The Five Pillars, Sharia, and Apologists

Richard Wiig's picture
Submitted by Richard Wiig on Mon, 2010-09-13 11:51

SOLO’s resident Islamic apologist claims that Islam is the five pillars - that is: Shahada (the monotheistic statement that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger); Salah (daily prayers); Zakat (obligatory charity); Sawm (fasting); and Hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca) - and that is where Islam ends. When Osama Bin Laden and his ilk violently fight for Islam, they are not practicing Islam, according to the apologist. It would be nice if that was true. It would mean that, at the very least, Muslims everywhere would be outraged at the misuse of their religion, but that clearly isn’t the case.

It’s true that practice of the five pillars is core to Islam, but in themselves they are nothing but mind-numbing exercises in rote obedience, exercises that can only serve the purpose of softening the mind for further content. Where is this content to come from? Is it to be Islamic, and come from the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sunnah, or from somewhere other than Islam? The answer is clear to all who care to see.

When we look beyond the Five Pillars we find: the Qur’an (the unchangeable word of Allah), the Hadith and Sunnah (the living example of Islam’s Prophet) and Sharia, or Islamic law, codified from the ideas contained in the former two. Sharia was codified by Islamic scholars after the death of Muhammad at the behest of Islams early Caliphs’ (after which the Caliphs had them killed) and it has been institutionalised and entrenched ever since. Sharia is Islam and Islam is Sharia.

A statement from an apologist: “What Al-Qaeda practices is not Islam but terrorism.”

Al Qaeda certainly practices terrorism, as the Qur’an and Sharia commands them to do, but it doesn’t do so merely for the sake of terrorism. The goal of Al Qaeda, and all other Jihadists, violent and non-violent, is to advance Sharia. This cannot, in any sense, be considered the advancement of something-other-than-Islam. It is, Islam, and it is institutionalised to varying degrees by every Muslim state, and infused on a personal level thoughout the entire Islamic culture. One of the clearest examples of this is the personal outrage and push from across the entire Islamic world for the West to bow to Sharia blasphemy laws over the Danish cartoons, and presently over the burning of Qur’ans.

Apologists love pointing out that only a few Muslim countries practice Sharia in full. That is, however, irrelevant. Islam is Islam whether practiced by halves or by wholes. A Christian in Pakistan, persecuted, jailed, perhaps even murdered, for blasphemy, does not care that Pakistan isn’t a fully fledged Sharia state. In 1990 forty-five Muslim countries signed the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. Article 24 of that Declaration states that it is “subject to the Islamic sharia”. Article 25 states that Sharia “is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of this Declaration.” Clearly, there is no such thing as human rights in Islam, at least not as understood by any Western conception of the term.

The more one delves into Sharia the more filth it reveals. Here’s a few examples from Nonie Darwish’s book, “Cruel and Usual punishment”:

From the Shaf’i school

“There is no expiation (punishment) for killing someone who has left Islam, a highway man, or a convicted married adulterer, even when someone besides the Khalifa kills him”

“A criminal, even if repents, will not be spared from punishment except for the crime of Hiraba.”

Hiraba, as the explanation section states:

“means violation of public safety by disrupting law and order due to attack of a united group. Plunder of property, rape, murder, and bloodshed is included in this.”

That is, it supports vigilante mobs acting in the defense of Islam, such as the mobs that rioted and murdered over Danish cartoons.

The mentality for that is set up with Qur’anic teachings and Hadith such as this:

”Whoever sees something wrong and accepts it is as though he had committed it.”

In regards to blasphemy, every school of Islamic law mandates death. Blasphemy is considered an act that makes a believer an unbeliever, which amounts to apostasy. Shafi’ law has 442 acts in section w.52 that are classified as “Enormity” (horror acts). Here are a couple:

o.8.(7): to deny any verse of the Holy Qur’an

o.8.(19) to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred law.

o.8.(20) to deny that Allah intended the Prophet’s message to be the religion followed by the entire world.

In regards to apostasy:

There is no indemnity for killing an apostate (or any expiation, since it is killing someone who deserves to die)

The testimony of apostates is not admissible.

An apostate does not inherit from muslim parents

Marriage to an apostate is immediately dissolved if the spouse is and remans Muslim.

This is a tiny sampling, but enough to see that Sharia is to be imposed from the bottom up as much as from the top down. It is a license to every would-be thug, heartless malcontent or just plain pious believer who cannot tolerate anything outside of a lockstep conformity. It is a license to the worst in people - a sanction to jealousy, envy, greed, vindictiveness, fear.

Another statement from an apologist:

“The lip-service which AL-Qaeda pays by referring to 1500 year old verses, doesn't make it Islamic organization. Ask Osama bin Laden where last time he performed Hajj? To sit in some cave in Afghanistan and to send stoned jihadists to commit suicide missions mainly against Muslims is not Islam.”

That comment can stand for itself. I’ll simply say that if apologists didn’t pay lip-service to Islam, then they’d know better, and that the best of Muslims knows that the apologist is no better than dead meat.

Muhammad said:

“No Muslim should be killed for killing an unbeliever”
“No Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel”
“No Muslim should be killed for killing a non-Muslim”
“A Muslims should not be killed for killing an infidel”
“A Muslim must not be killed for killing a non-Muslim”.


( categories: )

You're an idiot!

Richard Wiig's picture

You're an idiot!

Richard

Leonid's picture

"Go and live in fucking Saudi Arabia, Leonid, it's where you ought to feel most at home."
Well, this is better than to live in Orwellian-Stalinist-kegebist" secure paradise" which you want to establish in the West. Saudis already have all your paraphernalia in place and running, but at least they don't have crime and taxes.

3600 is a sizeable number.

Richard Wiig's picture

3600 is a sizeable number. I'm skeptical that they are all jihadists, but regardless of the number... Saudi Arabia relentlessly promotes Jihad around the world. Saudi Arabia is an enemy of the West, an enemy of freedom. Go and live in fucking Saudi Arabia, Leonid, it's where you ought to feel most at home.

Richard

Leonid's picture

"All the House of Saud is doing when they execute the odd jihadist, is saving their own neck. "

3600 "odd jihadists" compared to 60 in America?

"If I was a totalitarian, as you keep suggesting , then I could do no better than to adopt and fight for Sharia."

There are many ways to be totalitarian. Stalin for example never fought for Sharia, but was totalitarian nevertheless.

There are not thousands of

Richard Wiig's picture

There are not thousands of potential violent Jihadists out of 1.5 billion muslims, there are 1.5 billion potential violent Jihadists out of 1.5 billion muslims. The Ummah is one giant recruiting pool for fundamentalist Islam.

In regard to the war against terror, observe that Saudi Arabia, the country which is ruled by strict Sharia law is much more successful than Europe and America combined. Doesn't it contradict your premise that Sharia promotes terrorism?

Saudi Arabia does not fight terrorism; they are extremely active in spreading terrorism around the world. I believe Rosie has posted evidence of this below. All the House of Saud is doing when they execute the odd jihadist, is saving their own neck. They are in power and they like having power, and that is what Sharia is ultimately designed to do. Keep tyrants in power. If I was a totalitarian, as you keep suggesting , then I could do no better than to adopt and fight for Sharia.

Richard-few questions

Leonid's picture

"You keep repeating your claim that very few support terrorism,"

This is from Rosie's post:

"There are millions who express sympathy with global jihad (according to a 2006 Gallup study in involving more than 50,000 interviews in dozens of countries, 7 percent of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims - 90 million people - consider the 9/11 attacks "completely justified.") Nevertheless, only some thousands show willingness to commit violence (e.g., 60 arrested in the USA, 2400 in Western Europe, 3200 in Saudi Arabia). "

The difference between 7 and 13.5% is almost 100%. So much for the reliability of statistics. Thousands of potential terrorists out of 1.5 billion Muslims is infinitesimal number. Even 100 000 would constitute only 0.0001%. How this justifies your position that all Muslims forfeit their rights by virtue of being Muslims? Why 99.999% of Muslims have to prove that they are not potential terrorists according to your presumption of guilt? How it justifies implementation of your totalitarian measures? In regard to the war against terror, observe that Saudi Arabia, the country which is ruled by strict Sharia law is much more successful than Europe and America combined. Doesn't it contradict your premise that Sharia promotes terrorism?

As far as I know every single

Richard Wiig's picture

As far as I know every single day from 20 to 50 people die in Iraq as result of suicide bombing and every one of them is a Muslim.

In regards to this, Rosie, although I'm sure you know it anyway, when Sunni blow up Shia', or vice versa, each considers the other to be not Islamic enough.

From your summary one can

Richard Wiig's picture

From your summary one can learn that the vast majority of Muslims (93%) don't support terrorism and suicide bombing.

The Gallup Center for Muslim Studies did a global poll that showed that 13.5 of muslims considered 9/11 justified and an additional 21.3 percent thought that 9/11 was in some way justified, that's without even getting on to how many support the advancement of Sharia by means that don't include violence. You keep repeating your claim that very few support terrorism, and that the advancers of Sharia are only a small minority, even though you've admited that you don't actually have the foggiest notion.

Rosie

Leonid's picture

"Mostly, these attacks are against non-Muslims occupying Muslim land."

As far as I know every single day from 20 to 50 people die in Iraq as result of suicide bombing and every one of them is a Muslim.

"77-90 million seems a bit too many to give me comfort, Leonid."

Even one would be one too many, but nevertheless vast majority of Muslims don't support terrorism, and those who does are passive supporters. Otherwise America and Europe would become second Iraq long time ago.

Richard

Leonid's picture

"What is it that you think I want to do?"

Exactly what you've said-isolate and quaranteen, ban and banish, restrict and put under surveillance etc...All this is paraphernalia of totalitarian state.

Leonid

gregster's picture

I'm not only irritated by your position but please stop this; "Soloists use totally fallacious stolen concept of war against Islam, a system of believes, by means of state's power." It's beliefs, not believes.

No, all you want is to

Richard Wiig's picture

No, all you want is to unleash the power of state against mostly law-obedient and legally unarmed population.

Could you please elaborate on that, Leonid. What exactly does that mean? What is it that you think I want to do?

Still too many for my comfort!

Rosie's picture

From your summary one can learn that the vast majority of Muslims (93%) don't support terrorism and suicide bombing.

7% of 1.1-1.3 billion Muslims = 77-90 million in support of terrorism and suicide bombing.

77-90 million seems a bit too many to give me comfort, Leonid.

What do you think?

Also, although the article says that most of the suicide bombings took place in Iraq in 2008, this was against the Americans - not fellow Muslims. Mostly, these attacks are against non-Muslims occupying Muslim land.

Richard

Leonid's picture

"What's actually hard to fathom is why you persist in your misrepresentation."

Misrepresentation? Hardly. If anything , than it's understatement. That what you've said :

" The use of force is the choice of ALL muslims by virtue of being a muslim. To be a muslim one must submit to Islamic law. Islamic law mandates force. That any individual muslims might not feel comfortable with that is beside the point.

We need to fight the source: the Qur'an, Hadith and Sunnah itself. The whole ideological shebang.

We can isolate and quaranteen it easy as pie. All it would take is the political will.

We can restrict Islam within the West, absolutely. And we should."

http://www.solopassion.com/nod...

not to mention your favorite axiom that all Muslims forfeit their rights by virtue of been Muslims.

All this has nothing to do with fighting the source; such a fight could be won only by power of ideas, not guns.( political will means guns). No, all you want is to unleash the power of state against mostly law-obedient and legally unarmed population. As all aspiring dictators you think it will be as easy as pie. You are are wrong, and for the proof ask any former kegebist.

Hilton, it's truly disgusting

Richard Wiig's picture

Hilton, it's truly disgusting that there's not a word from politicians about this. The appeasement that's going on is unbelievable. Some guy threatening to burn a Qur'an is enough to get the whole political establishment out to pressure him, but not a word about the plight of poor Molly Norris.

Just going over the same old

Richard Wiig's picture

Just going over the same old ground, Leonid. BTW, Islam doesn't start and stop at the Qur'an. Its followers can not pick and choose as the whim takes them.

Is this so difficult to understand?

What's actually hard to fathom is why you persist in your misrepresentation.

Richard

Leonid's picture

"Then you turn around and directly contradict yourself by saying that Islam can only be the peaceful verses."

This is not a contradiction, but a proof of my position. I never said "that Islam can only be the peaceful verses." This is an utter nonsense. I myself quoted more than once very militant verses from Qur'an. My claim is that in Qur'an like in any scripture one can find whatever one needs to support any political or even personal agenda. You want a war-Qur'an justifies it; you want peace and prosperity-Qur'an supports this as well. You want to beat your wife-Qur'an allows it, you want to respect her-Qur'an gives you an example of Mohammed, who never abused his wife, who had quite nasty attitude, and so on...But all this is completely beside the point. The point is that you and other Soloists use totally fallacious stolen concept of war against Islam, a system of believes, by means of state's power. That is-not to eliminate terrorism, but ideas by force. You think that you can change the mind set of more than billion of people by using coercion. This is a dangerous nonsense. The only possible outcome of such an approach would be a creation of totalitarian state, practically undistinguished from the Sharia's dictatorship. And even so you couldn't win. Soviet communists fought Christianity in Russia for more than 70 years, by using most brutal means and without any success. Orthodox Christian Church which is not much better than Islam, is flourishing in today's Russia, and became stronger than ever. Do you really think that West could succeed where KGB failed? I repeat what I already said zillion times-you fight force by force and ideas by better ideas. Is this so difficult to understand?

Who else is on this Fatwa list?

HWH's picture

A Seattle cartoonist who became the target of a death threat with a
satirical piece called Everybody Draw Mohammed Day has gone into hiding
on the advice of the FBI. more here

Fefer wrote that the FBI advised Norris to
move, change her name and wipe away her identity because of a religious
edict issued this summer that threatened her life.

"She is, in effect, being put in a
witness-protection program - except, as she notes, without the
government picking up the tab,"

The FBI also declined to comment. David
Gomez, the FBI's special agent in charge of counterterrorism in
Seattle, told the New York Daily News in July that the agency was doing
everything it could to protect individuals on a fatwa list issued by
Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki

Of course not a skerrick of
outrage from our politicians as to the audacity of this superstition to
effectively threaten the lives of individuals in sovereign Western
jurisdictions. Our local Aussie vote- coddlers are too busy imposing
hefty fines on AFL players who step over the line with racial comments.

If any of us were on that list,
would they even care to tell us?

aperture card scanning

Leonid, you say that the

Richard Wiig's picture

Leonid, you say that the koran is a mass of contradictions that anyone can take anything from. In other words, Islam can be anything. Then you turn around and directly contradict yourself by saying that Islam can only be the peaceful verses.

Well, he's obviously wrong.

I don't agree with you that Islam can be anything. Islam can only be what the ideas in the Qur'an allow it to be. The fact is, Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, a respected Sunni scholar from Al-Azhar university, is not saying anything that hasn't been said throughout the history of Islam and even by Muhammad himself. He is not wrong, he merely differs from the scholars you've chosen to focus on, and it is they who have diverged from mainstream Islam, not him. Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is a bit of a reformer though. Here's something that might interest you. It's an examination of Qaradawi by muslims who adhere to a more traditional approach than Qaradawi. It's also part of a series that Robert Spencer is running, and inviting people such as yourself - who say that Islam is peaceful - to refute what these people say, on Islamic grounds. I believe that is something that you don't do. You bring your own western perspective to the situation rather than looking at it from the Islamic point of view. As an objectivist, you should know how essential it is to define your terms.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010...

Rosie

Leonid's picture

From your summary one can learn that the vast majority of Muslims (93%) don't support terrorism and suicide bombing. It also clear that Jihad mainly constitutes a war of Muslims against Muslims. In the view of these facts how one can support the notion that "we are in war against Islam and ALL Muslims therefore forfeit their rights?

"Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who

Leonid's picture

"Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who is obviously an Islamophobic bigot, says, it is martyrdom that Jihadists are practicing, not suicide."

Well, he's obviously wrong. There is lenghty argument against the notion of suicide as martyrdoom in "Hijacked caravan"
Qur'an aslo says "don't throw yourself into destruction"

More Interesting Stuff

Rosie's picture

from this article about Suicide attack:

Muslim religious motivation

Islamist militant organisations (including Al-Qaeda, Hamas and Islamic Jihad) continue to argue that suicide operations are justified according to Islamic law, despite claims that Islam strictly prohibits suicide and murder.

Irshad Manji, in a conversation with one leader of Islamic Jihad, noted their ideology:

"What's the difference between suicide, which the Koran condemns, and martyrdom?" I asked. "Suicide," he replied, "is done out of despair. But remember: most of our martyrs today were very successful in their earthly lives." In short, there was a future to live for - and they detonated it anyway.

According to a report compiled by the Chicago Project on Suicide Terrorism, 224 of 300 suicide terror attacks from 1980 to 2003 involved Islamist groups or took place in Muslim-majority lands. Another tabulation found a massive[quantify] increase in suicide bombings in the two years following Papes study and that the majority of these bombers were motivated by the ideology of Islamist martyrdom. According to another estimate, as of early 2008, 1,121 Muslim suicide bombers have blown themselves up in Iraq.

Recent research on the rationale of suicide bombing as an effective technique to kill enemies has highlighted the importance of the religion of Islam as a driving force. While some scholars cite political and socio-economic factors, others agree that religion provides the framework for suicide bombing because acting in the name of Islam is regarded as martyrdom. Since martyrdom is widely seen as a step towards paradise, those who commit suicide while discarding their community from a common enemy believe that they will reach an ultimate salvation after they die.

Male Islamic terrorists claiming that bombers will be greeted by "72 virgins" are referring to Houri, and this is a commonly expressed motivation.

A briefing produced by the little-known Pentagon intelligence unit called the Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) cites a number of passages from the Quran dealing with jihad (holy warfare), martyrdom and paradise, where "beautiful mansions" and "maidens" await martyr heroes. In preparation for attacks, suicide terrorists typically recited passages from the Quran to prepare themselves.

The most common citation from the Quran made by Islamic suicide bombers is Sura 9 Ultimatum, Verse 111:

Allah has bought from the believers their lives and their money in exchange for Paradise. Thus, they fight in the cause of Allah, willing to kill and get killed. Such is His truthful pledge in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Quran - and who fulfills His pledge better than Allah? You shall rejoice in making such an exchange. This is the greatest triumph.

"Historically, as long as a Muslim died while attempting to advance the cause of Islam, including by warfare and killing, it was not considered suicide, but a glorious act worthy of paradise. The tantalizing prize of paradise for being killed supply sufficient Quranic justification for modern Muslim suicide attackers, especially those who are dissatisfied with their current lives.

"According to Charles Kimball, chair of the Department of Religion at Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, "There is only one verse in the Qur'an that contains a phrase related to suicide", Verse 4:29 of the Quran. It reads:

O you who believe! Do not consume your wealth in the wrong way-rather through trade mutually agreed to, and do not kill yourselves. Surely God is Merciful toward you.

Some commentators believe that the phrase "do not kill yourselves" is better translated "do not kill each other", and some translations (e.g. by Shakir) reflect that view.

Mainstream Islamic groups such as the European Council for Fatwa and Research rely on the Quranic verse Al-Anam 6:151 as prohibiting suicide: "And take not life, which Allah has made sacred, except by way of justice and law". Whether the Quran prohibits it or not, the hadith allegedly unambiguously forbids suicide.

Nationalism

The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam are considered to have mastered the use of suicide terrorism as "the contemporary terrorist groups engaged in suicide attacks, the LTTE has conducted the largest number of attacks." The LTTE also has a unit, The Black Tigers, which are "constituted exclusively of cadres who have volunteered to conduct suicide operations."

Pape suggests that resentment of foreign occupation and nationalism is the principal motivation for suicide attacks:

Beneath the religious rhetoric with which [such terror] is perpetrated, it occurs largely in the service of secular aims. Suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation rather than a product of Islamic fundamentalism... Though it speaks of Americans as infidels, al-Qaida is less concerned with converting us to Islam than removing us from Arab and Muslim lands.

Muslim views

In January 2006, one of Shia Islam's highest ranking Marja clerics, Ayatollah al-Udhma Yousof al-Sanei also decreed a fatwa against suicide bombing, declaring it as a "terrorist act".

The general population of Muslims is against suicide attacks, their rationale alluding to the strict Islamic laws stated in Quran against suicide and killing.

Other views

According to anthropologist Scott Atran and former CIA case officer Marc Sageman, support for suicide actions is triggered by moral outrage at perceived attacks against Islam and sacred values, but this is converted to action as a result of small world factors. There are millions who express sympathy with global jihad (according to a 2006 Gallup study in involving more than 50,000 interviews in dozens of countries, 7 percent of the world's 1.3 billion Muslims - 90 million people - consider the 9/11 attacks "completely justified.") Nevertheless, only some thousands show willingness to commit violence (e.g., 60 arrested in the USA, 2400 in Western Europe, 3200 in Saudi Arabia). They tend to go to violence in small groups consisting mostly of friends, and some kin (although friends tend to become kin as they marry one another's sisters and cousins - there are dozens of such marriages among militant members of Southeast Asia's Jemaah Islamiyah). These groups arise within specific "scenes": neighborhoods, schools (classes, dorms), workplaces and common leisure activities (soccer, paintball, mosque discussion groups, barbershop, café, online chat-rooms).

Suicide bombers seen as martyrs and heroes

Rosie's picture

Just found this very interesting article about teen suicide bombers.

This is further confirmation of something I wrote earlier about how these suicide bombers are seen as martyrs and are idealised like matadors in Spain. The article gets interesting from about the 11th paragraph - a third of the way down - for those with short attention spans.

*And* another thing! said Mother

Rosie's picture

Terrorism in the form of suicide bombing directly contradicts Qur'an, which explicitly prohibits suicide.

In December 2001, the United States Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Asset Control designated Holy Land Foundation as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.

Among the founders of the Holy Land Foundation is Mousa Mohammed Abu Marzook, a political leader of Hamas (who have conducted numerous suicide bombings and other attacks directed against Israelis), who provided substantial funds to the Holy Land Foundation in the early 1990s. In 1994, Marzook (who was named a Specially Designated Terrorist by the Treasury Department in 1995) designated HLF as the primary fund-raising entity for Hamas in the United States. He was deported from the US to Jordan in 1997. Marzook was indicted on August 20, 2004, by a US federal grand jury in Chicago, Illinois. He and two other individuals were charged with a 15-year conspiracy to raise funds for terrorist attacks against Israel.

The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development was a charity that provided millions of dollars of material and logistical support to Hamas. In the year 2000 alone, HLF raised over $13 million. According to the United States Department of Treasury, HLF supported Hamas activities through direct fund transfers to its offices in the West Bank and Gaza that are affiliated with Hamas, and transfers of funds to Islamic charity committees ("zakat committees") and other charitable organizations that are part of Hamas or controlled by Hamas members. The Department of Treasury also reported that HLF funds were used by Hamas to support schools that served Hamas's ends by encouraging children to become suicide bombers and to recruit suicide bombers by offering support to their families.

Do you still think suicide bombing is expressly forbidden by the Qur'an? I think that it is plain that the Muslims see a big distinction between suicide and suicide bombing (or homocide bombing as President Bush described it perhaps so as not to confuse).

Oh, and Leonid, you may like to cast your eye over the chapter headed Funding in the Wikipedia article about Hamas linked above. A few more eye openers about that "terrorism-fighting" Saudi. Eye

Great posts Richard

gregster's picture

There is no doubt in my mind that the duplicitous Islime are invading by stealth. And breeding more potential and probable killer slime. Even Rosie has it right, if you take out her references to prophecies.

And Richard even doesn't hear

Richard Wiig's picture

And Richard even doesn't hear his own quotations when it doesn't suit him.

On the contrary. I'm fully aware of what Muslims such as Mufti Barkatullah say. I even took the time to read the reasonably lengthy summarisation of the Fatwa that you posted about. Have you read it yet? Have you looked into what other muslims are saying about it yet? Have you picked up on the flaws and ambiguities in it yet, or have you still just simply taken it at face value?

From Richard's link:

MUFTI BARKATULLAH:
(Senior Imam, North Finchley Mosque)
Any act of violence which makes innocent people victim is not allowed. This position has been and always will be throughout Islam for the last 1,500 years. No new person or a scholar can ever change this position.

Leonid takes that at face value. What exactly is "innocent" in Islam? Is it the equivalent of what Leonid takes it to be? Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi would say exactly the same thing as the Imam from North Finchley Mosque and yet still support the homicide bombing of Israelis.

Richard "There's never been such a thing as suicide bombing. The term is probably a western term. "

Nonsense. Qur'an explicitly prohibits suicide. It says " Don't kill yourself" at least twice.

Sure, it prohibits suicide. Everyone agrees with that, but as Sheik Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, who is obviously an Islamophobic bigot, says, it is martyrdom that Jihadists are practicing, not suicide.

Leonid

Rosie's picture

In regard to Sharia in the West-it's not a law of the land; it serves Muslim communities which adopted it.

I know - that is why I said it is adopted, with its own courts, for inter-Muslim disputes about domestic affairs and financial dealings. Where it deviates from the law of the land in these cases, cases are judged in accordance with Shari'a law. Although in commercial dealings it has always been the rarely exercised option that two parties can agree to the law of another country if they choose, it is UNHEARD of that domestic disputes be governed under any other law than the law of the land. I do not know the constitutional basis for this since domestic law is not governed by the law of contract with the freedom to contract as the parties choose (as is the case in commercial law) and so I am presuming that the appeasement policies of politicians must have passed new legislation to allow it.

Can you not see, Leonid, the dangers when two sets of laws govern the way people live in two communities in one land? It is apartheid. It is divisive. It is possible with the best will in the world but it is risky and, given all the other factors of Islam, I think it is a great danger to allow this.

Re Saudi Arabia - You think that because private citizens are flouting the whitewash of the government - and nothing is done about it unless it occurs and is discovered in mosques in Saudi - you think Saudi opposes terrorism? What is Saudi if not its private citizens? Who funds all these mosques which are really political cells? Who rewards terrorists' families? Who pays for the Muslim madrasas in Pakistan? Did you read Hatred's? Did you read what the RAND Corporation analyst told the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board? Do you think this was based on false evidence?! Did you ever look at what Saudi textbooks teach about jihad? Saudi is as economically dependent on the USA as the USA is on Saudi oil. In addition, Saudi has been threatened by other Arab nations greedy for its wealth (and Arab tribes have been fighting amongst themselves for thousands of years) and the US interests are protected by providing US forces to protect Saudi and, on occasions, threatened individuals.

But make no mistake that the relationship is precarious. Saudi is Islam; it hates the infidel, it hates the Jews and not one Jew is allowed to set foot in Saudi, it supports terrorism with both enormous funding and people ("Al Qaeda is essentially a Saudi political movement...25 percent of those detained in Guantanamo are Saudis"), it has no interest in the infidel USA other than economics and for protection from its neighbours every now and then and, when the time is right, will have no reservations to destroy the USA if it would mean a successful takeover of Islam there. It is sneaky because it needs to be - ever done business with Arabs? I have. They were smart, cunning and would tell lies if necessary but if you were on the ball and could catch them out, would own up. Their faces were impossible to read when telling a lie. They were experienced liars, clearly. They were also charming and polite - I don't wish to misrepresent. They were very, very smart. Don't be fooled by appearances, Leonid.

It also could support peaceful and prosperous life as Christianity does.
Of course it could. But it won't. Look at C.A.I.R (in particular the last seven paras of the Wikipedia article and all this masquerading exposed. And this book confirming the lies of CAIR by an American pretending to be a Muslim convert. Look at Gold's book. Look at the history of Israel. Look at the lies in relation to the Palestinian refugees. Look who has taken over from Arafat! Look at the bullshit that goes on between the Muslims and the Roman Catholic Church. Look at the video I linked to. Look at what people uncover when they sneak about undercover (which they have to do to get the truth because on the surface it is A, and underneath it is B). Nice thought, peace. But consider the Qur'an and its openly declared goals. There will not be peace until Israel is destroyed (which is why they do not recognise it on their maps) and the world is Islam. I really do not see how you can argue Islam's realistic goal is peace faced with all the evidence. You are comparing reality with words (and a few whitewashing actions) from people who are instructed to lie to achieve their goals by Muhammad himself!

I look forward to your answer, Leonid. Is there really one to counter this? If you are realistic and not merely wishful?

Leonid

Rosie's picture

Why to single Islam out?

Because, Leonid, there is a declaration in the Qur'an, consistent with the calls by Islamic religious leaders, for Islamic take-over of the entire world by force. It is not an obscure teaching. It is taught in today's textbooks in Islamic schools worldwide, including, for example, the Muslim Academy outside Washington D.C. It is devoutly preached in mosques, presented as the heroic ideal to youth, and blared forth on radio and TV and loudspeakers in the streets. Captured documents have revealed that "at the graduation ceremony for the [Hamas] Islamic Society's network of kindergartens [funded by Saudi Arabia], Palestinian children enacted the attacks of suicide bombers. Children wore military uniforms and mock explosive belts, wielded imitation Kalashnikov rifles, and burned the Israeli flag." (p246, Gold's Hatred's)

The goal that every Jew be killed and the entire world subjected to Islam to the glory of Allah is consistent with what we can see happening throughout the world - the using of Palestinian refugees to gain sympathy for Muslims and stir up world opinion against the Jews (conveniently ignoring that it was actually the Arabs who told their fellow Arabs to leave just prior to the 6 day war when the Arabs thought Israel would be decimated and that they would be considered apostates if they stayed and killed), in the using of many mosques as political cells for organising and recruiting Muslims to perform acts of terrorism, teaching about jihad and manipulating minds with the great goal of Islam world dominance; and then there is the more insidious method using the masses - the peace-loving Muslims - as pawns for takeover via immigration in to the West, high birth rates and the eventual democratic election and a Muslim government. When all Western countries are in this position, that will be the end of democracy.

Then there is the issue of Islamic prophecy, Israel and Jews. If Israel survives (and it is a miracle that it was not decimated in the 6 day war) then Islam is proved a false religion. One of the leaders in the Islamic Jihad Movement, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Oudeh, declared in 1990, "Now Allah is bringing the Jews back to Palestine in large groups from all over the world to their big graveyard where the promise will be realised upon them, and what was destined will be carried out." He was not referring to the Biblical prophecies that God would, in the last days, restore the scattered Jews back into their own land, to which the Messiah would return to reign over them and the world from the throne of His father David. He was obviously referring to Muhammad's prophecy (in direct opposition to the Bible) that the Muslims would kill all the Jews at the last day.

Turn a blind eye, Leonid, and I see an analogy between your not believing this future could be possible and the Jews in 1938, who were warned by two prophets to get out of Europe because of the Nazis, not believing that such atrocities were possible.

Not only is it possible, Leonid, it is happening and (not surprisingly) it is also Biblical prophecy occurring right before our eyes.

And that is why Islam is singled out, Leonid.

Lindsay:

Frediano's picture

What about America?

Wouldn't work. Unpaid bar bills in Manhatten, from the 70's.

Forget 'daisy cutter's', OBL's biggest fear in life is the Vig at 'Coyote Ugly.'

He would have a fresh bar tab in Bangladesh, as long as he didn't mind a little hepatitis.

But you make a good point: by all evidence, America is currently a place where the West has exactly zero influence and reach.

regards,
Fred

Homicide Bombing

Rosie's picture

There's never been such a thing as suicide bombing. The term is probably a western term. It's certainly not a term that takes regard for Islamic teachings. Islam certainly doesn't endorse suicide, but it does endorse being slain in the fight for Allah.

Perhaps this is why President Bush renamed it homicide bombing.

Leonid, would you agree that "homicide bombing" is sanctioned by Islamic teachings?!

"Leonid merely hears what he

Leonid's picture

"Leonid merely hears what he wants to hear."

And Richard even doesn't hear his own quotations when it doesn't suit him.

From Richard's link:

MUFTI BARKATULLAH:
(Senior Imam, North Finchley Mosque)
Any act of violence which makes innocent people victim is not allowed. This position has been and always will be throughout Islam for the last 1,500 years. No new person or a scholar can ever change this position.

Richard "There's never been such a thing as suicide bombing. The term is probably a western term. "

Nonsense. Qur'an explicitly prohibits suicide. It says " Don't kill yourself" at least twice.

Richard " Leonid may as well be a muslim practicing Taqiyya."

Richard is a bigot who's practicing bigotry.

Prohibition of suicide

Richard Wiig's picture

Prohibition of suicide bombing never has been abrogated. In this regard read:

Well, perhaps in this regard listen to one of Sunni Islam's most respected scholars:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/pro...

Leonid merely hears what he wants to hear.

There's never been such a thing as suicide bombing. The term is probably a western term. It's certainly not a term that takes regard for Islamic teachings. Islam certainly doesn't endorse suicide, but it does endorse being slain in the fight for Allah. Leonids quibbling over suicide is nothing more than that. Quibbling.

Saudi government which is ruled by Sharia fights terrorism.

Of course, it only fights the terrorism that is aimed at it. Aimed at infidels and they actively promote and endorse it. Leonid may as well be a muslim practicing Taqiyya.

Rosie

Leonid's picture

Prohibition of suicide bombing never has been abrogated. In this regard read:

“Sunni Muslims worldwide in the Islamic Ummah (Community) do not believe that the act of suicide bombing is sanctioned within Islam, but that it is abhorrent and a reprehensible innovation to the Prophetic Way as based on the hadith. Therefore, it is necessary to determine whether it truly is as the Prophet said that “every reprehensible innovation is misguidance and every misguidance is in hell”

http://www.ihsanicintelligence...

In regard to Sharia in the West-it's not a law of the land; it serves Muslim communities which adopted it. The laws of the land suppose to protect the rights of all citizens. If practice of Sharia colludes with common law, common law prevails.

On Saudi Arabia-you are talking about private citizens, like Osama bin laden who is also Saudi, and I referred to Sharia as the law of the country. Saudi government which is ruled by Sharia fights terrorism. If any mosque in Saudi Arabia becomes a centre of terrorist activity, then it's a matter which Saudi security forces deal with, and, in spite they act under Sharia law, they some times do amazingly good job, better than West.

This is my elbow: I never denied that Islam could be as violent and barbaric as Christianity. All religions are, especially when they supported by the power of state. It also could support peaceful and prosperous life as Christianity does. There are many examples for both cases in the past and present. Why to single Islam out?

Leonid

Rosie's picture

1. "I don't now why you should worry about Sharia? You don't live in Muslim country and in the West there is no chance of snowball in hell that Sharia will become the law of the land."

Shari'a Law is already being applied, and there are separate courts for this, in France and the UK for inter-Muslim domestic disputes and financial dealings. As you know, all those countries are democratic and in their "appeasement" policies for vote-catching, this has occurred. Furthermore, as you know, the populations of those countries are expected to have more Muslims than non-Muslims in about between 30-50 years. Thus Muslim votes will outnumber non-Muslims' votes with the obvious consequences to government. The very human rights that are denied in Muslim countries are being, and will be, used to destroy the Western World that grants them. So, Leonid, I wouldn't be too sure about your prophecy that "there is no chance of snowball in hell that Sharia will become the law of the land."

2. "Terrorism in the form of suicide bombing directly contradicts Qur'an, which explicitly prohibits suicide."

The Qur'an tells the reader to take the later verses over the former verses where there is contradiction. Muhammad began trying to convert the Jews and Christians to Islam by the very lie of pretending to copy from the Bible (although certainly not identical) even pretending to have the Muslims face Jerusalem (rather than Mecca) in order to seduce them but when, as they ought, they refused, he wrote his later verses which include violence, Islam's declaration to destroy the Jewish race, the pursuit of Islam world wide, lying okay in this pursuit, etc. and he also decided to alter the position of prayer to face Mecca. And now that there was no point in pretending, this was more correct since Jerusalem has no connection with Islam whatsoever although they have built a mosque, with characteristic affrontery - just as they are doing with GZ - on Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the previous site of the first sacred Holy Temple of the Jews. This is where they attempted to bury Arafat but Israel refused. Incidentally, are you aware just who Arafat was? Are you aware that his hero, his uncle, was in the closest connection with Hitler in their mutual desire to exterminate all the Jews and it is for this reason that "Arafat" changed his name, masquerading as the bringer of peace between the Muslim and Jewish people? (And he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his masquerade!) Are you aware that Mein Kampf is the continual bestseller in Muslim countries to this day?!
And since no Muslim has the authority to abrogate a single verse of the Qur'an or the teachings and practices as recorded in the hadith, why is no outraged voice raised in the UN or in Europe against the pronounced vows of Muslim leaders that an entire race must be exterminated? But I digress... Sad

Although CAIR have always insisted that Muslims have always condemned suicide bombings, beheadings and terrorist attacks, did anyone protest the statement in Al-Hayat Al Jadida on September 11, 2001 declaring that suicide bombers were the cream of society, the engines of history - or the many similar declarations by Muslim leaders and publications over the last 50 years? Noone! In fact there were Muslims in the streets of Palestine and indeed the entire Islamic world cheering and applauding the terrorism on Sept 11, 2001! If you were correct, Leonid, don't you think they would be hanging their heads in shame?

This is a new policy of propaganda and I am surprised that you are not only persuaded, but convinced by it, Leonid. Every child in Palestinian, Syrian, Egyptian et al., schools knows this "new policy" is a lie. They are all taught to hate and work towards the destruction of Israel. There are literally millions of youths in madrasas in Pakistan and elsewhere whose education is aimed toward, and whose greatest ambition is, to become suicide bombers. With the blessing of its Iranian political and religious leaders, in a recent and ongoing campaign, 40,000 volunteers (and the number is growing) were signed up and trained to act as suicide bombers for operations in Iraq, Israel and wherever pagans are occupying Muslim lands. (Worldnet Daily, July 7, 2005)

The past president of the Islamic Society of North America, Muzammil Siddiqi has called for shari'a law in the US and has praised suicide bombers, whom he considers to be messengers of justice. Yet, incredibly, he has been an invited guest of President Bush at administration events and was invited to lead in prayer at the national prayer breakfast following the 9/11 attacks.

Funds are raised on radio and TV in Saudi Arabia to reward the families of terrorists.

As part of this publicity campaign to whitewash Islam of any connection to "terrorism", a number of sermons were preached by imams in mosques in Muslim countries simultaneously calling it "religious extremism" - a term unknown to Muhammad. On the same day the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia preached against terrorism and condemned Saudis fighting with the insurgency in Iraq. On the same day, the Moslem Council of Britain condemned the attacks in London and called on Muslims to help hunt down these terrorists. There is good reason for Muslim leaders to join forces and act as one body - approx 200 Muslim clerics were slain in various countries for criticising the terrorists. But this is whitewash. There are over 100 verses in the Qur'an advocating violence against non-Muslims in order to take over the world for Islam and Allah. These terrorists are simply doing what Muhammad and his followers have done for 1300 years.

3. "Saudi Arabia, the country which lives in the strict accordance with Sharia, would be a terrorist state. However, as a matter of fact it fights terrorism."

I laughed out loud when I read this! Leonid - you are a gullible man! A victim of powerful propaganda, whitewashing and wishful thinking. I thought you were much too smart and well read for that.

The "World Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and the Crusaders" over the signatures of Osama bin Laden and various leaders of militant Islamic groups in Egypt, Pakistan and Bangladesh , declared:

"The USA has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of territories, Arabia...and using its bases there to fight against neighbouring Islamic peoples....To kill Americans and their allies, both civil and military, is an individual duty of every Muslim who is able...By Allah's leave, we call on every Muslim..to obey Allah's command to kill the Americans and plunder their possessions wherever he finds them and whenever he can."

This infamous organisation ws founded by bin Laden and his personal physician, Dr Ayman Zawahiri, in February 1998. Zawahiri comes from one of the most aristocratic families in Egypt and is the mastermind behind Al Qaeda. None of the 9/11 hijackers were from a deprived background either, thus disproving the commonly asserted propaganda that it is the poverty of the masses that drives them to die in jihad. In fact Stephen Schwartz pointed out that of 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers ..."none were poor people..none were people who grew up feeling some grievance because they lived in difficult conditions...they were not from crowded Egypt or Pakistan nor people who had experienced anti-Islamic violence in the last 20 years. These people had grown up in the country that Americans often think of as our most solid and dependable ally in the Arab world - the kingdom of Saudi Arabia...Al Qaeda is essentially a Saudi political movement...25 percent of those detained in Guantanamo are Saudis." (from Radical Islam in America, Imprimis, May 2004 avaiable at www.hillsdale.edu.)

This was confirmed by the Editor in Chief, Mortimer B Zuckerman, of US News & World Report, in July 19-26, 2004 at p 84 in an editorial titled "Looking Evil Right In The Eye."

Furthermore, no Jew may set foot in Saudi Arabia, only Islam may be practiced in Saudi Arabia despite its approving Article 18 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (China and the Soviet Union also approved!) along with every other member state (although it did abstain from voting for or against the Declaration as a whole); Saudi Arabia were part of a secret network of oil interests working with the Nazis during WWII and put together by the Dulles brothers and John D. Rockefeller, their textbooks promote jihad against non-Muslims and nor do they recognize Israel's existence. Saudi Arabia is a major supporter of terrorism but this is overlooked by the United States.

In July, 2002, "a RAND Corporation analyst told the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board that Saudi Arabia was an enemy of the United States [that]...Saudis were active 'at every level of the terror chain' " Clearly, Saudi Arabia "exports two products...oil and religious fanaticism".
Dore Gold, former Israeli ambassador to the UN, documents the uncomfortable truth about Saudi Arabia in his excellent book, Hatred's, that everyone in the West ought to read. (Especially you please, Leonid! The complete book is linked for your ease of reference.)

Most mosques are funded by Saudi Arabia with oil profits from money we pay at the pump. Many mosques in the West are centers for terrorist cells and training, an indisputable fact consistent with Islam and thoroughly documented in this video , Jihad in America. This documentary examines terrorist activity - including on US soil. The link has a longish introduction - sit through it to get to the meat. You will see secret videos in mosques in USA that record raising of money for terrorism -who from in the USA and how much, the recruitment of fighters, the teaching of jihad, gun fighting et al., and there is much militant and evil fighting talk in the name of Islam spoken. Peaceful Islam? Not a show. Do not be fooled, Leonid. Just lies and propaganda in the name of Allah and the spread of Islam. And all this talk of rape, orphans, widows, killing, plunder and decapitation and limb splicing is said in the most chilling matter-of-fact way. A judge talks about a Muslim up for murder and that he had never heard such anger from the dock before. He goes on to say that this man got off the charge of murder despite compelling evidence and the jury convicting him of other charges which would mean that he had to be guilty. The implication being that the jury were threatened. You will also see that the NYPD, in their search of this man's apartment, uncover 47 boxes of terrorist material and completely overlook it, dismissing it as irrelevant religious stuff. Duh. It was re-examined in the wake of 9/11 of course. It was then that they discovered the terrorist headquarters were right there in the US and they had all the necessary documentation to have, maybe, prevented 9/11. (Names of people, plans etc.)

There is no explaining away today's suicide bombers and terrorists as "extremists". In Muslim countries, terrorists are treated with the same hero-worship that matadors receive in Spain and that NFL and NBA stars receive in America. Their faces appear on posters everywhere with accolades of praise and admiration.

There is much much more to say but, right now, I need a tranquiliser! (I think a health warning ought to be placed on some of these threads to do with Islam!)

So, Leonid, I ask of you what you ask of Richard: just where is your elbow?!

Hmmm

Lindsay Perigo's picture

BTW, if I was Bin Laden, looking for the safest place on earth far from the reach of the West, a friendly environment where Westerners stick out like a sore thumb, where the West has exactly zero influence and reach, I would choose Bangladesh (former East Pakistan), not Pakistan.

What about America?

Richard

Leonid's picture

I don't now why you should worry about Sharia? You don't live in Muslim country and in the West there is no chance of snowball in hell that Sharia will become the law of the land. In regard to your numerous quotations I'd like to see the references. For some reason you prefer to avoid them. Terrorism in the form of suicide bombing directly contradicts Qur'an, which explicitly prohibits suicide. You said “AL-Qaeda certainly practices terrorism as Sharia commands" This is total nonsense. If you were right, then Saudi Arabia, the country which lives in the strict accordance with Sharia, would be a terrorist state. However, as a matter of fact it fights terrorism. Islam treats apostates not better or worse than Christianity, which used to burns them for four hundred years. Most of Sharia's laws originated from Old Testament which is inseparable from Christianity and Judaism. On the whole, your post presents very shallow and biased picture of Islam. Islam can inspire terrorists as Christianity inspired crusaders and Inquisition. That however doesn't mean that burning stakes are the essence of Christianity. Islamic civilization is much more, that your simplistic scheme. It knew violence, but it also knew hundreds of years of peace, prosperity, blossom of science, arts, architecture, poetry and philosophy. Only ignorant bigots like you see in Islam a manual to assembly the suicide belt in three easy steps. I repeat that I don't give a damn about Islam this way or another, but you took on yourself to present the topic on which you are totally ignorant. I think it's very silly of you to discuss Islam, when you don't know Sharia, Haddit, Qur'an or Fikch from your elbow.

That is, it supports

Frediano's picture

That is, it supports vigilante mobs acting in the defense of Islam, such as the mobs that rioted and murdered over Danish cartoons.

One needs only to witness what happens in a Dhaka or Chittagong during a Hartal (religious strike.) Poor rickshaw drivers and their passengers, 'violating' the hartal (national religious strike in supposed non-theocracy Bangladesh)are hunted down and summarily murdered in the streets for their 'crimes' by bands of religious thugs/enforcers. The newspapers the following day report the body counts, like soccer matches. The educated moderates in civil government begs the populace to 'modern up, already' but the old men in robes(OMIR) assert their death grip on those defacto theocracies exactly with these terror tactics.

Not even the bayonet-tipped Enfield toting Bangladesh Navy/MoD dare violate a hartal. When the OMIR exert their political power, the nation is shut down. That is the point.

We in the West really don't begin to fathom the nature of this asymmetric conflict. We keep thinking they are like us. It's the Western disease. First glaring hint: even in nations that aren't officially theocracies(like Bangladesh), they are theocracies.

BTW, if I was Bin Laden, looking for the safest place on earth far from the reach of the West, a friendly environment where Westerners stick out like a sore thumb, where the West has exactly zero influence and reach, I would choose Bangladesh (former East Pakistan), not Pakistan. Bangladesh is, as far as the West goes, the opposite ends of the Universe.

regards,
Fred

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.