace loving Islam that lives by only the peaceful portions of the Quran will adhere to the violence. Why? Muslims believe the Quran is infallible and that Mohammed was the perfect man.

 

Here are some quotes that you will read in Danny’s essay:

 



Muslim dismembers wife in front of six children, throws head from 

creepingsharia.wordpress.com/…/muslim-dismembers-wife-in-…

Jun 6, 2012 – Muslim dismembers wife in front of six children, throws head from rooftop  their six children before throwing her dismembered head from roof 

Husband ‘butchers wife in front of their six children before throwing 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…/Husband-butchers-wife-children-thro…Share

Jun 4, 2012 – A man is under arrest in Germany after killing his wife in front of his six young children and cutting her into pieces. Orhan Sircasi then ran on to 

 

Excerpt from Daily Mail UK:
“The 32-year-old killer of Turkish origin fought off police as they tried to seize him early this morning by lunging at them with the knife and swinging the head like a club.”

 

Picture the sheer horror of such a situation. This savage had just chopped his wife into pieces in front of his children, then with a knife in one hand and her head in the other he heads for the roof top. Then using his wife’s head as a club he attacks the police who are trying to take him into custody. I cannot help but feel sorry for those officers. It is only natural for any sane human being to recoil from a severed head and they had to arrest him. Let us go one horror further. He threw her head to the ground below. Imagine yourself walking past there and having it land in front of you, or worse still hitting you on the way to the ground. If you don’t think that man was a savage then you are reading the wrong essay, for I can call him no less.

They have a fondness for beheading their victims. This is one that I recall hearing about on Fox News right after it happened.


 

 

New York Television Executive Gets 25 Years for Beheading Wife 

http://www.foxnews.com/…/new-york-television-executive-faces-sen…Share

Mar 9, 2011 – A judge on Wednesday gave a Pakistani former television executive the harshest punishment he could for beheading his estranged wife: 25 

Now this is one that I have a hard time with because political correctness has become so entrenched in our society that the police do their very best not to find Muslims guilty of one of these honor killings. No one repeatedly beats their own head against a coffee table until they are dead.

 

Florida: Muslim woman’s death accidental or an ‘honor’ killing 
creepingsharia.wordpress.com/…/florida-muslim-womans-deat…
May 21, 2011 –
 Muslim Woman’s Death Ruled “Accident” From the Florida Family killed herself by repeatedly beating her head against a coffee table and the 

Anytime that an innocent person is murdered it is a tragedy. When that innocent victim happens to be child it is far worse. Complicating that issue, this child was slowly beaten to death over a period of months, for not memorizing the Qur’an.

 

Mother beat son to death for failing to learn the Koran by heart  http://www.telegraph.co.uk News  UK News  Crime
2 days ago – A mother who beat her son to death for failing to learn the Koran by heart murdered him and burned his body to hide the evidence, a jury has 


While the problem is growing ever worse here, the U.S. by no means has a monopoly on honor killings. Europe, Asia, Africa, Indonesia … anywhere you find Muslims you find honor killings as part of their fundamental belief.

 

Sweden: Terrified Muslim women hide from “honor killing” relatives ...

creepingsharia.wordpress.com/…/sweden-terrified-muslim-wo…May 10, 2012 –

 

 
I have always loved a good challenge. It makes life more interesting, but after what I have learned of Islam, were I challenged to find something good about the belief, I would forego the effort. Islam has NO redeeming qualities. It was founded by a bloodthirsty pedophile, and those who follow the teachings of the Qur’an are victims every bit as much as those who fall under the harsh sword of that wretched belief.

 

 

Embracing Female Genital Mutilation

 frontpagemag.com/…q…/embracing-female-genital-mutilation/May 10, 2010 – It’s not awesome . . . but comparing it to more severe forms of female circumcision troubles me. . . . . And it’s not like Western culture is so free of ...

 

 

Muslim Child-Rape Gangs in Britain :: Gatestone Institute
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/…/muslim-child-rapegangs-britain
May 21, 2012 –
 Nine Muslim men belonging to a child-rape gang in northwestern England have  Soeren Kern is Senior Fellow for European Politics at the 

Fjordman: Muslim Rape Epidemic in Sweden and Norway ...

fjordman.blogspot.com/…/muslim-rape-epidemic-in-sweden-a.

Feb 20, 2005 – There have, for example, been a number of gang-rapes of Swedish women by Muslim immigrants. But Swedes must be careful what they say 

UK: Police didn’t investigate Muslim rape and prostitution gang for 

http://www.jihadwatch.org/…/uk-police-didnt-investigate-muslim-ra…

May 9, 2012 – UK: Police didn’t investigate Muslim rape and prostitution gang for fear of being called racist. This isn’t a racial issue at all, in fact. It is an issue ...

 

 

Saudi Offers “Castrated African Slave” for Sale on Facebook

frontpagemag.com/…/saudi-offers-castrated-african-slave-for-s…

1 day ago – I have a [male] slave I bought from an African country and arranged for his visa and stay till I got him to Saudi [Arabia]. His description: 1 – Black ...

 

 

JRH 12/11/12

Please Support NCCR

_______________________________

Be sure to read all of Danny’s essay.

No Muslim in the Military Controversy


Rick Womick. TN State Senator

 

John R. Houk

© November 30, 2011

 

A few weeks ago State Representative Rick Womick a member in Tennessee’s General Assembly made this statement:

 

Personally, I don’t trust one Muslim in our military” and “if they truly are a devout Muslims, and follow the Quran and the Sunnah, then I feel threatened because they’re commanded to kill me,” the U.S. Air Force vet told Think Progress. (Quoted from New York Daily News. Emphasis Mine)

 

Ooh can you imagine how the MSM and the Muslim Brotherhood affiliated Muslim-American organizations wanting to throw Womick into the proverbial frying pan? How much more politically incorrect can a public figure get?

 

You have to know though, no matter how harsh Womick sounded, he has a good point. If you are a good Muslim following the totality of the Quran, Hadith and Sira as well as believing that Islam’s prophet is the perfect man and the example that all men should follow (and women follow the example of his rules for women) then you are person attempting to follow the totality of the Islamic path laid out in those three Islamic holy writings (and offshoots) to the best of your ability. If you follow that path that means are willing to dish out bad news for non-Muslims (kafir) up to and including killing.

 

Now do all Muslims make their goal in life to be a Muslim that follows the totality of what is written down for them to seek? This is unlikely. In this modern age most Muslims choose to follow the portions of the Quran that are attributed to Mohammed in the pre-Hegira days of Mecca.

 

Do all Christians follow the New Testament the path of Christ to share the Good News of Redemption from the darkness of this world age, sharing the love of God between Believers and unbelievers and letting all people know you are a Christian by the God-kind-of-Love (agape) fruit you produce?

 

Of course all Christians do not follow the Christian path to the letter. Those Christians who make every effort to follow the Christian path to the letter might be called Radical Christians. Think very carefully though. A Radical Christian is non-violent by nature. The Lord Jesus Christ gave instructions on how to share the Good News and the Great Commission:

 

1 After these things the Lord appointed seventy others also,[a] and sent them two by two before His face into every city and place where He Himself was about to go. 2 Then He said to them, “The harvest truly is great, but the laborers are few; therefore pray the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest. 3 Go your way; behold, I send you out as lambs among wolves. 4 Carry neither money bag, knapsack, nor sandals; and greet no one along the road. 5 But whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace to this house.’ 6 And if a son of peace is there, your peace will rest on it; if not, it will return to you. 7 And remain in the same house, eating and drinking such things as they give, for the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not go from house to house. 8 Whatever city you enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you. 9 And heal the sick there, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ 10 But whatever city you enter, and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say, 11 ‘The very dust of your city which clings to us[b] we wipe off against you. Nevertheless know this, that the kingdom of God has come near you.’ 12 But[c] I say to you that it will be more tolerable in that Day for Sodom than for that city. (Luke 10: 1-12 NKJV)

 

18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore[a] and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.[b] (Matthew 28: 18-20 NKJV)

 

The Christ-Way of spreading Christianity is sharing the Good News. If faith in Christ is rejected for whatever deluded reason, those that share are to shake the dust off their feet of those who rejected Christ. God will deal with the rejection. Christ did not command to war against rejection and kill those who refuse the Good News.

 

On the other hand the Quran, Hadith and Sira triumvirate Islamic holy writings take another path. After the recorded words of Mohammed were preached they were quite profound as a monotheistic message in Mecca for that city overtly practiced polytheistic faith and counted on polytheism as part of its economy. Mohammed was rejected in Mecca and forced to flee which is a holy event to Muslims known as the Hegira.

 

Something happened to Mohammed’s mind between pre-Hegira Mecca and post-Hegira Medina. Mohammed went from a message of ubiquitous oneness of God (Allah) and the inner peace available to voluntarily submitting to that oneness to an angry man that slowly built a cult army of Muslims that when strength was attained violently sought out all his detractors and offered them conversion, second class citizenship or death. The latter became the paradigm for Islamic imperial conquest in later years that stretched from India to Spain and managed to make an incursion in Eastern Europe to Vienna until repulsed by King Jan III (John) Sobieski of Poland.

 

America needs more people like State Rep. Rick Womick and Sobieski that understand Islam is a theopolitical culture that would transform America away from the heritage of Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness and of Christianity.

 

There is a difference between a good person seeking theological or philosophical inner peace and a good Muslim seeking the path laid out by Mohammed according to the Quran, Hadith and Sira. Thus there is a difference between a Muslim who is a good person (perhaps the hoped for Moderate Islam) and a good Muslim (perhaps the real Islam known as Radical Islam).

 

Bill Warner eschews the bonds of political correctness to defend Rep. Womick by defining the theopolitical nature of Islam that Womick alludes toward in his reasoning that Muslims should not serve in the US Military. Warner’s essay is awesome!  

 

JRH 11/30/11