Leaving Islam






[Readers, please note: the original author of this ‘Book’ sent me the draft for a review and commentary. Having carefully reviewed and having made some minor corrections/alterations of the draft , I felt compelled to circulate this basic book on ‘Real Islam’ in the Internet, so that anyone who is interested in ‘Real Islam’ and Islamic Terrorism may benefit from its rich content. The original author prefers to remain anonymous at this stage, until possibly when a publisher agrees to publish this book at an appropriate time. Due to its prolix nature, I have divided this ’Book’ into 15 parts. This is part 1/15; the remaining parts will be posted as they become available. Please feel free to comment on this ‘Book.’ All comments should be sent to [email protected]. Happy reading—Abul Kasem, the reviewer.]  

Please send an e-mail to [email protected] if you want to have a copy of the latest electronic version of this book.


An Introduction to Real Islam and Jihad

 (November 2003)


            The war we are engaged in, we are told, is a war against 'terror'. But terror is a method, not an enemy. Those who limit their thought process to the constraints of the politically-correct ‘thought police’ seem content to believe that we are not really fighting individuals or nations, but rather an abstraction, … as if somewhere there are soldiers with "Republic of Terror" embroidered on their uniforms marching lock-step to attack us. Terrorist acts are simply the weapon of choice deployed by the true enemy. So in reality we are no more in a war against terrorism than we were engaged fighting the scourge of Machine guns in WWI, Zeros in WWII, or the plague of Soviet Tanks in the Cold War.  Though such vague, loose nomenclature may be reassuring in our society obsessed with political correctness, it prevents rational evaluation of the true threat behind the terrorist weapon deployed against us.

            The gentle reader should be forewarned that his work delves much deeper into the cultural, spiritual, and religious roots of the current conflict than many others dare to go. This is not for the faint hearted, but is presented for the benefit and enlightenment of all lovers of truth, knowledge, and freedom. It should be noted that this work is likely to be tagged by some as Islamophobic or racist.  It may appear, and some will undoubtedly charge, that the facts and views presented herein are extreme. But the data is in fact genuine, accurate, and fair, as is the context.  It seems inevitable these days, that perspectives based on traditional values are quickly tagged as politically ‘incorrect’, and more often than not are judged as coming from the extreme far right.  Contrary to the reviews of the ‘morally-core challenged’ elite that are sure to follow, this author does not lean heavily to the far right. Those all the way ‘Right’ have no concept that the absolute (and unalterable) demands of Justice can be satisfied by mercy through spiritual change, repentance, and true reform.  I will however, admit to ascribing to political, social, and religious philosophy centred much more on personal responsibility than is currently interpreted as ‘politically correct’ by the far-left.

            There is Far-Left, Left, Middle, Right, and Far-Right. Be careful not to limit and ascribe correct behavior and judgment to any one political philosophy. Within all these leanings are valuable perspectives, truth, and wisdom. I look at them all as incomplete sources of information and ideas. Because the Left often seeks to void personal responsibility by circumventing justice with mercy, without the process of repentance, they err. Because the Right often says ‘Lock them up and throw away the key’, or ‘hang-em high’, and operate from a merciless platform of pious superiority, they err. Then there is the Middle... Within the Middle there are good people who are intelligent and try to take the best and wisest approaches from both spectrums depending on current realities, but unfortunately large numbers are simply people without deep moral convictions or strong values which our society has traditionally depended on for its strength and prosperity. Those with no convictions are dangerous because, with no compass of their own, they can be easily manipulated through misinformation and spin. Stalin referred to these as “the convenient masses”.

            There are two very practical pieces of advice upon which one can base fair judgment of other people, religions, and governments. In fact those who fail to embrace this advice completely will remain forever as lost as ‘old’ Europe is today.  I believe my source is a good one. The first litmus test to use in judgment is, … "Only through a mans works is his true nature exposed". The other is "By this we can know if man has truly repented, … he will confess and forsake the bad behavior”. By these two pieces of advice, one can fairly judge the value of individuals/groups actions, and also gauge the progression of an individual/group if and when they realize their actions lead to bad fruit, and make claim to be reformed. Until then, it would be stupid to call the kettle anything other than 'black', even when speaking from a pot that is less than white.

            The West looks forward to Islam taking full responsibility for the bad fruit being produced in their name, and out of a sense of principal and humanity actually doing something to change it, without having to be pressured by others.  But we must also be realistic and realize we can expect only more of the same, … a little ‘hand wringing’ is probably all we will ever see from their regional and world leaders, along with more finger pointing at Israel and the West. The reasons for such pessimism will become clear later. In the mean time, until we see effective action and hear convincingly from this supposed vast silent majority of peace-loving Muslims, it is expedient for the rest of the world to live with both eyes wide open.

Chapter 1

The Enemy at the Gates:

     On September 11, 2001, Self-described devout Muslims carried out an act of brutal terrorism and murdered some 3000 people in America. They hijacked 4 planes, slit the throats of stewardesses, and destroyed the World Trade Center and part of the Pentagon. America and other nations responded and went after culpable Muslim terrorist groups in Afghanistan. Their various cells, networks, and organizations stretch far and wide, and elsewhere in the world some governments arrested others associated with Islamic terrorist organizations, all claiming to be good devout Muslims.


     Following September 11th, most Muslims living in the West defended Islam and stated that Islam is a religion of peace, while many other Muslims living in the Islamic world and even some Muslims in America (living in predominately Muslim communities) as well as Muslim students on American campuses, openly celebrated the deaths and destruction wrought upon us. Many others throughout the Islamic world were observed rejoicing and calling for the continuing destruction of America shouting "Death to America", and "America is the Great Satan".  Huge numbers openly or quietly rejoiced, with the absence of sincere and coherent outrage palpable. In the West Muslim spokesmen were much more muted, some proclaimed that the Muslim terrorists have hijacked their faith and that real Islam is a kind, tolerant religion not associated with terrorist individuals or events. A claim oft repeated in defense of Islam was that “Islam’ is a word which literally means ‘Peace’”.  In response it was pointed out that the Arabic word for peace is salaam, and that Islam is Arabic for surrender or submission, quite a different concept than peace, and that even Muslim means one who submits.   Now the official line from Islam is that “Islam’ means Peace through submission to Allah’s will”, but the opposite camp points out that the newly created definition is illusory in that it does not mention what ‘Allah’s will’ is with respect to Jihad and its role in the advancement of Islam. The two camps often seem to completely contradict each other. Obviously, they both cannot be correct. Those in the West are left to divine, what’s the bottom line according to real Islam? Out of an overabundance of prudence, it would be wise to first fortify ourselves with knowledge. If we fail to thoroughly investigate what Islam is truly all about, there is a danger we might inadvertently invite even more horrific sequels to the disasters that have already been perpetrated upon us.


     Since that dastardly attack the topic of Islam seems always in the news and there has been much more discussion around terms like “Jihad”. One question commonly asked is "why are so many associated with this religion so violent?" Giving the benefit of the doubt to a poorly understood religion, and to secure the support of the Islamic world, the American political machine has gone out of its way to stress that America and her allies are not fighting Islam, but rather, they are fighting Muslim terrorists who have perverted the true teachings of Islam. On the other hand, other voices have raised concerns that indeed there is a violent component within the religion, and that Islam itself is part of the problem. Thus far those expressing concerns about fundamental Islam have been largely muted, out of an overabundance of political correctness and liberal social concerns. But this overwhelming desire to view the Islamic world through rose-colored glasses has led to a resistance of critical analysis of Islamic writings, practice, and history.

     For us to truly understand "Jihad" and Islamic violence in today’s time frame, we must start by examining the Islamic texts in some detail.  A sixty-second sound byte from an "expert" (be they Muslim, Christian, Hindu, or otherwise) is not sufficient. To gain a knowledge base sufficient for fair judgment one must more deeply investigate the three sources of religious philosophy related to Islam in their holy texts, … the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira.  But quoting a verse is not enough, we also have to acquaint ourselves with other sources of history surrounding the period to understand the context, background, scope, and applicability of the various passages related to Jihad and violence in Islam. Otherwise, one would be left with many passages that seemingly contradict each other, and be no closer to truly understanding "Jihad", and the application of Islamic violence today. A complete picture must be drawn. A mere phrase such as "Islam means peace", or "Jihad is an internal struggle against internal, sinful desires", or, "Islam is violent" has little support if one does not know the actual teachings of Islam.

     Since the death of thousands of Americans has occurred at the hands of self-proclaimed devout Muslims, and since scores of similarly disposed Muslims have vowed to continue to murder Americans, be they men, women, or children, it is incumbent upon us to examine the fundamental teachings of Muhammad, found in their texts, and see how they are being applied or misapplied today. This investigation and study has become all the more urgent because of what is at stake.  It is not only American lives (and way of life), which may be at risk, but the lives of anyone living in a free, democratic society. Therefore, readers should understand that when "America", or "American" is referenced, we are also including Britons, Mexicans, French, Germans, Japanese, Brazilians, Russians, Poles, Chinese, Australians, Canadians, Brazilians, and so forth. It is not just Americans who may be at risk; all non-Muslim peoples are at issue.


     For a start, the sometimes-elusive Islamic concept of Jihad must be clearly understood. In particular, we need to determine exactly how violent Jihad is understood, accepted and supported by a majority (or a large minority) of Muslims today.  If it is accepted and supported as it is practiced my many militant groups today, then it would really be incorrect to call Islam a religion at all by western standards; rather it would represent more a military, political and cultural threat. These hard questions need to be asked to know if the actions of the many devoted murderous Muslims in various organizations and lands today can be identified as truly Islamic and if their violent acts are done in the spirit of real Islam, or if they (and their active and passive supporters) represent a fringe minority.  Many prefer to believe that the threat to America comes not from Islam itself, but from an extremist form of the religion espoused by terrorists and their small but vocal band of supporters.  If they are a tiny insignificant minority, they may be manageable by typical diplomatic, military, and law enforcement methods designed to marginalize, isolate, discredit, and destroy.  But a majority or even a large minority from a population of billions is still a huge number of people virtually impossible to manage by those methods, because if millions or billions intend to kill and destroy a particular people or nation, there is very little that society can do to protect itself short of extreme protective self-defense and even offensive measures.  For ourselves, and our future, we need to answer the following three questions:


1) What are the teachings of real Islam found in the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira with respect to the use of violence, call it Jihad if you like, to aggressively spread it’s power over non-Muslims, and are these teachings valid and applicable today?

2) Is real Islam behind and does it condone the murder of 3000 Americans and the destruction of the WTC, or were those Muslim terrorists doing something well outside Muhammad’s religion?

3) What does the future hold for Islam and America, Britain, Western Europe, Japan, Australia, Russia, China, and so on?

Chapter 2

Real Islam and the Religious Texts:

            "Real" Islam is the Islam Muhammad practiced and taught, as it is read and understood by the majority of Muslims today. Further, the most applicable part of Real Islam is based more heavily upon Muhammad’s final teachings and deeds than earlier writings. These final teachings are recorded in the Qur’an, Hadith (Hadith are the traditions and sayings of Muhammad), and Sira (Sira is comprised of Muhammad’s biographical material).  

     These foundational texts of Islam contain Muhammad’s words and deeds over a 23-year period, the Qur’an being dominant in Islamic theology.  In studying the scripts, it needs to be remembered that many of his words that are understood apply only to a specific people for a specific time or event.  It appears that as Muhammad’s circumstances changed, his words, teachings, commands, and attitudes also sometimes changed. Thus, as situations changed over time and Muhammad’s words and teachings morphed to accommodate them, real Islam changed over time. In the end, at Muhammad’s death, the philosophy and conduct of Islam and its followers solidified to a more stable and recognizable form. Therefore, to determine what real Islam teaches regarding Jihad and violence, we must examine these text’s chronology, context, scope, and applicability. It is either mistaken or dishonest to take one passage out of context and apply it to a set of circumstances for which it was not meant.  

      What we are going to do is examine a number of Qur’anic passages related to Jihad and violence. Citations from related Islamic texts, i.e., the Hadith and Sira are provided to provide the context, chronology, and background. Additionally, references from various early Islamic scholars’ commentary are presented (tafsir). When appropriate, quotations from other books written by scholars or experts on Islam are presented, be they Muslim, Christian, or secular.  

      After this, we are going to go a step further. We are also going to examine Muhammad’s actions. Actions ever speak louder than words; therefore, let us lend an ear to hear what it is that his deeds speak about the man.  A wise sage said, "A man is defined by what he does." Thus, Muhammad’s works must be thoroughly scrutinized, for surly they truly portray his heart and show us who he truly was and what he truly believed. We will also briefly review what Muhammad’s closest "companions" understood to be his final wishes, which they understood to be the commands of God as to His messenger or apostle. We will refer to the four "rightly guided" Caliphs: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali. These four hold a special place in Islamic theology and history. If anyone knew what Muhammad truly wanted, they did. Following Muhammad’s death, they continued to fulfil and obey his commands, as they understood his final clear directions and wishes. They loved Muhammad, obeyed his commands, and put their lives on the line for him time and again. Hence their actions depict their understanding of how Muhammad wanted them to carry on Islam into the future (i.e. real Islam).  

      Now then, if Muhammad’s calls to violence found within the texts were only for a specific period of time, against a specific people, for an understandable cause such as self defence, or to alleviate the oppression of an oppressed people, then the critics of Islam could not honestly say that Islam is a religion that condones aggressive violence and terrorism. On the other hand, if it can be shown that Muhammad’s final intentions for Islam were to attack, conquer, and rule all other peoples, and that the use of violence, in various forms including terrorism, were justified towards installing Islam as the dominant power, and that philosophy is being extended to today by a significant number of believers, then it would be a deliberate deception to call Islam a religion of Peace.  

            In light of the long, often-violent history of Islam’s expansion, and the many more recent terrorists attacks in the world, it would be foolish to rely on carefully crafted statements, in English, from prominent Muslims regarding the true nature of Islam.  Westerners are inclined to believe religious leaders are normally honest and pious, and we want desperately to believe that all Muslim clerics and Imams are similarly disposed, but that is an assumption fraught with peril. Unfortunately, as will be shown, dishonesty and deception towards non-believers are also a part of accepted Islamic practice and doctrine, and success at such deliveries in the advance of Islam is celebrated and rewarded.  

So, Let’s start this investigation.

Chapter 3


            Understanding the application of Abrogation as it is used in interpreting the Qur’an is critical to this study.  This unusual application is an important principal and facet of Islamic studies.  We must start with the Qur’an because the Qur’an is one of the foundations of Islam. Islam is built upon the Qur’an and "Sunnah", or lifestyle of Muhammad. Many Western readers will probably be inclined to apply traditional methods of logic and study of Biblical Scriptures to their study of the Qur’an. They will be tempted to take various Qur’anic verses at face value, mistakenly thinking that all the verses in the Qur’an are applicable today. They may reason that since the Qur’an in one place says, "there is no compulsion in religion"; it must mean that Muslims are not to force people into Islam. This approach, however, is erroneous. One of the odd facets of the Qur’an is that some verses "abrogate" other verses, or in other words they cancel them, rendering them null and void and no longer applicable.  "Abrogation" means the cancelling or replacement of one Qur’anic passage by another. Things changed during the 23-year period that Muhammad spoke the Qur’an. As circumstances changed, Muhammad’s directions and precepts found in the Qur’an changed accordingly, sometimes quite dramatically. Thus the Qur’an abrogates or cancels itself in various passages and presents seemingly conflicting statements. Muslims do not view these abrogations as contradictions, but rather, as improvements to better suit the varying circumstances or needs, or to fit Muhammad’s religious concepts. For example, many Islamic scholars consider that the verse reference above "there is no compulsion in religion", found in 2:256, has been abrogated by the passage found in 9:5, (more on this later).  This is widely understood because the more tolerant verse in chapter 2 was spoken about 7 - 8 years earlier than the one spoken in Chapter 9.  

            The "Dictionary of Qur’anic Terms and Concepts", pages 5 and 6, [2], state: "Qur’anic injunctions themselves may be abrogated, as has happened in a few cases. An example of this abrogation is 24:2 which abrogates the punishment of adultery, (q.v.) stated in 4:15-16. A study of the Qur’an shows first, that only a limited number of Qur’anic verses have been abrogated, and second, that the abrogation pertains to legal and practical matters only, and not to matters of doctrine and belief."  

     In "Islam: Muhammad and His Religion", page 66, [3], the great Islamic scholar Arthur Jeffery wrote: "The Qur’an is unique among sacred scriptures in teaching a doctrine of abrogation according to which later pronouncements of the Prophet abrogate, i.e.: declare null and void, his earlier pronouncements. The importance of knowing which verses abrogate others has given rise to the Qur’anic science known as "Nasikh wa Mansukh", i.e.: "the Abrogators and the Abrogated"."  

     The Encyclopedia of Islam, [4], states on abrogation:

Rather than attempting to explain away the inconsistencies in passages giving regulations for the Muslim community, Kuran scholars and jurists came to acknowledge the differences, while arguing that the latest verse on any subject "abrogated" all earlier verses that contradicted it. A classic example involves the Kuranic teaching or regulation on drinking wine, where V, 90, which has a strong statement against the practice, came to be interpreted as a prohibition, abrogating II, 219, and IV, 43, which appear to allow it.  

      So, as a result of changing circumstances, various Qur’anic passages were abrogated, and it is normal that, as a philosophy and doctrine, Islamic doctrine changed over time. As such, rules that apply at one point in time may not necessarily apply at a later date.  This concept is unusual by Western religious standards in its scope, and there are even minor disagreements within Islam regarding which teaching or doctrine abrogates another.  But in general, Muslims recognize more recent passages and writings as the most applicable, abrogating earlier references on the same subject matter.  

      Therefore, when discussing Islam and Jihad, what must be considered most applicable are Muhammad’s final teachings and the commands that he wanted obeyed. What were his last wishes and instructions regarding Jihad and violence?  Which Qur’anic passages are still in force today for the Muslim and the Muslim community, and which are not? Earlier statements related to peace may or may not have been abrogated by later statements related to violence, or visa versa.  We will have to carefully examine the context of the texts to know which are acceptable and in force today for Muslims.



An Introduction to Real Islam and Jihad 

(Part 2/15)



Chapter 4

Definitions of "JIHAD":


     What follows are several classical definitions of Jihad. Thereafter, we will examine passages from the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira related to Jihad and violence in Islam. "Jihad" or other forms of the word occur in the Qur’an about 35 times. Additionally throughout the Qur’an there are other words used for various other forms of violence. 

      From the "Concordance of the Qur’an", by Hanna Kassis, published by University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1983, [6] comes a definition, which is probably the simplest, most straightforward found. Kassis essentially derived it from the Qur’anic context of the word: 

JIHAD = JAHADA (verb). To struggle, strive, fight for the faith.  

     The following is a more detailed definition of Jihad from the Shorter

Encyclopaedia of Islam, page 89, [7]:

DJIHAD, holy war. The spread of Islam by arms is a religious duty upon Muslims in general. It narrowly escaped being a sixth "rukn", or fundamental duty, and is indeed still so regarded by the descendants of the Kharidjis. The position was reached gradually but quickly. In the Meccan Suras of the Kur’an patience under attack is taught; no other attitude was possible. But at Madina the right to repel attack appears, and gradually it became a prescribed duty to fight against and subdue the hostile Meccans. Whether Muhammad himself recognized that his position implied steady and unprovoked war against the unbelieving world until it was subdued to Islam may be in doubt. Traditions are explicit on the point; but the Kuranic passages speak always of the unbelievers who are to be subdued as dangerous or faithless. Still, the story of his writing to the powers around him shows that such a universal position was implicit in his mind, and it certainly developed immediately after his death, when the Muslim armies advanced out of Arabia. It is now a "fard ‘ala ‘l-kifaya, a duty in general on all male, free, adult Muslims, sane in mind and body and having means enough to reach the Muslim army, yet not a duty necessarily incumbent on every individual but sufficiently performed when done by a certain number. So it must continue to be done until the whole world is under the rule of Islam." 

      Many Westerners have wondered in amazement at the number of men leaving safe and relatively comfortable lands to undertake a perilous journey and face a certain death to fight superior forces in Afghanistan, Chechnya, and Iraq.  Clearly, those who do so, do it out of a strong sense of religious duty, fully expecting to be rewarded for their sacrifice.  The "Dictionary of the Qur’an", op cit, defines Jihad as: 

 "The literal meaning of Jihad is "to strive". Technically, Jihad is any endeavor that is made to further the cause of God, whether the endeavor is positive (e.g. promoting good) or negative (e.g. eradicating evil) in character, takes the form of social action or private effort, involves monetary expenditure or physical struggle, or is made against the enemy without or the enemy within (i.e. against "the bidding self"). The reduction of Jihad to "war" is thus unjustified, though war is an important form of Jihad, and a number of Qur’anic verses about Jihad (e.g. 8:74, 75, 9:44) refer primarily to fighting. The comprehensive nature of Jihad is evidenced by such verses as 29:69: "Those who strive in Us (= Our way), We guide them to Our ways." When Jihad takes the form of war it is know as qital ("fighting"). 

      Regarding Jihad, the "Tafsir of Ibn Kathir", volume 2, pages 116, 117 on verse 2:191, [8], states: 

As Jihad involves death and the killing of men, Allah draws our attention to the fact that the disbelief and polytheism of the disbelievers, and their avoidance of Allah’s path are far worse than killing. Thus Allah says, "And Fitnah is worse than killing." This is to say that shirk (Polytheism) is more serious and worse than killing. 

      The "Reliance of the Traveller, (the Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law)", page 599, [9], is one of the more respected, classical works in Islamic theology. This 1200+ page voluminous book on Sharia contains fundamentals of Islamic jurisprudence compiled by "the great 13th century Hadith scholar and jurisprudent", Imam Nawawi, and others (like Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri). This work was not written with a Western audience in mind. They wanted to produce a book on Islamic Laws that was precise, and accurate; one that taught true and correct Islamic values. There are additional statements regarding the rules of Jihad found in "Reliance of the Traveller", but we quote only the relevant statements that portray Jihad’s scope and application:


o9.0 JIHAD 

"Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion. And it is the less Jihad. As for the great Jihad, it is spiritual warfare against the lower self, (nafs), which is why the Prophet said as he was returning from Jihad.

‘We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad’

The scriptural basis for Jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

1) Fighting is prescribed for you (2:216)

2) Slay them wherever you find them (4:89)

3) Fight the idolaters utterly (9:36)

and such Hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet said:

"I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah"; 

and the Hadith reported by Muslim, 

     ‘To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.’” 



     Jihad is a communal obligation. When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others  (O: the evidence for which is the Prophet’s saying (Allah bless him and give him peace). 

“He who provides the equipment for a soldier in jihad has himself performed jihad,” 

and Allah Most High having said: 

 Those of the believers who are unhurt but sit behind are not equal to those who fight in Allah’s path with their property and lives. Allah has preferred those who fight with their property and lives a whole degree above those who sit behind. And to each Allah has promised great good" (Koran 4:95). 


o9.3  Jihad is also (O: personally) obligatory for everyone  (O: able to perform, male or female, old or young) when the enemy has surrounded the Muslims.  

  o9.8   The Caliph makes war upon the Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians, provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax Jizya…in accordance with the word of Allah Most High:

 "Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and Hiss messenger have forbidden – who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been give the Book – until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled." 9:29

The Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim…. 


     Finally, from Sahih Muslim,Book 1, Hadis  #0033, and Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Hadis #387, comes a telling insight on the true meaning and scope of Jihad:

Muhammad said, "I have been ordered to fight against people until they say that "there is no god but Allah", that "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah", they pray, and pay religious taxes. If they do that, their lives and property are safe." 

     The Qur’an says Jihad receives the highest reward and is the surest way to paradise if the “fighter” dies: “Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead … they live … in the presence of their Lord” (Qur’an 3:169). “… To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah … soon shall we [God] give him a reward” (Qur’an 4:74). 

      Based upon many Islamic scholars writings, it appears undeniable that violent Jihad is permitted in Islam for both offensive and defensive purposes. It was commanded by, and praised by Muhammad as being one of the greatest forms of true Islamic spirituality.  Further, some of the final direction from Muhammad was that it (Jihad) is to continue until all people are subjected to Islamic rule.  Aggression toward non-Muslims is allowed, but prior to attacking, the Muslims are to offer them a choice: 1- Become Muslim; 2- do not become Muslim but pay the extortion (jizya) tax; 3- defend yourselves unto death.


For reference, some verses in the QUR’AN that contain the word, or form of the word "JIHAD": 3:136,142; 4:95,97; 5:35,54,59; 8:72,74,75; 9:16,19,20,24,41,44, 73,74,81-82, 86,87,88; 16:110-111; 22:77-78; 25:52; 29:5,6,7,8,69; 31:14-15; 47: 31,33; 49:15; 60:1; 61:11; 66:9.

Chapter 5 

Chronology and Abrogation in the QUR’AN:


     Now we will review the general CHRONOLOGY of the QUR’ANIC listings, with respect to their violent Jihadi passages. As stated earlier, we must explore both the context and chronology of the Qur’an’s passages. This is challenging because the Qur’an is not arranged chronologically, and in fact, no one knows for certain its complete chronology. There is no standard chronological agreement among scholars, be they Muslims, Christians, or secular, as to when chapters or even portions of chapters were revealed during Muhammad’s life. Some of Muhammad’s words, spoken as the Qur’an near the end of his life, were folded into passages he spoke near the beginning of his declared prophethood. Therefore, the Qur’an is a jumbled chronological hodgepodge. In and of itself, the Qur’an is practically worthless when it comes to determining its chronology. The only corroborating references that are able to provide us a guide as to when certain passages were spoken are the Sira and Hadith. Sometimes they provide chronological details behind the Qur’an’s verses. However, as a whole, scholars are unable to completely determine the Qur’an’s chronology. Consequently, they only offer their best, educated, opinions. In our study, we are most interested in the opinions accepted by the majority of Muslims today. 

    A Qur’anic chronology is very important because what Muhammad said earlier in his life did not necessarily apply to later events (due to "abrogation" mentioned above). By any standard of evaluation, it appears he was always prepared to change his mind, vows, and rules. (See the selection of Hadiths from Sahih Muslim, [10], book 15, #s 4044 – 4062). If we are to understand true Islamic Jihad as it is understood and taught today, then we need to establish his final position with respect to Jihad and aggression. Hence the importance of the last few chronological passages of the Qur’an, and the subsequent actions of his closest companions and followers. 

    Note that the majority of various Qur’anic passages relative to "Jihad" or violence come from chapter nine (ie Sura 9). Most scholars agree that chapter nine is from a very late period - near the end of Muhammad’s life. The great Muslim historian Tabari, in volume 8, (who wrote a 39 volume Islamic history and an extensive commentary on the Qur’an), [11], shows that the conquest of Mecca occurred in 630, and Ibn Ishaq documented in his "Sirat Rasulallah", page 617, [12], (this work is the most authentic biographical material still extant today), states that the main Jihad section of chapter 9 was revealed in AH 9, i.e. 631. Muhammad died in 632. Therefore, chapter 9 was revealed during Muhammad’s last two years, if not in the last year. Chapter 5 is usually thought to be the last chronological chapter, but it does not have many references to Jihad. 

     The following is a quote from the Encyclopaedia of Islam, op cit, with respect to the problems of Qur’anic chronology. At the end of the quote are its chronological lists taken from several different scholars of Islam. 

     The Kuran responds constantly and often explicitly to Muhammad's historical situation, giving encouragement in times of persecution, answering questions from his followers and opponents, commenting on current events, etc. Major doctrines and regulations for the Muslim community, which are never stated systematically in the Kuran, are introduced gradually and in stages that are not always clear. There are apparent contradictions and inconsistencies in the presentation of both the beliefs and the regulations, and the latter are sometimes altered to fit new situations. Thus it is essential to know the approximate dates or historical settings of some passages, and at least the chronological order of others, if they are to be understood fully. This problem was recognized by early Muslim scholars who devoted much attention to it in the first few centuries, until a fairly rigid system of dating was established and given the imprimatur of orthodoxy. In modern times the study of the chronology of the Kuran has been almost exclusively a domain of Western scholars, who have not however been able to reach a consensus on a dating system, or even on the possibility of establishing one.

The Egyptian standard edition gives the following chronological order of the Suras, with the verses said to date from a different period given in parentheses: XCVI, LXVIII (17-33, 48-50 Med.), LXXIII (10 f., 20 Med.), LXXIV, I, CXI, LXXXI, LXXXVII, XCII, LXXXIX, XCIII, XCIV, CIII, C, CVIII, CII, CVII, CIX, CV, CXIII, CXIV, CXII, LIII, LXXX, XCVII, XCI, LXXXV, CVI, CI, LXXV, CIV, LXXVII (48 Med.), L (38 Med.), XC, LXXXVI, LIV (54-6 Med.), XXXVIII, VII (163-70 Med.), LXXII, XXXVI (45 Med.), XXV (68-70 Med.), XXXV, XIX (58, 71 Med.), XX (130 f. Med.), LVI (71 f. Med.), XXVI (197, 224-7 Med.),XXVII, XXVIII (52-5 Med., 85 during Hijrah), XVII (26, 32 f., 57, 73-80 Med.), X (40, 94-6 Med.), XI (12, 17, 114 Med.), XII (1-3, 7 Med.), XV, VI (20, 23, 91, 114, 141, 151-3 Med.), XXXVII, XXXI (27-9 Med.), XXXIV (6 Med.), XXXIX (52-4 Med.), XL (56 f. Med.), XLI, XLII (23-5, 27 Med.), XLIII (54 Med.), XLIV, XLV (14 Med.), XLVI (10, 15, 35 Med.), LI, LXXXVIII, XVIII (28, 83-101 Med.), XVI (126-8 Med.), LXXI, XIV (28 f. Med.), XXI, XXIII, XXXII (16-20 Med.), LII, LXVII, LXX, LXXVIII, LXXIX, LXXXII, LXXXIV, XXX (17 Med.), XXIX (1-11 Med.), LXXXIII Hijrah II (281 later), VIII (30-6 Mec.), III, XXXIII, LX, IV, XCIX, LVII, XLVII (13 during Hijrah), XIII, LV, LXXVI, LXV, XCVIII, LIX, XXIV, XXII, LXIII, LVIII, XLIX, LXVI, LXIV, LXI, LXII, XLVIII, V, IX (128 f. Mec.), CX. 

      The Encyclopaedia of Islam, op cit, also details three Western Islamic scholars chronology of the Qur’an. (Noldeke was one of the greatest Qur’anic scholars from the West). This is the chronological order of the last Medinan Suras listed in their work:

Weil: 2, 98, 62, 65, 22, 4, 8, 47, 57, 3, 59, 24, 63, 33, 48, 110, 61, 60, 58, 49, 66, 9, 5.
Noldeke and Blachere: 2, 98, 64, 62, 8, 47, 3, 61, 57, 4, 65, 59, 33, 63, 24, 58, 22, 48, 66, 60, 110, 49, 9, 5.

[NOTE, traditional Western dating breaks the chronological order of the Qur’an up into 3 or 4 groups. The last group (sometimes called "late Medinan") is presented above. There are earlier Suras in both lists above, however, for space’s sake, and editing time, only the last Sura grouping is presented. Note that Sura 9 is the second to last in all these three scholar’s groupings.] 


      Canon Sell in "The Historical Development of the Qur’an", page 204, [13], details that Jalalu-d-Din as-Suyuti (a great Muslim Qur’anic scholar) lists Chapter 9 second to last, and Sir William Muir (a great Western Islamic scholar) lists chapter 9 as last. All of the above mentioned references also list Chapter 5 near the chronological end, if not at the very end. 

      The Hadith of Sahih Bukhari, volume 6, book 60, # 129 (or 5.59.650), [14], Hadith states that "The last Sura that was revealed was Bara’a…"  so Sura 9 was considered by him to be one of the last, if not the last revealed chapters of the Qur’an. 

     Therefore, the works of six top scholars, (3 of them Muslim, 3 Western), all agree that Chapter 9 is either the last or the second last chapter to be spoken or revealed by Muhammad. Consequently, since this chapter contains the largest amount of violent passages, this is our focus, because as a result of being the last Chapter revealed, Sura 9 would dominate, or abrogate, conflicting Qur’anic passages from earlier periods. That being said, to be thorough and fair we will also review other relevant passages on Islamic violence and Jihad found in the Qur’an. 

     In “Milestones, Ideologue of Fundamentalist Islam in Egypt”, Syed Qutb argues strongly for Jihad from some select Qur’anic verses (Qur’an 4:74-76; 8:38-40; 9:29-32). These passages alone, he states, suffice to justify the universal and permanent dimensions of Jihad (pp. 53-76). 





Chapter 6

The QUR’AN and JIHAD: Offensive and Defensive Verses:

     Historically Muhammad and his movement did not initially use force to induce the Jews, Christians and pagans to accept Islam; however force was justified for defence. Later, when he began to gather an army to himself and was able to go on the offensive, he did so. Then when people or circumstances turned against him he told his followers that the latest "revelations from Allah" instructed him to: "Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home." (9:73). Thus Muhammad’s career of warring in the name of Allah began as soon as it became a viable option, and then did not cease. Those defeated by Muhammad’s military actions were offered protection if they would submit to the dictates of Islam or pay tribute (ie Jizya tax or protection money). Those that refused those options had no "choice" but to be put to death. Non-Muslims were Dhimmis (the people of obligation) and, as such, were to be "utterly subdued". Such a recipe guaranteed the expansion of Islam. 

   Encarta Encyclopedia ‘99’ states: "The remarkable speed of [Islam’s] religious expansion can be attributed to the fact that it was accomplished primarily through military conquest. Muhammad drew Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula to Islam by his forceful personality, the promise of salvation for those who died fighting for Islam, and the lure of fortune for those who succeeded in conquest. The caravan raids of the early years of Islam soon became full-scale wars, and empires and nations bowed to the power of this new religious, military, political, economic, and social phenomenon." 


     Below are some of the many Qur’anic verses that reference violence and Jihad. At the end of each passage of selected verses, comments and reference material will be added. Qur’anic passages, unless otherwise noted, are taken from The Noble Qur’an, [15]. Note that for clarification the translators sometimes added words in parenthesis.

PASSAGE ONE: SURA 22:39 – 41 and 2:193

22:39 Permission to fight is given to those (i.e. believers against disbelievers), who are fighting them, (and) because they (believers) have been wronged, and surely, Allah is Able to give them (believers) victory.

22:40 Those who have been expelled from their homes unjustly only because they said: "Our Lord is Allah." - For had it not been that Allah checks one set of people by means of another, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, wherein the Name of Allah is mentioned much would surely have been pulled down. Verily, Allah will help those who help His (Cause). Truly, Allah is All-Strong, All-Mighty.

22:41 Those (Muslim rulers) who, if We give them power in the land, (they) order for Iqamat-as-Salat. [i.e. to perform the five compulsory congregational Salat (prayers) (the males in mosques)], to pay the Zakat and they enjoin Al-Ma'ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam orders one to do), and forbid Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism and all that Islam has forbidden) [i.e. they make the Qur'an as the law of their country in all the spheres of life]. And with Allah rests the end of (all) matters (of creatures).

2:193. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zâlimûn (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.) [Same verse from Dawood’s Koran [16] 2:193 states: “Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God’s religion reigns supreme. But if they desist, fight none except the evil doers.”] 


     The context and background of the above passages can be found in Ibn Ishaq’s and Tabari’s work. What follows is from the biographical work of Ibn Ishaq’s "Sirat Rasulallah", op cit, pages 212, 213. [NOTE: two passages from the Qur’an are referenced: [a] Sura 22:39-41, and [b] Sura 2:193].


     The apostle had not been given permission to fight or allowed to shed blood before the second Aqaba [a place where a pledge was made between Muhammad and his followers from Medina]. He had simply been ordered to call men to God and to endure insult and forgive the ignorant. The Quraysh [a leading group of Meccans] had persecuted his followers, seducing some from their religion and exiling others from their country. They had to choose whether to give up their religion, be maltreated at home, or to flee the country, some to Abyssinia, others to Medina.

     When Quraysh became insolent towards God and rejected His gracious purpose, accused His prophet of lying, and ill treated and exiled those who served Him and proclaimed His unity, believed in His prophet and held fast to His religion, He gave permission to His apostle to fight and to protect himself against those who wronged them and treated them badly.

     The first verse which was sent down on this subject from what I have heard from Urwa b. Al-Zubayr and other learned persons was: "Permission is given to those who fight because they have been wronged. God is well able to help them, --- those who have been driven out of their houses without right only because they said God is our Lord. Had not God used some men to keep back others, cloister and churches and oratories and mosques wherein the name of God is constantly mentioned would have been destroyed. Assuredly God will help those who help Him. God is Almighty. Those who if we make them strong in the land will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin kindness, and forbid iniquity. To God belongs the end of matters [a]. The meaning is "I have allowed them to fight only because they have been unjustly treated while their sole offence against men has been that they worship God. When they are in the ascendant they will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin kindness, and forbid iniquity, i.e., the prophet and his companions all of them." Then God sent down to him: "Fight them so that there be no more seduction," [b] i.e. until no believer is seduced from his religion. "And the religion is God's,", i.e. Until God alone is worshipped."

     When God had given permission to fight and this clan of the Ansar had pledged their support to him in Islam and to help him and his followers, and the Muslims who had taken refuge with them, the apostle commanded his companions, the emigrants of his people and those Muslims who were with him in Mecca, to emigrate to Medina and to link up with their brethren the Ansar. "God will make for you brethren and houses in which you may be safe." … 

     Ibn Ishaq’s work details the chronological and historical context of the above verses. Generally, Muhammad is now going to fight in self-defence. But, if we look closely, we find that Muslims will be allowed to a) "fight them so that there be no more seduction" – i.e., others trying to dissuade Muslims from Islam, and b) "the religion is God’s, i.e. Until God alone is worshipped." The seeds for future aggression to further Islam by using violence were now planted. 

     Tabari also documents this event. (Note: Tabari often used Ibn Ishaq’s work as a basis for parts of his history). Below is an except from Tabari, op cit, volume 6, page 137, on the time of the revelation of the above passage.

     The seventy representatives chiefs of those who had accepted Islam, came to the Messenger of God from al-Madinah met him during the pilgrimage, and swore an oath of allegiance to him at al-Aqabah. They gave him their pledge in the following words: "We are of you and you are of us; whoever comes to us of your Companions, or you yourself if you come to us, we shall defend you as we would defend ourselves." After this the Quraysh began to treat them harshly and the Messenger of God commanded his Companions to go to al-Madinah. This was the second trail, during which the Messenger of God told his Companions to emigrate and himself emigrated. It was concerning this that God revealed:

     And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for God. [Note: This verse (8:39) was probably not revealed until after the battle of Badr. The almost identical verse 2:193 seems not to have been revealed until shortly before the conquest of Mecca.]


Tabari adds on page 138:

     Those members of the Aws and the Khazraj who took the oath of allegiance at the second al-Aqabah took the pledge of war, when, in contrast to the terms of the first al-Aqabah, God permitted fighting. The first was the pledge of women, as I have mentioned above on the authority of Ubadah al-Samit. The second pledge of al-Aqabah was to wage war against all men [Note: That is, on anyone who attacks Muhammad.], as I have mentioned above on the authority of Urwah al-Zubayr.] 


Regarding 2:193, the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cit, page 117, 118, states 

     Then Allah orders Muslims to kill the disbelievers "until there is no more Fitnah." According to Ibn Abbas and others, "Fitnah" means polytheism, "And religion (worship), is for Allah" meaning Allah’s religion should stand supreme and overshadowing the rest of the religions. In the Sahihayn, it is reported that the Prophet said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight the people till they say: "None has the right to be worshipped by Allah, and whoever says it will save his life and property from me except on breaking the law (rights and conditions for which he will be punished justly), and his accounts will be with Allah"". 


     Therefore, PASSAGE ONE provides us with the allowance of fighting and the works of history and Sira provide us with their chronology – early during Muhammad’s time in Medina. These verses are primarily defensive, but there is also a component of aggression in "And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for God."  It appears that Muhammad envisioned that there would come a time when he would no longer be on the defensive, but on the offensive. Thus, his early words depict his later actions. 


PASSAGE TWO: SURA 2:216 & 217

2:216 Jihad (holy fighting in Allah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.

 2:217 They ask you concerning fighting in the Sacred Months (i.e. 1st, 7th, 11th and 12th months of the Islamic calendar). Say, "Fighting therein is a great (transgression) but a greater (transgression) with Allah is to prevent mankind from following the Way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, to prevent access to Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah), and to drive out its inhabitants, and Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion (Islamic Monotheism) if they can. And whosoever of you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever." 


     So it appears that not only death in this life, but the classical Hollywood eternal damnation in a lake fire will face those who abandon the faith, … pretty severe. Helmet Gatje in "The Qur’an and its Exegesis", page 213, [18], presents a quote from Baidawi’s Tafsir on this verse. Baidawi was one of the greatest early commentators on the Qur’an. Gatje’s words are in parenthesis.

     "They will question thee concerning the holy month": It is related that, in the month of Jumada l-Akhira, which was two months before (the battle of) Badr, the Prophet sent out his paternal cousin Abd Allah ibn Jahsh with an expeditionary force, in order to be on the look-out for a caravan of (the tribe of) Quraish in which were Amr ibn Abd Allah al-Hadrami and three (other) men. They killed Amr, took two of his men captive, and drove away the caravan, which contained the goods of trade from at-Taif. This happened at the beginning of (the month of) Rajab, while Abd Allah and his people believed it was (still) the (month of) Jumada l-Akhira. Regarding this, the (people of the tribe of) Quraish said: "Muhammad has (unlawfully) regarded the month in which raids and warlike acts are forbidden, so that the fearful can be safe and men can move freely everywhere for the sake of their livelihood, as permissible (for such forbidden acts). This fell hard upon the members of the expeditionary force, and they said: "We will not submit until compensation comes down for us." At this, Muhammad gave back the caravan along with the captives. According to Ibn Abbas (however it is related) that the Messenger of God accepted the booty when this verse came down. This is supposed to have been the first booty in Islam. Those who question (Muhammad about the holy month) were the unbelievers, who thereby sought to ascribe to him calumny and profanation (of a holy month). Others say (however) that they were the members of the expeditionary force (who asked Muhammad about the holy month)…. 


 "Say: Fighting in it is a heinous thing": that is, a heinous sin. For the most part, in opposition to Ata, it is held that this statement is abrogated by the following words of God: "If they do not leave you alone and offer you peace and stop hostilities, then take them wherever you find them and slay them" (Sura 4:91/93). In this case the more specific (that is, the prohibition against fighting during the month of Rajab) would be abrogated by the general order (that is, the general command to kill the unbelievers). However, there is a contradiction in this. It lies nearest (the truth) to reject (the interpretation that the present verse declares an absolute prohibition against fighting in the holy month. Although (the word) "fighting" is indefinite here, it is fixed in scope; and thus, (the fighting here) not (to be understood as fighting) in general…  

      These passages display clearly what Muhammad ordered at the time these verses were revealed.  Just after arriving in Medina, Muhammad issued commands and they attacked and stole other people’s possessions. His followers were also later justified when, during that process, they ended up murdering a man. 

     This action took place during a period of recognized "peace" within the Arab community. They had an understanding, a code of honor if you will, that all would honor the sacred months and not make war upon others. Muhammad’s men broke this code. And to justify this and other deeds, Muhammad received a timely "revelation" justifying the robbery and murder these men committed. Even with these few verses regarding Jihad and violence, duplicity is apparent. It appears that in the earliest stages of the movement, that as circumstances changed, Islam changed as needed to fit the new reality. 

     Also note how this passage contradicts or "abrogates" passage one. 2:216 and 217 allow offensive attacks but 2:190-194 primarily command defensive actions. Here, Muhammad’s actions were a raid upon some travelling merchants who had goods that were not from the city of Mecca. 



4:94  O you who believe! When you go (to fight) in the Cause of Allah, verify (the truth), and say not to anyone who greets you (by embracing Islam): "You are not a believer"; seeking the perishable goods of the worldly life. There are much more profits and booties with Allah. Even as he is now, so were you yourselves before till Allah conferred on you His Favors (i.e. guided you to Islam), therefore, be cautious in discrimination. Allah is Ever Well Aware of what you do.

4:95  Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward;  

     These two verses show how important Jihad and fighting are in Islam. Apparently Jihad is highly commendable, and those that fight are rated high in Allah’s eyes, and they will be greatly rewarded.  This also shows clearly the aggressive intentions of Jihad.  Ali’s Koran starts 4:94 with, "Oh you who believe, when you go abroad in the cause of Allah…"  From our chronological tables we see that this chapter was also revealed during the Medinan period. In Rodwell’s Koran, [19], the notes for chapter 4 state: "Most of the events alluded to in this Sura fall between the end of the third and the close of the fifth year after the flight to Medina."



      Now, let’s look at another Muslim scholar’s commentary. From the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cit, pages 145 – 150, (not re-quoting the verses)

     Quoting Ibn Abbas: "Some Muslims chased a man for his booty, who said to them: "Assalamu Alaykum." They killed him and seized his booty. Consequently, the above verse was revealed. It is mentioned in a biography that his brother Fazzar emigrated to the Prophet in compliance with his father’s command to call on Fazzar people to embrace Islam. On his way, one of the Prophet’s brigades found him at night. He had already informed them that he was a Muslim, but they rejected his admission, and killed him. His father said: "I went to the Prophet and he gave me one thousand dinars and other compensation, and sent me back." Then, the above verse was revealed.

     Al-Bukhari narrated, on the authority of Ibn Abbas: "The Prophet said to Al-Miqdad: "When a believer conceals his Faith among a people who are disbelievers and he has disclosed his Islam, then you have killed him, didn’t you, too, conceal your Islam in Makkah before? (1). Narrated by Al-Bukhari in this way (summarized and Mu’allaq).

      Iman Ahmed quoted Ibn Abbas as saying: "A man from Banu Saalim who was herding his sheep, passed by a group of the Prophet’s companions, and greeted them. They said: "He only greeted us in order to seek our protection." They went to him and killed him. Afterwards, they brought his sheep to the Prophet and the above verse was revealed."" (2) 


      Note from Ibn Kathir’s quote. 1) Muslims were allowed to attack non-Muslims and plunder their possessions. It is quite clear that the poor shepherd was treated badly by any standard. He greeted them, poised no threat, but he was murdered because the Muslims thought he was not a ‘true’ Muslim. In other words, it was totally permissible to attack non-Muslims at this time in Islam’s history. The murdering Muslims were not then reproached for having attacking others of the same faith, instead they were reproached for attacking a person who greeted them – as a Muslim would do, but whom they thought was not a true Muslim. Had the shepherd not greeted them, Muhammad would have had less difficulty in justifying his murder, and it probably would not have merited mention of any kind at all. One wonders why it took the murder of a Muslim for Allah to "reveal" this Muslim-sensitive protective verse to Muhammad? Obviously it would have been better if Allah could have revealed this to Muhammad earlier so as to prevent a potential brother from being murdered.


 Let’s continue with Ibn Kathir’s commentary. Regarding verse 4:95 it says,

      "Al-Bukhari quoted Al-Barra as saying: "When the above verse was revealed, the Prophet called Zaid Ibn Thabit and ordered him to write it down. Ibn Umm Maktum came to the Prophet and explained to him his disability. Then, Allah revealed: "Except those who are disabled." 

     Note here that once again, it took an unforeseen change in human circumstances and predicaments for Allah to complete a revelation to answer it. Jihad was ordered for Muslims to be sanctified as good followers, but it was pointed out that some Muslims were unable to fight – such as blind men. Consequently, Allah had to modify his prior revelation to Muhammad with another revelation – exempting the disabled from Jihad. 

      Thus far, three Qur’anic passages have been considered. The first was revealed around the time Muhammad fled from Mecca to Medina; the second, just a few months after his arrival in Medina and the third, from between the 3rd and 5th year of Muhammad’s stay in Medina.





Chapter 7


ACTIONS, Speaking even Louder than the Words


      Now, from the Muslim perspective using their own writings, let us examine some additional actions that Muhammad ordered from 1 A.H. up to 6 A.H. There are more incidents we could reference, but for the sake of time and space we have to limit the amount of detailed information. This material is presented to facilitate honest evaluation and judgment of Muhammad himself, because it is only by his actions that he can and should be judged.

     While reading the incidents below, we should continue to ask ourselves if real Islam, i.e. Muhammad’s Islam, allows aggressive violence and terrorism. The following 13 events and incidents (occurring in the last few years of Muhammad’s life) will be examined:

1) The killing of Abu Afak

2) The killing of Asma Marwan

3) Attack upon the Banu Qaynuqa Jews

4) The killing of Kab Ashraf

5) The killing of Ibn Sunayna.

6) Attack against the Banu Nadir Jews

7) The killing of the Shepherd

8) Massacre of the Banu Qurayza Jews

9) The torture killing of Kinana

10) The killing of a slave Wife and Mother

11) The slaying of an old woman from Banu Fazara

12) The killing of Abdullah Khatal and his Daughter

13) The attack upon Tabuk 


INCIDENT # 1 – The Murder of Abu Afak

      This occurred around 2 A.H. In this incident Muhammad requested his men to kill an old Jewish man named Abu Afak. Abu Afak was 120 years old. He was a man with much experience and became alarmed and concerned observing Muhammad and his followers activities soon upon their arrival at Medina. Abu Afak spoke out and urged his fellow Medinans to question Muhammad. Below are the details from Muslim sources. 

 From "The Life of Muhammad, op cit., page 675,


Abu Afak was one of the Ubayda clan. He showed his disaffection when the apostle killed al-Harith b. Suwayd b. Samit and said:

          "Long have I lived but never have I seen

          An assembly or collection of people

          More faithful to their undertaking

          And their allies when called upon

          Than the sons of Qayla when they assembled,

          Men who overthrew mountains and never submitted,

          A rider who came to them split them in two (saying)

          "Permitted", "Forbidden", of all sorts of things.

          Had you believed in glory or kingship

          You would have followed Tubba 


[NOTE: the Tubba was a ruler from Yemen who invaded that part of what is present Saudi Arabia: the Qaylites resisted him]


      The apostle said, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" Whereupon Salim b. Umayr, brother of B. Amr b. Auf, one of the "weepers", went forth and killed him. Umama Muzayriya said concerning that:

          You gave the lie to God's religion and the man Ahmad! [Muhammad]

          By him who was your father, evil is the son he produced!

          A "hanif" gave you a thrust in the night saying

          "Take that Abu Afak in spite of your age!"

          Though I knew whether it was man or jinn

          Who slew you in the dead of night (I would say naught).

     Additional information is found in the Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, (Book of the Major Classes) by Ibn Sa'd, Volume 2, [20], page 32.


      Then occurred the "sariyyah" [raid] of Salim Ibn Umayr al-Amri against Abu Afak, the Jew, in [the month of] Shawwal in the beginning of the twentieth month from the hijrah [immigration from Mecca to Medina in 622 AD], of the Apostle of Allah. Abu Afak, was from Banu Amr Ibn Awf, and was an old man who had attained the age of one hundred and twenty years. He was a Jew, and used to instigate the people against the Apostle of Allah, and composed (satirical) verses [about Muhammad].

      Salim Ibn Umayr who was one of the great weepers and who had participated in Badr, said, "I take a vow that I shall either kill Abu Afak or die before him. He waited for an opportunity until a hot night came, and Abu Afak slept in an open place. Salim Ibn Umayr knew it, so he placed the sword on his liver and pressed it till it reached his bed. The enemy of Allah screamed and the people who were his followers, rushed to him, took him to his house and interred him. 

     From a contemporary Muslim scholar - Ali Dashti's "23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad", [21], page 100:

     "Abu Afak, a man of great age (reputedly 120 years) was killed because he had lampooned Mohammad. The deed was done by Salem b. Omayr at the behest of the Prophet, who had asked, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?" The killing of such an old man moved a poetess, Asma bt. Marwan, to compose disrespectful verses about the Prophet, and she too was assassinated." 

     Prior to listing all of the assassinations Muhammad had ordered, Ali Dashti writes on page 97: 

"Thus Islam was gradually transformed from a purely spiritual mission into a militant and punitive organization whose progress depended on booty from raids and revenue from the zakat tax."

Here an aged man was apparently killed upon Muhammad's command. He was no apparent physical threat to Muhammad, and he did not urge people to commit violent acts against Muhammad or his followers. There was no discussion with Jewish leaders, no dialogue with Abu Afak, simply an apparent outright killing of one of Muhammad's weak and defenseless critics. The aged Abu Afak urged the people who lived in Medina to doubt and question Muhammad’s words and acts. Muhammad's sayings probably seemed strange and dictatorial to the old man, and he chided the Arabs that put their faith in Muhammad with satirical verses. Muhammad heard of this and viewed the 120-year-old man as a threat to his credibility, not to his life. Nowhere does it say that Abu Afak urged his fellow Arabs to attack or harm Muhammad. Yet, for creatively speaking his mind for the benefit of his friends, this man was killed. Further understanding can be gleaned from the last statement in Umama b. Muzayriya's verse: "Though I knew whether it was man or jinn …Who slew you in the dead of night (I would say naught)." 

     This statement displays that Muhammad’s henchmen knew exactly what they were doing. They knew it was cold-blooded murder that they were committing upon Muhammad's request. They also intended to keep it a secret, to hide their deeds from the populace at large, which is why Umama said he wouldn't reveal who murdered Abu Afak.


INCIDENT # 2 – The Murder of Asma bt. Marwan

     This incident immediately followed the murder of Abu Afak around 2 A.H. The incident involves Muhammad's request for his men to murder a woman named Asma bt. Marwan. 

 (Quoting from Guillaume, op cit, pages 675, 676,


      "She was of B. Umayya b. Zayd. When Abu Afak had been killed she displayed disaffection. Abdullah b. al-Harith b. Al-Fudayl from his father said that she was married to a man of B. Khatma called Yazid b. Zayd. Blaming Islam and its followers she said:

     "I despise B. Malik and al-Nabit

     and Auf and B. al-Khazraj.

     You obey a stranger who is none of yours,

     One not of Murad or Madhhij. [Note: Two tribes of Yamani origin]

     Do you expect good from him after the killing of your chiefs

     Like a hungry man waiting for a cook's broth?

     Is there no man of pride who would attack him by surprise

     And cut off the hopes of those who expect aught from him?"

Hassan b. Thabit answered her:

     "Banu Wa'il and B. Waqif and Khatma

     Are inferior to B. al-Khazraj.

     When she called for folly woe to her in her weeping,

     For death is coming.

     She stirred up a man of glorious origin,

     Noble in his going out and in his coming in.

     Before midnight he dyed her in her blood

     And incurred no guilt thereby."


      When the apostle heard what she had said, he said, "Who will rid me of Marwan's daughter?" Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, "You have helped God and His apostle, O Umayr!" When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, "Two goats won't butt their heads about her", so Umayr went back to his people.

     Now there was a great commotion among B. Khatma that day about the affair of bint [girl] Marwan. She had five sons, and when Umayr went to them from the apostle he said, "I have killed bint Marwan, O sons of Khatma. Withstand me if you can; don't keep me waiting." That was the first day Islam became powerful among B. Khatma; before that those who were Muslims concealed the fact. The first of them to accept Islam was Umayr b. Adiy who was called the "Reader", and Abdullah b. Aus and Khuzayma b. Thabit. The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B. Khatma became Muslims because they saw the power of Islam."


And from Ibn Sa'd's, "Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir" [op cit] volume 2, page 31:


      Then (occurred) the sariyyah of Umayr ibn adi Ibn Kharashah al-Khatmi against Asma Bint Marwan, of Banu Umayyah Ibn Zayd, when five nights had remained from the month of Ramadan, in the beginning of the nineteenth month from the hijrah of the apostle of Allah. Asma was the wife of Yazid Ibn Zayd Ibn Hisn al-Khatmi. She used to revile Islam, offend the prophet and instigate the (people) against him. She even composed verses. Umayr Ibn Adi came to her in the night and entered her house. Her children were sleeping around her. There was one whom she was suckling. He searched her with his hand because he was blind, and separated the child from her. He thrust his sword in her chest till it pierced up to her back. Then he offered the morning prayers with the prophet at al-Medina. The apostle of Allah said to him: "Have you slain the daughter of Marwan?" He said: "Yes. Is there something more for me to do?" He [Muhammad] said: "No two goats will butt together about her. This was the word that was first heard from the apostle of Allah. The apostle of Allah called him Umayr, "basir" (the seeing).

      Now, to sum this up and put it in perspective; Muhammad had al-Harith b. Suwayd b. Samit killed. This upset Abu Afak, so he spoke out against it. So, likewise, Muhammad had Abu Afak eliminated. This offended Asma bt. Marwan, and she spoke out against that deed she deemed evil. She encouraged her fellow tribesmen to take action against Muhammad. When Muhammad heard of what she had said, he had her killed also. 

      Further note: Hassan b. Thabit’s poem as a response to her: "Before midnight he dyed her in her blood and incurred no guilt thereby." Even here his closest followers were fully aware of Muhammad’s methods and understood that murder was allowed for Islam. There is nothing to refute that they had been murdering people all along, and Thabit rightly knew the she would be on Muhammad’s hit list quite shortly. And, true to form, Muhammad dispatched his followers to kill her. 

     Now, at first glance, this order to kill Asma might seem justifiable to some. Asma was calling for someone to kill Muhammad. But then, after all, he had been murdering her friends. But from Muhammad’s viewpoint it is understandable that he might be troubled by her call. It is obvious that peaceful folks who are no threat to their neighbors normally have no reason to fear, but Muhammad’s followers were practicing a hard-ball form of religion with no room for dissent or opposition. Today, gang leaders, organized mobsters, drug cartels, and other criminal elements are similarly upset by those who expose and speak out against their murderous activities. 

      So, let's look deeper at the event and examine the context of Asma's relationship to her tribe. 

 1) First, Asma has seen Muhammad in action. She had personal knowledge of several apparent cold-blooded murders. Of course, it seems reasonable by western standards that she should speak out against them.

 2) Second, her tribe was not under Muhammad's rule. Perhaps they had a treaty with Muhammad, perhaps not. Either way, this woman was apparently free by local laws and norms to speak her mind. If a treaty existed, and she was out of line, Muhammad could have complained to her tribe's leaders, and they could have commanded her to be silent or dealt with the situation.

 3) What's more noteworthy about this event is that after she was murdered, Muhammad said, "Two goats won't butt their head about her", meaning no one will care about her death. Obviously at a minimum her children, her family, and her friends felt differently, but that did not register as important to Muhammad any more than the value of her life as an unbeliever.  Also note, that there were already people from her tribe who had become Muslims. Certainly these people were not going to listen to her. 

      The point is: if no one of significance really cared about her being murdered, then no one really cared about what she had to say. Her people also knew about Muhammad having had Abu Afak murdered, and they didn't care about that either. In that light, it seems unlikely anyone take her seriously enough to listen and respond to her urgings to murder Muhammad, who was the leader of a powerful group of people. None of her own people were willing to put their lives on the line for her words.  Although her stand seemed justified and principled, it had insufficient local support, which Muhammad perceived. 

      The bottom line is that Asma bt. Marwan was not a legitimate threat to Muhammad. She didn't scare him, she was not the leader of her tribe, and she had little or no influence. She was little more than a nuisance to him. Yet Muhammad had her murdered, again, in premeditated cold blood. Were Asma and Abu Afak murdered simply because they rejected Muhammad, or were their deaths meant to serve as examples in order to dissuade other would be critics? In our day, what would a society based on law and individual rights call an organized group of people who murder civilians that sleep for the reasons and purposes outlined?


INCIDENT # 3 – Muhammad’s Conflict with and Attack upon the Jews of Banu Qaynuqa  

     Shortly after Muhammad arrived at Medina he had conflict with the Jews. There were a number of large and small tribes of Jews in and around Medina. The Banu Qaynuqa Jews were one of the larger tribes. Muhammad desperately wanted the Jews to believe in him, but almost all the Jews refused. The more learned Jews perceived immediately that Muhammad’s claim of being a prophet did not jibe with their traditions and earlier teachings of the prophets, and they quickly rejected him. Their rejection undermined Muhammad’s credibility because they had the "Scriptures", i.e. Torah or Old Testament. Thus, they were a threat to Muhammad and the theology he was in the process of establishing. From early on, there were very ill feelings between the Jews and Muhammad. As Muhammad’s power grew he began to confront the Jews. 

      Tabari places this incident with the Banu Qaynuqa as occurring in 2 AH.  To set the stage, we will start with a quote from the esteemed collection of Hadith by Imam Muslim. The name "Abu’l-Qasim" is another of Muhammad’s names. 

Sahih Muslim, op cit, Book 019, Number 4363: [NOTE: words in parenthesis are from the translator – Ahmad Sidiqqi].

 It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira who said: We were (sitting) in the mosque when the Messenger of Allah came to us and said: (Let us) go to the Jews. We went out with him until we came to them. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) stood up and called out to them (saying): O ye assembly of Jews, accept Islam (and) you will be safe. They said: Abu'l-Qasim, you have communicated (God's Message to us). The Messenger of Allah said: I want this (i. e. you should admit that God's Message has been communicated to you), accept Islam and you would be safe. They said: Abu'l-Qasim, you have communicated (Allah's Message). The Messenger of Allah said: I want this... - He said to them (the same words) the third time (and on getting the same reply) he added: You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I wish that I should expel you from this land Those of you who have any property with them should sell it, otherwise they should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle (and they may have to go away leaving everything behind). 

      Muhammad wanted them to submit to him. Note that the Jews rejected him and then how he threatened them: O ye assembly of Jews, accept Islam (and) you will be safe … 

      Notice how Muhammad’s declaration – "You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle," So, now Muhammad believed he co-owned the entire world with God.  Some might say that his ego had already gotten the better of him.  Also note that his intentions were well known with them – “You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I wish that I should expel you from this land.” The enmity between them had grown and Muhammad was looking for a way to rid himself of those disbelieving Jews that he considered a threat to his credibility. 

      The Banu Qaynuqa Jews were primarily goldsmiths, tradesman, and craftsman. They were on his bad side and he waited for an opportunity to deal with them. He did not have to wait long. His opportunity arose following a problem between some Muslims and Jews. There are a lot of details surrounding this incident, but for length’s sake we will limit our presentation. This incident is in and of itself a worthy subject for a separate in-depth investigation. However, what is important here is to display yet another facet of Muhammad’s inclination to violence. Even at this stage of his ascent to power, attacking and killing numerous innocent people seems well within his character. In the eyes of the devout then and now, those that opposed or disagreed with Muhammad also opposed and disagreed with God, and thus faced God’s wrath, expressed through Muhammad. 

     The entire set of details is not presented, save only those that pertain to the point. However, the source references from which those interested may look them up for study are; Sahih Muslim #4363 (cited above),  Guillaume, page 260, 364, 365,  Ibn Sa’d, volume 2, page 32 

  The summary of the incident:

      Muhammad and the Qaynuqa were at odds. They had rejected Muhammad and resisted his demand that they acknowledge his prophethood. Instead, they made fun of him and vexed him. They treated him as some  false, ridiculous, egotistical man who claimed greatness and prophethood. Naturally, Muhammad could not long tolerate them. 

     After Muhammad’s victory at Badr, he called the Qaynuqa Jews together and insisted that they acknowledge his prophethood, or, they would end up like the defeated Meccans (see the Sahih Muslim quote above). The Jews refused him, and stated they were ready to fight him if that was what he wanted. Muhammad received a "revelation" concerning the Jews – Sura 3: 12, 13. 

     Shortly thereafter, an incident occurred in a market place. A Qaynuqa Jew played a bad joke upon a Muslim lady leading to her humiliation. Her male companion killed the Jew. His friends in turn killed the Muslim man. This led to a confrontation between Muhammad and the Qaynuqa. Muhammad made no attempt to work things out with the Jews. Rather he received a visitation from a spirit named "Gabriel" – the same spirit that visited him for the first time in a cave (which caused Muhammad to attempt suicide). During this visitation, Gabriel gave Muhammad a revelation. The details come from the "Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir", op cit, vol 2, page 32:

Then occurred the ghazwah of the Apostle of Allah against the Banu Qaynuqa on Saturday, in the middle of Shawwal, after the commencement of the twentieth month from the hijrah. These people were Jews and allies of Abd Allah Ibn Ubayyi Ibn Salul. They were the bravest of Jews, and were goldsmiths. They had entered into a pact with the Prophet. When the battle of Badr took place they transgressed and showed jealousy and violated the pact and the covenant. Thereupon Allah the Blessed and the High revealed to His Prophet: "And if thou fears treachery from any folk, then throw back to them (their treaty) fairly. Lo! Allah loves not the treacherous". [Sura 8:58] The Apostle of Allah had said: ‘I fear the Banu Quynuqa’ but after this verse it is stated that he marched against them.  

      Now, Muhammad had the pretext to attack the Qaynuqa (the altercation in the market place), and Allah’s permission to attack them. He didn’t feel the need to work out the problems with the Jews; rather he moved to rid himself of them. Muhammad besieged them for about fifteen days; then the Qaynuqa Jews surrendered. Another additional key piece of information is provided by Ibn Sa’d:

     They shut themselves up in their fortress, so he (Prophet) strongly besieged them, till Allah cast fear in their hearts. They submitted to the orders of the Apostle of Allah, that their property would be for the Prophet while they would take their women and children with them. Then under his orders their hands were tied behind their backs. The Apostle of Allah appointed al-Mudhir Ibn Qadamah al-Slimi, of the Banu al-Silm, the tribe of Sa’d Ibn Khaythamah to tie their hands behind their backs. Abd Allah Ibn Ubayyi had a talk with the Apostle of Allah about them and entreated him (to release them). Thereupon he (Prophet) said: Leave them, may Allah curse them and curse him who is with them! He abandoned the idea of their killing and ordered them to be banished from Madinah.  

Another critical set of details, relative to my argument is provided from Guillaume, pages 363, 364:

      My father Ishaq b. Yasar told me from Ubada - …"when the B. Qaynuqa fought the apostle Abdullah b. Ubayy espoused their cause and defended them, and Ubada Samit who was one of the B. Auf, who had the same alliance with them as had Abdullah, went to the apostle and renounced all responsibility for them in favor of God and the apostle, saying, "O apostle of God, I take God and His apostle and the believers as my friends, and I renounce my agreement and friendship with these unbelievers.: Concerning him and Abdullah b. Ubayy, this passage from the chapter of the Table came down [2 – Sura 5:51]     "O you who believe, take not Jews and Christians as friends. They are friends of one another. Who of you takes them as friends is one of them. God will not guild the unjust people. You can see those in whose heart there is sickness, i.e. Abdullah b. Ubayy when he said, "I fear a change of circumstances." Acting hastily in regard to them they say we fear that change of circumstances may overtake us. Peradventure God will bring victory or an act from Him so that they will be sorry for their secret thought, and those who believe will say, "Are these those who swore by God their most binding oath?" [that they were with you], as far as God’s words, "Verily God and His apostle are your friends, and those who believe, who perform prayer, give alms and bow in homage," mentioning Ubada taking God and His apostle and the believers as friends, and renouncing his agreement and friendship with the B. Qaynuqa… 

     There are a number of issues to be dealt with in relation to this incident. As a side note it is interesting to look at the "pact/treaty" that the Muslim writers claim to have existed between the various Jewish tribes and Muhammad. An analysis of this so-called "Charter of Medina", or "treaty", done by A. Wensinch, "Muhammad and the Jews of Medina", [24], page 70, reveals that this "treaty" was really more of an edict issued by Muhammad upon the Jews, rather than what might today be considered a "treaty". Muhammad laid a burden of regulation upon the Jews, which they had to accommodate, and with which they were apparently in full compliance. What is important is that Muhammad was at odds with the Jews because they had rejected him, and after his victory at Badr, Muhammad now felt confident that he could threaten, and then move against them, despite the earlier assurances in the Charter made at a time when Muhammad’s forces were less dominant. 

     Accordingly, now occurred one of the more questionable and ugly actions committed by Muhammad against the Jews. The Jews shut themselves up in their fortress, then succumbed to the siege and submitted to the orders of the Apostle of Allah and agreed that their property would be for the Prophet while they would take their women and children with them. They were undoubtedly unhappy with both the earlier terms and the new surrender terms issued, but they resigned themselves to continue to follow the dictates of this powerful man and his forces.  

      The Jews surrendered to Muhammad expecting to be expelled, taking their families with them. However, as they surrendered, Muhammad ordered that their hands be tied behind their backs. Muhammad was preparing to massacre the males! It seems that they surrendered expecting acceptable terms, but now, when they were defenceless, Muhammad tied them up in preparation for a wholesale slaughter. Then, an interesting exchange takes place, which seems a further blot on Muhammad’s record. A pagan (Abd Allah ibn Ubayy, a recent convert whom Muhammad considered a hypocrite) confronts Muhammad and demands that the Jews not be massacred. Muhammad was challenged by a pagan to not commit the evil act, and in response Muhammad grew angered to the point where it was evident to all "shadows appeared upon his face".

Tabari records (Volume 7, page 86): 

      The Messenger of God besieged them until they surrendered at his discretion. Abd Allah b. Ubayy b. Salul rose up when God had put them in his power, and said, "Muhammad, treat my mawali well"; for they were the confederates of al-Khazraj. The Prophet delayed his answer, so Abd Allah repeated, "Muhammad, treat my mawali well." The Prophet turned away from him, and he put his hand into (the Messenger’s) collar. The Messenger of God said, "Let me go!" – he was so angry that they could see shadows in his face (that is, his face colored). Then he said, "Damn you, let me go!"  He replied, "No, by God, I will not let you go until you treat my mawali well. Four hundred men without armor and three hundred with coats of mail, who defended me from the Arab and the non-Arab alike, and you would mow them down in a single morning? By God, I do not feel safe and am afraid of what the future may have in store." So the Messenger of God said, "They are yours." 

      So, we see a pagan apparently shaming Muhammad to not carry out his brutal plan to murder 700 Jewish males. On this event alone, it could be argued that the pagan had more human compassion and a stronger sense of right and wrong, which is to say that his morality was superior to Muhammad’s by any standard. Islam considers that when a young boy begins puberty, that he is an adult, so these males were probably aged from 14 on up. Abd Allah ibn Ubayy was apparently a warlord or mercenary who for political, military, and/or economic reasons allied himself with Muhammad’s forces for this campaign.  It should be noted here that for whatever reason the pagan later wisely counted himself amongst the ‘believers’ (as apparently all who survived the march of Islam in those days had to in order to survive and prosper).  His share of booty was undoubtedly increased in this and subsequent actions after his ‘miraculous’ conversion. 

     Another similar minor incident occurred between ibn Ubayy and Ubada Samit. From Sir William Muir’s work "The Life of Muhammad", [25], volume 3, chapter 13, page 138 we read:  

     Abdallah upbraided Obada (they were both principals in the confederacy with the Cainucaa,) for the part he had taken in abandoning their allies, and aiding in their exile: -- "What! art thou free from the oath with which we ratified their alliance? Hast thou forgotten how they stood by us, and shed for us their blood, on such and such a day? "- and he began enumerating the engagements in which they had fought together. Obada cut him short with the decisive answer, -- "hearts have changed. Islam hath blotted all treaties out."  

      Samit Ubada had an alliance with the Qaynuqa Jews. They had stood together at one time, and shed blood to defend Ubada and his tribe, but, because of the conflict between the Muslims and the Jews, Samit broke his alliance with the Jews. And, accordingly, there was yet another "revelation" for Muhammad justifying and supporting this, which will be addressed further. 

      This incident is documented so readers do not think that Muhammad only had a few people occasionally murdered. The record demonstrates that Muhammad was prepared to eliminate anyone, individuals or entire tribes, who, in Muhammad’s mind opposed him. All that was needed was a convenient event or any statement of opposition and the requisite revelation was generated to justify pulling the trigger. 

These events, chronicled as they are, leads to some legitimate questions:

 1) If Muhammad and his followers were about peace, why didn’t he try to work things out between himself and the Jews? There was no diplomacy as it progressed from an incident, to a "revelation," to an attack. Obviously many nations and movements throughout history have suffered opposition from other nations and yet have not gone immediately to war, rather the norm is to try to work out misunderstandings. If Muhammad is an example for all mankind as claimed, why are his patience and peace making skills apparently so meagre?

2) Was it necessary to eradicate an entire tribe of people over an incident in which one Muslim was victimized after killing another? Is it reasonable that an entire tribe of people were destroyed by what was at the time the most prominent Members of a ‘peaceful’ religion?


INCIDENT #4 – The Murder of Kab b. Ashraf

     Muhammad continued to have problems with various people around Medina who refused to acknowledge his claim to prophethood. Kab b. Ashraf was a prominent local who made it known that he did not believe in Muhammad. Kab never lifted a weapon against Muhammad or any Muslim, he only voiced his opinion against Muhammad, and allegedly made up some unsavory poems about Muslim women. Muhammad saw him as a threat, and therefore, had him killed at the darkness of night. 

     Tabari states that this murder took place in 3 A.H.  

From Bukhari, op cit, vol 5, book 59,  #369:  [Note, this is a very long Hadith. Also note the actual killer in this Hadith is another man named Muhammad bin Maslama. I have referred to him as Maslama.]

 "Narrated Jabir Abdullah: "Allah's messenger said "Who is willing to kill Ka'b al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His apostle?" Thereupon Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's messenger! Would you like that I kill him?" The prophet said, "Yes". Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Ka'b). The prophet said, "You may say it."

Maslama went to Ka'b and said, "That man (i.e. Muhammad) demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) [taxes] from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you." On that, Ka'b said, "By Allah, you will get tired of him!" Maslama said, "Now as we have followed him, we do not want to leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be. Now we want you to lend us a camel load or two of food." Ka'b said, "Yes, but you should mortgage something to me." Maslama and his companion said, What do you want?" Ka'b replied, "Mortgage your women to me." They said, "How can we mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the Arabs?" Ka'b said, "Then mortgage your sons to me." They said, "How can we mortgage our sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people's saying that so and so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you."

Maslama and his companion promised Ka'b that Maslama would return to him. He came to Ka'b at night along with Ka'b's foster brother, Abu Naila. Ka'b invited them to come into his fort and then he went down to them. His wife asked him, "Where are you going at this time?" Ka'b replied, "None but Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Naila have come." His wife said, "I hear a voice as if blood is dropping from him." Ka'b said, "They are none but my brother Maslama and my foster brother Abu Naila. A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed."

Maslama went with two men. So Maslama went in together with two men, and said to them, "When Ka'b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when you see that I have got hold of his head, strike him. I will let you smell his head."

Ka'b Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing perfume. Maslama said, "I have never smelt a better scent than this." Ka'b replied, "I have got the best Arab women who know how to use the high class of perfume." Maslama requested Ka'b "Will you allow me to smell your head?" Ka'b said "yes." Maslama smelt it and made his companions smell it as well. Then he requested Ka'b again, "Will you let me (smell your head)?" Ka'b said "Yes". When Maslama got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions) "Get at him!" So they killed him and went to the prophet and informed him."

The story as told by Ibn Ishaq, op cit, page 365,

He [Maslama] said, "O apostle of god, we shall have to tell lies." He answered, "Say what you like, for you are free in the matter."

Thereupon he and Silkan [Abu Naila], and Abbad, and Harith, and Abu Abs Jabr conspired together and sent Silkan to the enemy of God, Ka'b, before they came to him. He talked to him some time and they recited poetry one to the other, for Silkan was fond of poetry. Then he said, O Ibn Ashraf, I have come to you about a matter which I want to tell you of and wish you to keep secret." "Very well", he replied. He went on , "The coming of this man is a great trial to us. It has provoked the hostility of the Arabs, and they are all in league against us. The roads have become impassable so that our families are in want and privation, and we and our families are in great distress. Ka'b answered, "By god, I kept telling you O Ibn Salama, that the things I warned you of would happen." Silkan said to him, 'I want you to sell us food and we will give you a pledge of security and you deal generously in the matter." He replied, "Will you give me your sons as a pledge?" He said, "You want to insult us. I have friends who share my opinion and I want to bring them to you so that you many sell to them and act generously, and we will give you enough weapons for a good pledge." Silkan's object was that he should not take alarm at the sight of weapons when they brought them. Ka'b answered, "Weapons are a good pledge."

Thereupon Silkan returned to his companions, told them what has happened, and ordered them to take their arms. Then they went away and assembled with him and met the apostle."

Thaur told me the apostle walked with them as far as Gharqad. Then he sent them off, saying, "Go in God's name; O God help them." So saying, he returned to his house. Now it was a moonlight night and they journeyed on until they came to his castle, and Abu Naila called out to him. He had only recently married and he jumped up in the bedsheet, and his wife took hold of the end of it and said, "You are at war, and those who are at war do not go out at this hour." He replied, "It is Abu Naila. Had he found me sleeping he would not have woken me." She answered, "by god, I can feel evil in his voice." Ka'b answered, "Even if the call were for a stab a brave man must answer it."

So he went down and talked to them for some time, while they conversed with him. Then Abu Naila said, "Would you like to walk with us to Shib al-ajmuz, so that we can talk for the rest of the night?" "If you like", he answered, so they went off walking together; and after a time Abu Naila ran his hand through his hair. Then he smelt his hand, and said, "I have never smelt a scent finer than this." They walked on farther and he did the same so that Ka'b suspected no evil. Then after a space did it for the third time and cried, "Smite the enemy of God!" So they smote him, and their swords clashed over him with no effect. Maslama said, "I remembered my dagger when I saw that our swords were useless, and I seized it. Meanwhile the enemy of god had made such a noise that every fort around us was showing a light. I thrust it into the lower part of his body, then I bore down upon it until I reached his genitals, and the enemy of God fell to the ground.

Harith had been hurt, being wounded either in his head or in his foot, one of our swords having stuck him. We went away, passing by the Umayya and then the Qurayza and then both until we went up the Harra of Urayd. Our friend Harith had lagged behind, weakened by loss of blood, so we waited for him for some time until he came up, following our tracks. We carried him and brought him to the apostle at the end of the night. We saluted him as he stood praying, and he came out to us and we told him that we had killed god's enemy. He spat upon our comrade's wounds, and both he and we returned to our families. Our attack upon god's enemy cast terror among the Jews, and there was no Jew in Medina who did not fear for his life.

Further note: On page 442 there is a descript poem part of which deals with Kab’s murder. The poem is composed by a Muslim, and this part says:

     … By Muhammad’s order when he sent secretly by night

     Kab’s brother, to go to Kab

     He beguiled him and brought him down with guile" 


     Ibn Sa'd's Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir provides us with yet another interesting artifact related to this story. From the Tabaqat, vol 2, page 37:  "Then they cut his head and took it with them. ..... they cast his head before him [Muhammad]. He (the prophet) praised Allah on his being slain."

     Note what happened here. Ka'b encouraged Muhammad's enemies, and made up some poems about Muslim women. Muhammad didn't like it, and had him murdered. To accomplish their action against Kab, Muhammad allowed them to lie to Kab in order to get him to lower his defenses and trust them. After they killed Ka'b, they beheaded him and brought the head to Muhammad. When Muhammad saw his head, he praised Allah for Ka'b being slain! Some obvious questions come to mind:

1) Did Muhammad abide by the treaty he had with the Jews? Was it right to dispatch men to commit the murder one of their leaders under cover of night using deceit and cunning?

2) What does this say about Islam’s view of non-Muslim laws? If Kab were a real criminal, couldn't Muhammad have dealt with him according to the local law or understanding he had with the Jews? Why is it that for the sake of Islam, no other law is binding?

3) What are the implications for any society? In effect, can Muslims murder in the night those who oppose them or Islam?

4) Are deceit and lies, when deployed against non-believers in the violent advancement of Islam, still acceptable behavior today? 


INCIDENT # 5 – The Murder of Ibn Sunayna

      Muhammad’s problems with the various Jews were not over yet. They had rejected him, which he could not tolerate. His animosity towards them seemed to be ever increasing. Just after the murder of Kab b. Ashraf, and before the battle of Uhud (3 A.H.), Muhammad ordered his followers to "kill any Jew that comes under your power".  Anti-Semitism is defined as; “an intense dislike for and prejudice against Jewish people”. By that standard, Muhammad could be considered Islam’s original anti-Semite.

From Guillaume, op cit, page 369:

"The apostle said, "Kill any Jew that falls into your power." Thereupon Muhayyisa b. Masud leapt upon Ibn Sunayna, 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.'" 

 This story is also supported in the Sunan of Abu Dawud, [26], Book 19, Number 2996:

 Narrated Muhayyisah: The Apostle of Allah said: If you gain a victory over the men of Jews, kill them. So Muhayyisah jumped over Shubaybah, a man of the Jewish merchants. He had close relations with them. He then killed him. At that time Huwayyisah (brother of Muhayyisah) had not embraced Islam. He was older than Muhayyisah. When he killed him, Huwayyisah beat him and said: O enemy of Allah, I swear by Allah, you have a good deal of fat in your belly from his property. 

     Yet another murder committed upon Muhammad's command. Note that Muhayyisa would have killed a family member at the drop of a hat. Here Muhammad, in his actions behaved not unlike a criminal boss, ordering his men to wantonly murder Jewish people. Hitler also did this, but in the name of Arian purity rather than in the name of a ‘religion of peace’. 

     A quote from an Islamic scholar – Wensinck, op cit, writes in, "Muhammad and the Jews of Medina", page 113:

 "It is remarkable that tradition attributes Muhammad's most cruel acts to divine order, namely the siege of Qaynuqa, the murder of Kab, and he attack upon Qurayzah. Allah's conscience seems to be more elastic than that of his creatures."..... Ibn Ishaq and al-Waqidi report that the prophet said the morning after the murder (of Kab Ashraf), "Kill any Jew you can lay your hands on." 

     This incident shows that Muhammad had unsuspecting people, those who even had good relations with Muslims, murdered in cold blood simply because they were Jewish. There was no other apparent justification to murder these Jews other than they were not Muhammad's followers. These actions were the work of Muhammad's henchmen committing murder at his explicit instruction. 

INCIDENT # 6 – The Attack against the Banu Nadir Jews

     Similar to the attack on the Banu Qaynuqa Jews, the attack on the Banu Nadir Jews arose from Muhammad’s desire for an opportunity to move against those that rejected his authority. Tabari (vol.7) states that this occurred during year 4 from the Hijrah. This event, like the attack upon the Qaynuqa has a large amount of detail, but we will only document the relevant portions for the argument at hand. However, the following references are provided should the reader wish to review the entire accounts. 

References: Tabari volume 7, page 156+;  Sahih Muslim,Book 19,  # 4324, 4347;  Sunan of Abu Dawud,  Book 14, # 2676;  Ibn Ishaq "Sirat Rasulallah" (translated by A. Guillaume) "The Life of Muhammad", pages 265 & 437+;  Ibn Sa’d’s, "Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir", Volume 2, pages 68–71;

"The Life of Muhammad", by Muir, found:

      This event, detained to show one aspect of jihad, also displays Muhammad’s unusual rational for attacking the Nadir.  The incident started when Muhammad visited the Banu Nadir to ask them to pay blood-wit – i.e. financial compensation, for a man who was murdered by one of their tribe. The B. Nadir agreed. While there, it is claimed that some of the Jews decided to kill Muhammad, by dropping a large rock upon him, from the roof of a nearby building. According to the sources, not all of the Jews agreed to attempt to kill him. However, Muhammad was given a "warning from heaven" (arguably from the so-called spirit Gabriel), that they were going to try to kill him so he quickly left the B. Nadir’s area. Following that, Muhammad attacked them. He laid siege to their fort. During the siege Muhammad ordered his men to burn down the Nadir’s date palm trees. This palm grove was very large and provided food and finances for the Nadir. As Muhammad destroyed their grove, the Nadir challenged Muhammad. 

The Jews took refuge in their forts and the apostle ordered that the palm trees should be cut down and burnt, and they called out to him, "Muhammad, you have prohibited wanton destruction and blamed those guilty of it. Why then are you cutting down and burning our palm trees?" 

      The Jews said this because previously Muhammad had told his men that they were not to destroy food trees. But here, the Jews saw that Muhammad contradicted himself and went against his own teachings. As a response, Muhammad has yet another timely revelation:

 "Whatsoever palm trees ye cut down or left standing on their roots, it was by Allah’s leave Quran 59:5.

 Tabari, op cit, volume 7, page 158 provides more details:

     When the Messenger of God’s companions returned they went to him and found him sitting in the mosque. They said, "O Messenger of God, we waited for you but you did not come back." "The Jews intended to kill me," he replied, "and God informed me of it. Call Muhammad b. Maslamah to me." When Muhammad b. Maslamah came, he was told to go to the Jews and say to them, "Leave my country and do not live with me. You have intended treachery." Muhammad b. Maslamah went to them and said, "The Messenger of God orders you to depart from his country." They said, "Muhammad, we never thought that a man of al-Aws would come to us with such a message." "Hearts have changed," he replied, "and Islam has wiped out the old covenants." "We will go," they said. 

And an interesting verse is now revealed. From the Sunan of Abu Dawud, op cit, Book 14, Number 2676. Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:

When the children of a woman (in pre-Islamic days) did not survive, she took a vow on herself that if her child survives, she would convert it a Jew. When Banu an-Nadir were expelled (from Arabia), there were some children of the Ansar (Helpers) among them. They said: We shall not leave our children. So Allah the Exalted revealed; "Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error." 

     In "The Quran and Its Interpreters", [27], volume 1, pages 252- 256, by Muhammad Ayoub, there are several differing Tafsir presented on this verse.  Ayoub presents Wahidi’s Tafsir.  Wahidi relates on the authority of Sa’id ibn Jubayr, who related it on the authority of Ibn Abbas:

"When the children of a woman of the Ansar all died in infancy, she vowed that if a child were to live, she would bring it up as a Jew. Thus when the Jewish tribe of al-Nadir was evicted from Medina [4/625], there were among them sons of the Ansar. The Ansar said, "O Apostle of God, what will become of our children!" Thus God sent down this verse." Sa’id ibn Jubayr said, "Therefore whoever wished to join them did so, and whoever wished to enter Islam did so likewise."  

      While Ayoub presents other Tafsir on this verse, some of them supporting the concept that people are not to be forced into Islam, the only Hadith from a Sahih collection that I’ve found is the one above. And that context has nothing to do with not forcing people into Islam, rather, it allows captured Jews some limited family options. More on this later. 

INCIDENT # 7 – The Murder of the Shepherd

      From Guillaume, op cit, page 673 an incident is detailed as occurring in 4 A.H. It involves another Muslim man named Amr Umayya, who was sent out by Muhammad to murder Muhammad's enemy Abu Sufyan. However, their assassination attempt failed. As he returned home, he met a one-eyed shepherd. The shepherd and the Muslim man both identified themselves as members of the same Arab clan. Prior to going asleep, the shepherd said that he would never become a Muslim. Umayya waited for the shepherd to fall asleep, and thereafter:

"as soon as the badu was asleep and snoring I got up and killed him in a more horrible way than any man has been killed. I put the end of my bow in his sound eye, then I bore down on it until I forced it out at the back of his neck."

Umayya returned and spoke with Muhammad. He relates: "He [Muhammad] asked my news and when I told him what had happened he blessed me".

     So, Muhammad blessed one of his men who brutally murdered a one-eyed shepherd while he slept. This shepherd did not assail Muhammad, but he did not believe in him. The shepherd did not invoke war against Muhammad. However, he wanted the freedom to choose his own faith and way, and he rejected Muhammad. Apparently, Umayya was determined not to return empty handed following his failure to murder the individual Muhammad targeted, and his selection of the handicapped Shepherd appears to be a random accident.  So, we see another person who didn't want to follow Muhammad, and another justified murder - simply for casually mentioning without malice that he did not intend to follow Muhammad. Muhammad's trail of blood continued to grow, a pattern very familiar to all who followed him then and now. 

Partial summary up to this point:

     We’ve covered a large amount of material, and should pause for a short review. We’ve gone about half way through the Quranic verses we intend to cover, and about half way through the last 10 years of Muhammad’s life. We have not covered all of the Quran’s verses related to Jihad, nor have we covered all of Muhammad’s violent actions. However, it should be obvious that shortly after Muhammad’s arrival at Medina the concept and allowance of shedding the blood of those that opposed or refused Muhammad’s rule was justified and ordained. Thus, as soon as Muhammad had military power to force his will on others he began to put it to use, to spread his domination by any and all means necessary

     We’ve seen that Muhammad had people murdered, and that he had tribes eliminated. Mothers, old men, friendly non-Muslim business men, handicapped shepherds, critics, freethinkers, all fell to his sword of death. He even would have massacred the adult males of an entire tribe of Jews, had not a pagan stopped him. Likewise he told another tribe (Banu Nadir) that they had ten days to leave or they would be beheaded. He allowed his followers to lie and deceive his enemies to murder them. We’ve seen him destroy the financial wealth of a tribe in order to defeat them. And those that followed Muhammad betrayed and broke former allegiances with friends and tribes in order to act against them. 

     After reading thus far, what should we think?  Is it becoming clearer why there are so many devout Muslims who also espouse violent methods against non-brothers?  Is it also becoming obvious why most Muslim peoples and nations are so feeble in their efforts to stop the extremists amongst them? In fact, the fastest and perhaps only way for Muslim terrorists in our day to be truly defeated, would be for them to first lose their grass-root local support, and then to be turned upon by ‘peaceful’ Islam, … but it appears that would be contrary to the teachings and philosophies of Muhammad.  Unfortunately, if true Islam, deep down actually supports the twisted rationalization behind terrorism, then our hope for effective help from the Muslim (so called moderate Muslims) community in the war on terror is not likely to succeed.




Chapter 8

Yet more Actions which Speak Louder than Words:


      We continue our review of the actions that Muhammad took. Talk is very inexpensive but actions are absolute illustrious. What else did Muhammad actually do as he came into power?


INCIDENT #8 – Muhammad’s Massacre of the Bani Qurayza Jews

     Muhammad lived among various Jewish tribes. He had issued an injunction or edict towards them expecting them to fulfil certain conditions related to living in Medina. One of these was that the Jews were not to help Muhammad’s enemies.


      During A.H. 5 (i.e. 626, 627 A.D.), an important siege / battle took place, "The Battle of the Trench". During this time, Muhammad’s enemies (Meccans and their allies), negotiated with the Jews of the tribe of Banu Qurayza to aid them against Muhammad. In the end the Jews did not betray Muhammad. They did not allow the Quraysh to use their land to launch an attack against Muhammad, and they did not attack Muhammad. Certainly they were not Muhammad’s best friends, having seen the brutalities and murders he had carried out against so many people.


     The Quraysh eventually lifted the siege and returned to their homes. Following that, Muhammad claimed that the angel Gabriel came to him and ordered him to attack the Banu Qurayza. (Notice that it is this spirit "Gabriel" at work again, motivating Muhammad to attack). By this time the Muslims were well aware that the B. Qurayza had negotiated with the Quraysh. Though the negotiations did not result in the feared alliance, still they were of great concern to the Muslims, and incited hatred towards the Jews. Sa’d b. Muadh, one of Muhammad’s top lieutenants, who was severely wounded during the Battle of the Trench (or the Battle of Ahzab), proclaimed that he did not want to die until he had seen the Jews destroyed. As the confrontation began, a Muslim who was on good terms with the B. Qurayza told them that Muhammad intended to massacre the Jews. Muhammad laid a formidable siege on the beleaguered Jews of B. Qurayza.


      Eventually, the Jews could not hold out and they surrendered. Muhammad picked out one of his men to judge their fate: the very same Sa’d  b. Muadh, who had made the previously mentioned death declaration, which undoubtedly Muhammad was aware of. Sa’d proclaimed that the adult males (any teenage boy who had started puberty, i.e. growing of facial/pubic hair, etc.) were to be beheaded, and, the women and children enslaved. Thus, Muhammad massacred around 800 prisoners of war and enslaved their women and children.


      The Sirat Rasulallah, op cit, page 464, records what one of the Jewish leaders said:

Huyayy was brought out wearing a flowered robe 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, 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.


      Muhammad massacred these men, not for making war upon him, not for aiding his enemies, but only because they were a threat to his further aims. They had rejected Muhammad and Islam, and they would not follow him as a prophet. Consequently, they would have to be removed. At this point in time, there were no more pagan leaders to plead for these Jews (as Ubayy had done for the Qaynuqa). There were no more Jewish tribes or allies nearby to lend them a hand, (they had all been expelled). Now Muhammad was free to do what appears he intended to do from the beginning: massacre those who threatened him and/or refused to become his followers.


      Apparently some of these Jews were given the option of becoming Muslims but they refused. From the only records available, only four Jews are recorded as having converted – obviously to save their own lives. The Jews believed Muhammad was a false prophet, hence their leader accepted their massacre instead of yielding to him.


     Edward Gibbon, in his classic history, “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” described the aftermath of the assault:

“Seven hundred Jews were dragged in chains to the market-place of the city; they descended alive into the grave prepared for their execution and burial and the apostle beheld with an inflexible eye the slaughter of his helpless victims. Their sheep and camels were inherited by the Musulmans: three hundred cuirasses, five hundred pikes, a thousand lances, composed the most useful portion of the spoil.”


     Gibbon was a respected historian and not some Zionist. But even the Arab’s own historians make no pretensions about their military conquests. There was no benevolence or spreading enlightenment as a motivation. It was all about rape and plunder. The History of Al-Tabari, written in the 10th century clearly outlines (pg 166, 175) the slaughter and pillaging and rapacious motivations of these forces. Even in recent history, the Arab tribes under the direction of Lawrence of Arabia weren’t motivated to attack the Turks for anything other than simple plunder and gold.


INCIDENT #9 – The Torture and Death of Kinana

     Previously we learned that Muhammad attacked the Jewish settlement of Khaybar following the treaty of Hudaybiyya. One particularly heinous incident among several stand out. Here is the material.

      On page 515 of Ibn Ishaq's "Sirat Rasulallah", (The Life of the Prophet of God), the events of the conquest of Khaybar are detailed. This event occurred about 3 years before Muhammad's death due to poisoning. Khaybar was a large Jewish settlement about 95 miles north of Medina. The Jews there were primarily farmers. Khaybar was known to have some of the best date palms in the region. The Jews there were well to do because they had worked hard and earned it. They had good relations with the surrounding tribes of pagans, Christians, and Jews.


     Prior to Muhammad's conquest of Khaybar, he had just been stopped by the Meccans from performing a pilgrimage to Mecca. Outside of Mecca, he also signed a humiliating treaty with the Meccans - a treaty that a number of his leading followers didn't like. This humiliated and embarrassed Muhammad and his followers, who then sought redemption in a different course of action. Apparently, to placate his men, Muhammad claimed to have a "revelation" that God would give them the possessions of the Jews of Khaybar. Six weeks later he marched on Khaybar with the intent to conquer and plunder.

      Page 515 of the above book reads:

   "Kinana al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of Banu Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came (Tabari says "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 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."

     Many might find Muhammad's orders to torture Kinana to obtain "buried treasure" similar to what criminals do to obtain people's money or possessions. It is not difficult to picture the organized crime figures beating someone or torturing him to make him talk. "Talk!, tell us where the money is!, or we'll make your pain even worse!". Finally, when he is near death, Muhammad has his head cut off. It appears that Muhammad's greed drove him to torture and then to murder a man for the sole purpose to obtain money and treasure.


      Think about Muhammad's statement, "Torture him until you extract what he has". This is the prophet of Islam in action when he had the power of the sword with no threat of external consequence. What kind of a man is this prophet of Islam, and what does this say about the people who choose to follow him, as all who do must also choose to justify and support all his deeds? Millions have gone to their death unwilling to risk their eternity on the man, an even greater number have hitched their wagons to his destiny.  It’s an age-old dilemma and choice still being forced on many throughout the world today.


INCIDENT #10 – The Murder of a Slave Wife and Mother.

     This incident involves a Muslim man who murdered his own slave-wife and mother of his children. From the Hadith of Abu Dawud [26]. Book 38, Number 4348: Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:

A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was informed about it.

He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.

He sat before the Prophet and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.

Thereupon the Prophet said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.


To continue to quote from Abu Dawud. Note #3800 states:

"This shows that even if a Jew or any non-Muslim abuses the Prophethe will be killed. This is held by al-Laith, al-Shafi'i, Ahmad, and Ishaq."

     Here we see here that Muhammad allowed people to murder others simply for insulting him. Note that a slave women, who was used as a concubine by her Muslim master, paid for her criticism of Muhammad with her life. The man murdered the mother of two of his children apparently in the presence of his young, and when the prophet hears of it he makes a special effort to sanction and justify the brutal act. It seems the opportunity to establish fear in the hearts of all should they disparage Muhammad simply could not be passed up.


     Now then, was that slave a threat? Were Muslims going to leave Islam because of a slave women's criticism? Of course not, she was only an irritant to her husband. But Muhammad could not tolerate for long any personal criticism. His ego could not allow his credibility undermined by anyone, no matter how insignificant and powerless he or she is; so he allowed and encouraged his followers to murder anyone who expressed different views. This incident also shows that Muhammad allowed his followers to even murder members of their own families.


INCIDENT #11 – The Murder of the Old Woman from Fazara

     This incident involves the actions of Muslims who were sent out by Muhammad on a raid against the Fazara tribe. The Fazara initially defeated the Muslims. The wounded Muslim leader swore vengeance. After he recovered he went out and attacked the Fazara again. One very old woman was captured. Here is the account from Guillaume, op cit, and page 665:

"....and Umm Qirfa Fatima was taken prisoner. She was a very old women, wife of Malik. Her daughter and Abdullah Masada were also taken. Zayd ordered Qays to kill Umm Qirfa and he killed her cruelly (Tabari, by putting a rope to her two legs and to two camels and driving them until they rent her in two.)


     Here, Muhammad's companions went out and attacked people, took some prisoners, then committed some brutal atrocities against their captives. These men were so destitute of basic human values that they ripped an old woman in half by using camels! One wonders how many Muslims are intimately acquainted with the record of brutal killings by Muhammad himself or explicitly ordered, sanctioned, and justified. Muhammad and his followers seem in every bit as brutal as the worst humanity has ever produced.


INCIDENT #12 – The Murder of Abdullah Khatal and his daughter

     This incident involves another slave woman who was murdered, upon Muhammad's command because she had mocked Muhammad some time earlier.  From Guillaume, op cit, page 550, 551:

"Another [to be killed] was Abdullah Khatal of B. Taym b. Ghalib. He had become a Muslim and the apostle sent him to collect the poor tax in company with one of the Ansar. He had with him a freed slave who served him. (He was Muslim). When they halted he ordered the latter to kill a goat for him and prepare some food, and went to sleep. When he woke up the man had done nothing, so he attacked and killed him and apostatized. He had two singing-girls Fartana and her friend who used to sing satirical songs about the apostle, so he ordered that they should be killed with him."


     Let's stop here and examine this paragraph. Muhammad ordered that a man who apostatized, and his two slave girls, be killed. Khatal was ordered to be killed not because he killed his male slave, a Muslim, but because he apostatized. Islamic law does not allow a Muslim man to be put to death for killing a slave. Muhammad also ordered two slave girls to be killed for singing satirical songs about him. They sung satirical songs about Muhammad probably at least a year or more earlier. Now, after Muhammad conquered Mecca, it was his time to pay those slave girls back. These slave girls were not threats to Islam, or to the new Islamic State, they were only ordinary slave girls. They were ordered to be executed only because they sang some silly song about Muhammad. Page 551 finishes the story of the slave girls:

"As for Ibn Khatal's two singing girls, one was killed and the other ran away until the apostle, asked for immunity, gave it to her."

     Needless to say, if the second slave girl did not ask for immunity, Muhammad would have had her murdered also. Muhammad had her sister killed just for poking a little fun of him in song. A sense of humor was apparently not one of Muhammad’s strong suits.


INCIDENT #13 – Muhammad’s Attack upon Tabuk

      There are many, other violent incidents that could drawn from Muhammad’s biography. We conclude the incidents section with this event because it shows Muhammad’s beliefs regarding Jihad and his mission of conquest for Islam. In one of his latest acts, it seems clear that Muhammad had no intention of living peacefully, side by side with non-Muslims, even with those who were far from his community’s borders. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that non-Muslims were his enemies because they had rejected him. As recorded in the Qur’an, non-Muslims had these options: become Muslim, pay extortion tax, or fight and die.



     Muhammad heard that the Romans were going to attack him. He marshalled 30,000 of his troops and they went north to the town of Tabuk to do battle with the Romans. However, upon arriving, they found that there was no threat at all. Instead, Muhammad sent a detachment to Ayla, to give them the afore-mentioned options: convert, pay the extortion tax - jizya, or die. The Christian leader there decided to pay tribute. Details of the incident can be reviewed at http://answering-islam.org/Books/Muir/Life4/chap28.htm, from which the following is extracted:

 "To John ibn Rabah and the Chiefs of Aylah. Peace be on you! I praise God for you, beside whom there is no Lord. I will not fight against you until I have written thus unto you. Believe, or else pay tribute. And be obedient unto the Lord and his Prophet, and the messengers of his Prophet. Honor them and clothe them with excellent vestments, not with inferior raiment. Specially clothe Zeid with excellent garments. As long as my messengers are pleased, so likewise am I. Ye know the tribute. If ye desire to have security by sea and by land, obey the Lord and his Apostle, and he will defend you from every claim, whether by Arab or foreigner, saving the claim of the Lord and his Apostle. But if ye oppose and displease them, I will not accept from you a single thing, until I have fought against you and taken captive your little ones and slain the elder.


      Think about what exactly is being said here; "Do what me and my associates tell you, give us your finest merchandise", "If my men are happy, I’m happy, pay me the money and you’ll be protected, upset me or them and your family will not be safe". Frankly, Muhammad’s words to John read like a script strait from "The Godfather".


Summary of the 13 incidents:

     We see how Muhammad’s attacks upon these people demonstrate his commitment to the teachings in Sura 9; "Make war upon the Christians and Jews, unless they convert or pay the extortion." Real Islam, i.e. Muhammad’s Islam, is clearly taught in the Qur’an, and demonstrated by Muhammad’s actions. Muhammad’s actions speak loudly here. Committed near the end of his life, they clearly portray what he wanted his followers to continue to do: attack and conquer non-Muslim people.  The vast majority of Islamic theologians today understand amongst themselves that these final acts and teachings abrogate all earlier, more conciliatory verses.  The fear of many is that the earlier, more tolerant versus are repeated for western consumption only, so that the frog might not notice how hot the pot is becoming until it is too late…


     Documentation shows many more people suffered a similar fate, but here is a summary of 10 individual murders committed upon Muhammad's requests or efforts just outlined.

1) Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish man who was murdered simply because he was a Jew
2) Abu Afak, a 120-year-old man, murdered while he slept
3) Asma Marwan, mother of 5 children, murdered while she slept
4) A slave women, mother of two children, murdered while she slept
5) A one-eyed shepherd, murdered while he slept
6) A very old woman literally ripped in half by Muslims who captured her in a raid
7) A slave girl, who was murdered because she poked fun at Muhammad

8) Murder of Kab Ashraf, a prominent local who did not believe in Muhammad

9) Murder of Ibn Sunayna (Jewish merchant on good social/business terms with Muslims)

10) The torture and death of Kinana, to extract money.


    If those descriptions shock you, consider that we are able to present the stories using the only source available, … the ‘Islamic friendly’ written history of the events. Now there are always two sides to every story, but the victims’ side in these cases is simply not available. One can only imagine just how far the truth may have been massaged to make the official record more palatable, or what additional important information has been omitted.  The only thing that is certain is that the official account was never at risk of being challenged, … dead people generally don’t talk too much. No one knows if other factors were at play beyond the data presented by those who wrote this history, but it certainly seems safe to say that we are not getting the full story. Even so, to most reasonable people, no further information is needed to deplore the actions of Muhammad and his followers in relation to those events. However, if we had the power to interview those people and get their perspective on the events, they would undoubtedly be understood to be even more deplorable and inhumane.



     Thus far information has been presented in a chronological sequence. The following chapter presents a small and limited selection of Qur’anic verses that relate to this books theme



Chapter 9

More Jihadic Passages from the QUR’AN:


     As we continue to review the Qur’an’s verses we will see them widen in scope of aggression and as we review Muhammad’s actions we will see what could only be described as a ‘trail of blood conquest’ extend. 

PASSAGE FOUR: SURA 2:190 - 192

     To be fair, the following verse is one often cited to Westerners in relation to Jihad, but it is also the first one that was revealed in connection with Jihad, and, unfortunately, it was subsequently supplemented (abrogated) by another (V9:36).

2:190. And fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allah likes not the transgressors.

 [To be rigorous, we repeat verse, this time from Dawood’s Koran, op cit, 2:190 ‘Fight for the sake of God those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love the aggressors.’] 

2:191. And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-al-Haram (the sanctuary at Makkah), unless they (first) fight you there. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.

2:192. But if they cease, then Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. 

     Two Muslim writers, Asad and Abdullah Yusuf Ali, both state that the chronology of this passage occurred around the time following the Treaty of Hudaybiyya. In Ali’s "The Holy Qur’an", [28], page 77, Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s commentary states, 

      This passage is illustrated by the events that happened at Hudaybiyyah in the sixth year of the Hijrah; though it is not clear that it was revealed on that occasion. The Muslims were by this time a strong and influential community. Many of them were exiles from Makkah, where the Pagans had established an intolerant autocracy, persecuting Muslims, preventing them from visiting their homes, and even keeping them out by force from performing the Pilgrimage during the universally recognized period of truce. This was intolerance, oppression, and autocracy to the last degree, and the mere readiness of the Muslims to enforce their rights as Arab citizens resulted without bloodshed in an agreement which the Muslims faithfully observed. 

     And Asad in "The Message of the Qur’an", [29], page 41:

     The reference to warfare in the vicinity of Mecca is due to the fact that at the time of the revelation of this verse the Holy City was still in the possession of the pagan Quraysh, who were hostile to the Muslims.

      If the Muslim’s chronology above is correct, then this passage occurred about 2 years before Muhammad conquered Mecca around the time of the Treaty of Hudaybiyya. This was prior to the conquest of Mecca by the Muslims and it sounds reasonable to me. A year or so after the treaty Muslims were allowed to make the pilgrimage but they did not rule Mecca or the nearby lands. The Muslims were strong now and capable of defending themselves, but they were not the supreme power in the region. So, Muhammad ordered them to defend themselves against the Meccan attacks, but not be aggressors because they had a treaty. However, outside of Mecca, Muhammad was free to attack tribes of non-Muslims that were not aligned with the Meccans, and this he did!

      Also note that the pact concluded between the Muslims and Meccans was not a "treaty" in the Western sense of the word. Rather it was a truce or cease-fire (i.e., an agreement of cessation of hostilities for a 10 year period). After 10 years, if nothing else had been concluded between the parties, they would be at odds again.

      Ibn Sa’d, op cit, records in volume 2, page 131:

      "…he [Muhammad] recited: We have given thee (O Muhammad) a signal victory [1]. He (Mujammil’) said: A person from the Companions of Muhammad said: O Apostle of Allah! is it a victory? He replied: By Him in Whose hand is my soul, it is surely a victory. He (Mujammi’) said: Then (the booty of) Khaybar was allotted to the participants of al-Hudaybiyah in eighteen shares. The army consisted of one thousand five hundred persons out of who three hundred were horsemen, and every horseman got two shares.

      Just six weeks after Muhammad concluded the Treaty of Hudaybiyya, he attacked and plundered the large Jewish settlement of Khaibar.  Let us emphasize two points relative to the Qur’an and Treaty of Hudaybiyya made with the Meccans. 

1)  They were to cease hostilities between themselves. i.e. the Meccans and the Muslims. Consequently, Qur’anic verse 2:190 says, "Fight for the sake of God those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love the aggressors."

2)     The Muslims were allowed to attack those groups that were not aligned with the Meccans. 

 Bukhari, op cit, volume 3. book 50, number 891: (Note: this is lengthy Hadith, only the relevant part is quoted)

 ……No doubt, the war has weakened Quraish and they have suffered great losses, so if they wish, I will conclude a truce with them, during which they should refrain from interfering between me and the people (i.e. the 'Arab infidels other than Quraish), and if I have victory over those infidels, Quraish will have the option to embrace Islam as the other people do, if they wish; they will at least get strong enough to fight.

      So, we see two classes of people here: 1) the Meccans and their allies, and 2) the polytheist tribes living nearer Muhammad. The treaty allowed Muhammad to attack the non-aligned polytheists, without having to worry about interference from the Meccans. Hence. aggressive Jihad continued against the polytheists near Muhammad’s lands. 

 [Note the jumbled chronology. From Baidawi’s commentary (tafsir) we see that 2:193 was revealed just after Muhammad arrived in Medina. This is about 8 years before chapter(Sura) 9 was revealed, and about 6 years before the verses above, 2:190 – 192 were revealed. 2:216, 217 and 2:193 occurred 6 years before verses 2:190 – 192, yet 2:193 was placed in the Qur’an to follow 2:190-192.]

      As previously quoted, the "Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cit, on verse 2:191 states:

      As Jihad involves death and the killing of men, Allah draws our attention to the fact that the disbelief and polytheism of the disbelievers, and their avoidance of Allah’s path are far worse than killing. Thus Allah says, "And Fitnah is worse than killing." This is to say that shirk (Polytheism) is more serious and worse than killing.

      In sum, verses 2:190 – 192 are defensive with respect only to the Meccans and their allies, and for a specific time (10 years). They are therefore limited in application and duration, and are not comprehensive towards all groups of people. Consequently, they cannot necessarily be applied to today’s Islamic theology or events of our time as evidence that Islam is not aggressive or merely defensive. Additionally, the consensus in Islam is that the verses are limited and in fact have been abrogated by more recent verses which have no ‘defensive’ constraints.


PASSAGE 5: SURA 9:1 - 7

9:1 Freedom from (all) obligations (is declared) from Allah and His Messenger to those of the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah), with whom you made a treaty.

9:2 So travel freely (O Mushrikun - see V.2:105) for four months (as you will) throughout the land, but know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah, and Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.

9:3 And a declaration from Allah and His Messenger to mankind on the greatest day (the 10th of Dhul-Hijjah - the 12th month of Islamic calendar) that Allah is free from (all) obligations to the Mushrikun (see V.2:105) and so is His Messenger. So if you (Mushrikun) repent, it is better for you, but if you turn away, then know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah. And give tidings of a painful torment to those who disbelieve. 

9:4 Except those of the Mushrikun with whom you have a treaty, and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfil their treaty to them to the end of their term. Surely Allah loves Al- Mattaqun (the pious - see V.2:2).

9:5 Then when the Sacred Months (the 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikun (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqâmat-as-Salât), and give Zakat, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

9:6 And if anyone of the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) seeks your protection then grant him protection, so that he may hear the Word of Allah (the Qur’an), and then escort him to where he can be secure, that is because they are men who know not.

9:7 How can there be a covenant with Allah and with His Messenger for the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) except those with whom you made a covenant near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah)? So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Mattaqun (the pious - see V.2:2). 

     Abdullah Yususf Ali’s commentary in his Qur’an, op cit, page 435, states that verses 9:1 – 29 were revealed during the month of Shawwal, A.H. 9, and read out by Hadhrat Ali loud to the various pilgrims in Mecca two months later to give Muhammad’s new policy a wide hearing. A. Yusuf Ali then states that the rest of the sura (30 – 129) were revealed months earlier than the first 29 verses, and sums up the lessons of the Prophet’s expedition to attack the Christian town of Tabuk (More on Tabuk later).

     Other Islamic writers state that, perhaps the first 40 verses of sura 9 were revealed, preceded by verses 41 to the end of the chapter. There are more differing opinions regarding the chronology and sections of passages revealed. However, all scholars extensively reviewed agree that the first 29 verses were some of the last verses spoken by Muhammad. 

      As previously stated, this passage was one of the very last to be spoken by Muhammad. The background for this verse is found in "The Life of Muhammad", op cit, page 617-619. It is a very long passage only partially cited.

      A discharge came down, [Muhammad received a revelation from God], permitting the breaking of the agreement between the apostle and the polytheists that none should be kept back from the temple when he came to it, and that none need fear during the sacred months. That there was a general agreement between him and the polytheists; meanwhile there were particular agreements between the apostle and the Arab tribes for specified terms. And there came down about it and about the disaffected who held back from him in the raid on Tabuk, [a Christian town Muhammad attacked, and forced them to pay him], and about what they said (revelations) in which God uncovered the secret thoughts of people who were dissembling. We know the names of some of them, of others we do not. He said (This chapter is a commentary on Sura 9) "A discharge from God and His apostle towards those polytheists with whom you made a treaty," i.e. those polytheists with whom you made a general agreement. "So travel through the land for four months and know that you cannot escape God and that God will put the unbelievers to shame. And a proclamation from God and His apostle to men on the day of the greater pilgrimage that God and His apostle are free from obligation to the polytheists," i.e., after this pilgrimage. So if you repent it will be better for you; and if you turn back know that you cannot escape God. Inform those who disbelieve, about a painful punishment except those polytheists with whom you have made a treaty," i.e. the special treaty for a specified term, "Since they have not come short in anything in regard to you and have not helped anyone against you. So fulfil your treaty with them to their allotted time. God loves the pious. And when the sacred months are passed, He means the four which he fixed as their time, "then kill the polytheists wherever you find them, and seize them and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush. But if they repent and perform prayer and pay the poor-tax, then let them go their way. God is forgiving, merciful. If one of the polytheists, i.e. one of those whom I have ordered you to kill, asks your protection, give it him so that he may hear the word of God; then convey him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know."

Then He said: "How can there be for the polytheists" with whom you had a general agreement that they should not put you in fear and that you would not put them in fear neither in the holy places nor in the holy months "a treaty with God and His apostle except for those with whom you made a treaty at the sacred mosque?" …

 Continuing a few paragraphs later on page 619:

      Then the apostle gave orders to fight the polytheists who had broken the special agreement as well as those who had a general agreement after the four months which had been given them as a fixed time, save that if any one of them showed hostility he should be killed for it….

 Continuing a few paragraphs later on page 620:

      Then comes the story of their enemy until he arrives at the mention of Hunayn [a battle site between Muslims and non-Muslims], and what happened there and their turning back from their enemy and how God sent down help after they had abandoned one another.

…Then He mentioned Tabuk and how the Muslims were weighed down by it and exaggerated the difficulty of attacking the Byzantines when the apostle called them to fight them; …

     Prior to this "revelation" of chapter 9, Muhammad had several; "agreements" with various Arab tribes. Some of these agreements were for a specified time. Others were general agreements allowing the pagans to visit the Kaba and perform their religious rituals. Some of these tribes were peaceful with him, others disliked him and caused him grief. Allah gave Muhammad a "revelation" allowing him to break all these various agreements, either immediately, or later. Thereafter he would attack them following the four sacred months. With notable exceptions, he would keep those treaties that were for a specified time with tribes that were on friendly terms. However, once those times were over, the state of aggression would be in place. Once again, Muhammad had gained power, and things changed. Now Muhammad was permitted to lie, i.e., break his agreements, and make war upon the pagans. Muhammad's circumstances changed - Allah changed, Islam changed.
     Note the last quoted paragraph,  ".....If one of the polytheists” (i.e. one of those whom I have ordered you to kill), is supposed to be God telling the Muslims to go out and kill people. Some of these people had gotten along peacefully with the Muslims. But because they didn't follow Muhammad they were going to be attacked sooner or later.

Sura 9:5 is the verse in the Qur’an that commands Muslims to attack and kill pagans:

"When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is forgiving and merciful."

       This passage if often quoted by some as proof that Islam is an aggressive religion. Some Muslims have responded that this verse was only directed towards pagan tribes that were at war with the Muslims. However, as the whole of the context is read, both in the Qur’an, and in the Sira, it is evident that defensive warfare is immediately allowed, but that offensive warfare would be taking place following the end of the four sacred months. [NOTE: The four sacred months are not sequential in the Islamic calendar, they are spread throughout the year, thus some writers have suggested that Muhammad gave the pagans about one year until Muhammad’s Islamic aggression was to commence.]

      Now to present a series of quotes From the "Tafsir of Ibn Kathir", op cit, volume 4.  

First in verse 9:5, page 375:

“But if they repent and perform the Salah, and give the Zakah, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful"

      Abu Bakr As-Siddiq used this and other honorable Ayat (verse or passage) as proof for fighting those who refrained from paying the Zakah. These Ayat allowed fighting people unless, and until, they embrace Islam and implement its ruling and obligations.

But then on verse 9:5, page 376:

So when the sacred months have passed… meaning, "Upon the end of the four months during which We prohibited you from fighting the idolaters, and which is the grace period We gave them, then fight and kill the idolaters wherever you may find them…

Then on verse 9:5, page 377:

This honorable Ayah was called the Ayah of the Sword, about which Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim said, "It abrogated every agreement of peace between the Prophet and any idolater, every treaty, and every term." Al-Awfi said that Ibn Abbas commented: "No idolater had anymore treaty or promise of safety ever since Surah Bara’ah was revealed.

     This passage is one that is primarily offensive. It does allow for defence if pagans attack the Muslims during the time of the treaty or sacred months, beyond that, it calls for offensive aggression against pagans if they exercise freedom of religion and remain non-Muslim. This is not a difficult passage to understand. Attack and kill the pagans, if they repent and become Muslims, leave them alone. Clearly, this passage calls for compulsion to Islam, claims otherwise are just plain dishonest.


 9:29 Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

     Again, first we turn to Ibn Ishaq, op cit, page 620, for the historical context of this verse. 

  Then He said (v. 28): "The polytheists are nothing but unclean, so let them not approach the sacred mosque after this year of theirs, and if you fear poverty" that was because the people said "the markets will be cut off from us, trade will be destroyed, and we shall lose the good things we used to enjoy," and God said, If you fear poverty God will enrich you from His bounty," i.e. in some other way, "if He will. He is knowing, wise. Fight those who do not believe in God and the last day and forbid not that which God and His apostle have forbidden and follow not the religion of truth from among those who have been given the scripture until they pay the poll tax out of hand being humbled," i.e. as a compensation for what you fear to lose by the closing of the markets. God gave them compensation for what He cut off from them in the former polytheism by what He gave them by way of poll tax from the people of the scripture….

      Again, quotes from Ibn Kathir on verse 9:29, op cit, pages 404 – 409:

 The Order was given to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah.

      This honorable Ayah was revealed with the order to fight the People of the Book, after the pagans were defeated, the people entered Allah’s religion in large numbers, and the Arabian Peninsula was secured under the Muslims’ control. Allah commanded His Messenger to fight the People of the Scriptures, Jews and Christians, on the ninth year of Hijrah, and he prepared his army to fight the Romans and called the people to Jihad announcing his intent and destination….

 Pages 405, 406

Paying Jizyah is a Sign of Kufr (Unbeliever) and Disgrace.

      Allah said, until they pay the Jizyah, if they do not choose to embrace Islam, with willing submission, in defeat and subservience, and feel themselves subdued, disgraced, humiliated and belittled. Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah or elevate them above Muslims, for they are miserable, disgraced and humiliated.

      To add support and insight from another Tafsir on 9:29. From the Tafsir of Al-Jalalein. i.e., Al-Jalalein Interpretation of the Koran.

     "Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, (which is Islam that abolishes all other religions) of the people of the Book, (meaning the Jews and the Christians ) until they pay the Jizya (the tax imposed upon them) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued. (with humiliation and submission to the government of Islam.) 9:29 ."

     A final reference for this verse – this was cited earlier in this article from the "Reliance of the Traveler."

      The Caliph makes war upon the Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians, provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax Jizya…in accordance with the word of Allah Most High:

 "Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and Hiss messenger have forbidden – who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been give the Book – until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled." 9:29

The Caliph fights all other peoples until they become Muslim….

     It is obvious: the order to fight and kill Christians and Jews is in verse 9:29. It is clear that Muhammad ordered his followers to fight those Christians and Jews to convert them or pay the Jizya, and if they don't convert or pay, they were to be killed. The message is unmistakably clear: convert... or pay in a state of humiliated submission, or die.

     Here again is the historical background for this is found in "The Life of Muhammad", op cit, page 620,

...."until they [the Jews and Christians] pay the poll tax out of hand being humbled", i.e. as a compensation for what you fear to lose by the closing of the markets. God gave them compensation for what He cut off from them in their former polytheism by what He gave them by way of poll tax from the people of Scripture."

      Muhammad consistently taught his followers to oppress or kill non-Muslims. Generally, Jews and Christians were allowed to live as such, provided they paid tribute (the Jizya tax). In this case, this tax was a revenue given to the Muslims to make up for revenues they lost from people who no longer dealt in pagan activities. If the Jews and Christians refused to pay this extortion tax they would have to convert to Islam or be killed.

     Also note that the tax levied upon the Christians and Jews was not to support the state in general affairs, it was to compensate the Muslims because they had lost revenue. It appears Muhammad acted not unlike a Mafia crime boss, making others pay for "protection". Truly, the Christians and Jews really did need protection from the followers of Muhammad in their day, and were compelled to pay tribute for their survival. 

     Read the last paragraph quoted from Ibn Ishaq again and notice Muhammad’s twisted logic:  if the Muslims were going to lose revenue, Allah would make it up to them by His bounty: the Muslims were to extort the money from the Jews and Christians! (Ref. to verses 9:28, 29). What does this say for Allah’s bounty? Did Allah need to take the money from Christians and Jews to give it to the Muslims? If Allah were really with Muhammad, why couldn’t the Muslims earn it themselves and generate their own livelihood? Was the direction truly from the loving and benevolent God of all men, or was Muhammad simply justifying thievery by applying it to God’s

     Notice the difference between 9:5 and 9:29  Earlier, non-Jews or Christians (idolaters or pagans) had to convert to Islam or be killed, generally they didn't have the option of paying the tax as did the more prosperous Jews and Christians. Only Later, in Islamic history were some pagans also given the option of paying Jizya to survive, but that was not Muhammad’s original order.

PASSAGE 7: SURA 9:30, 31

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

9:31 They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded [in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)) to worship none but One Ilâh (God - Allah) (none has the right to be worshipped but He). Praise and glory be to Him, (far above is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)." 

      From the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cit, page 408:

      Fighting the Jews and Christians is legislated because They are Idolaters and Disbelievers.

      Allah the Exalted encourages the believers to fight the polytheists, disbelieving Jews and Christians, who uttered this terrible statement and utter lies against Allah, the Exalted. As for the Jews, they claimed that Uzayr was the son of God, Allah is free of what they attribute to Him. As for the misguidance of Christians over Isa (Jesus), it is obvious. That is why Allah declared both groups to be liars. 

     Notice in verse 30 how Muhammad said, "May Allah’s curse be on them" – because Christians believe that Jesus is the Son of God. 

     These verses continue Muhammad’s tirade against Christians and Jews. Here he provides some of his reasoning for killing Jews and Christians: i.e., they believe that Jesus is the Son of God, or they believe that Ezra is the Son of God, thus making them polytheists. (Note, this is an apparent flaw in the Qur’an as there may have been a minor sect of Jews that greatly esteemed Ezra, or even believed that he was a son of God, but, Judaism has never declared Ezra to be the Son of God).

      All this goes hand in hand with some of Muhammad’s last words before he died: "May Allah curse the Christians and the Jews for they build their churches next to the graves of the prophets." 


9:123 O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who are the Al-Muttaqun (the pious - see V.2:2) 

     From the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, page 546, 547: The Order for Jihad against the Disbelievers, the Closest, then the Farthest Areas.

      Allah commands the believers to fight the disbelievers, the closest in area to the Islamic state, then the farthest. This is why the Messenger of Allah started fighting the idolaters in the Arabian Peninsula. When he was finished with them and Allah gave him control over Makkah, Al-Madinah, At-Taif, Yemen, Yamamah, Hajr, Khaybar, Hadramawt, and other Arab provinces, and the various Arab tribes entered Islam in large crowds, he then started fighting the People of the Scriptures. He began preparation to fight the Romans who were the closest in area to the Arabian Peninsula, and As such had the most right to be called to Islam, especially since they were from the People of the Scriptures. The Prophet marched until he reached Tabuk and went back because of the extreme hardship, little rain, and little suppliers. This battle occurred on the ninth year after his Hijrah. 

     Kathir’s commentary shows that the early Muslims understood what Muhammad expected of them. They knew that their religion was one of violence, compulsion, and conquest. There was no mystery in the minds of Muhammad’s followers regarding warfare to spread Islam. History shows that they attacked non-Muslims zealously. There in nothing in the Qur’an that ever tells them to stop attacking and subjecting non-Muslims, rather the direction is to continue until all the world is under Islam’s rule.

But what about the "NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION VERSE" so often cited today as proof Islam is a tolerant and accommodating religious movement? 

PASSAGE 9: 2:256

2:256. There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower. 


     This verse is the most often quoted verse used to portray Islam as a religion of peace. On the surface it sounds good. However, investigation into how the early Muslim scholars viewed it, and the background and comments they ascribe to it cast it in a slightly different light.

     From the Sunan of Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2676:  Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:

When the children of a woman (in pre-Islamic days) did not survive, she took a vow on herself that if her child survives, she would convert it a Jew. When Banu an-Nadir were expelled (from Arabia), there were some children of the Ansar (Helpers) among them. They said: We shall not leave our children. So Allah the Exalted revealed; "Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error." 

     From the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, op cite, pages 37, 38

      Allah says: "There is no compulsion in religion", meaning: do not force anyone to embrace Islam because it is clear, and its proofs and evidences are manifest. Whoever Allah guides and opens his heart to Islam has indeed embraced it with clear evidence. Whoever Allah misguides, blinds his heart and has set a seal on his hearing and a covering on his eyes cannot embrace Islam by force. 

      The reason for the revelation of this verse was that the women of Ansar used to make a vow to convert their sons to Judaism if the latter lived. And when the tribe of Bani an-Nadhir was expelled from Madinah, some children of Ansar were among them, so their parents could not abandon them; hence Allah revealed: "There is no compulsion in religion…" narrated by Ibn Jarir, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, Abu Dawud and an-Nasa’I, on the authority of Bandar, Abu Hatim, and Ibn Hiban from the Hadith of Shu’bah, Mujahid and others. However Muhammad Ibn Ishaq narrated that Ibn Abbas said: it was revealed with regard to a man from the tribe of Bani Salim Ibn Awf called al-Husayni whose two sons converted to Christianity but he was himself a Muslim. He told the Prophet: "Shall I force them to embrace Islam, they insist on Christianity", hence Allah revealed this verse. But, this verse is abrogated by the verse of "Fighting": "You shall be called to fight against a people given to great warfare, then you shall fight them, or they shall surrender" (sura 48:16). Allah also says: "O Prophet! Strive hard against the disbelieves and the hypocrites, and be harsh against them" (9:73), and He says, "O you who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are close to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who are the Pious, (9:123). 

     Therefore, all people of the world should be called to Islam. If anyone of them refuses to do so, or refuses to pay the Jizya they should be fought till they are killed. This is the meaning of compulsion. In the Sahih (al-Bukhari), the Prophet said: "Allah wonders at those people who will enter Paradise in chains", meaning prisoners brought in chains to the Islamic state, then they embrace Islam sincerely and become righteous, and are entered among the people of Paradise. 

      Ibn Kathir presents two different stories as reasons behind 2:256. The first story has nothing to do with compelling people into Islam. The second story begins to go against compulsion, but, Ibn Kathir then says that this verse was abrogated by the verse of "fighting" i.e. 48:16. I add that the only Sahih Hadith material I’ve been able to find on the matter (Sunan of Abu Dawud) supports the story of the expulsion of the Banu Nadir Jews. Thus, either way, compulsion of people to convert to Islam is allowed. 

     Ibn Kathir does say at the beginning of this quote: Allah says: "There is no compulsion in religion", meaning: do not force anyone to embrace Islam because it is clear, and its proofs and evidences are manifest. Whoever Allah guides and opens his heart to Islam has indeed embraced it with clear evidence. Whoever Allah misguides, blinds his heart and has set a seal on his hearing and a covering on his eyes cannot embrace Islam by force. But he goes on to contradict himself later in the next two paragraphs.


 FOR THE RECORD – Who exactly was/is compelled to accept Islam? 

     Since Muslim spokesman in the West frequently say that Islam forbids compulsion of conversion to Islam (2:256), we feel it is necessary to provide here historical references that show otherwise. Based upon the material, the story of the expulsion of the Banu Nadir Jews is the cause of the "revelation" of 2:256. Thus, the verse does not have anything to do whatsoever with forcing people to accept Islam. And, as we read elsewhere in the Qur’an, Muhammad taught that his followers were to make war upon people who choose not to convert to Islam. 

      Here are some historical references behind forced conversion to Islam. Note that they are taken from Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasulallah, op cit. 

 #1) On pages 668 and 669 Abu Bakr instructs a fellow Muslim in Islam. He states: "You asked me for the best advice that I could give you, and I will tell you. God sent Muhammad with this religion and he strove for it until men accepted it voluntary or by force."

 #2) On page 547, Muhammad’s arch enemy, Abu Sufyan was given safe passage by Ibn Abbas to meet with Muhammad. During the meeting, the following conversation occurs:

      "Woe to you, Abu Sufyan, isn’t it time that you recognize that I [Muhammad] am God’s apostle?" He answered, "As to that I still have some doubt."

      I [Ibn Abbas] 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.

     Abu  Sufyan did not intend to recognize Muhammad until he was threatened with his life. This is a clear case of compulsion of accepting Islam: convert or die.

#3) On pages 614, 615, Muhammad’s attack upon the people of Thaqif (who were hostile to Muhammad) is detailed. In them it states that they submitted to the demands of Muhammad, their reasoning for doing so was this:

      "We are in an impasse. You have seen how the affair of this man has progressed. All the Arabs have accepted Islam and you lack the power to fight them, so look to your case." Thereupon Thaqif took counsel and said one to another, "Don’t you see that your herds are not safe; none of you can go out without being cut off." So after conferring together they decided to send a man to the apostle as they had sent Urwa [to accept Islam so that they and their possessions would be safe from being plundered and killed by the Muslims].

      These people did not become Muslim because they wanted to. They had been invited to Islam and they refused. They had even killed the Muslim envoy! However, because they were outgunned and outnumbered, they decided, If you can’t beat them, join them. Thus their conversion was a sham, and made under compulsion.

#4) On page 645 the story of Muhammad’s emissary Khalid to the tribe of the Banu al-Harith bin Ka’b in the region of Najran is described. Muhammad…. ordered him [Khalid] to invite them to Islam three days before he attacked them. If they accepted then he was to accept it from them; and if they declined he was to fight them. So Khalid sent out and came to them, and sent out riders in all directions inviting the people to Islam, saying, "If you accept Islam you will be safe," so the men accepted Islam as they were invited.

      People were converting to Islam simply because they were threatened. Notice Khalid’s words – "If you accept Islam you will be safe." Is this the type of religion that people truly desire, one that threatens them with death unless they convert? 

     Probably few Muslims today understand that that their recent or distant ancestors entered Islam at sword point. Except for a few who joined for personal gains, probably most people were forced to accepting Islam solely for the purpose of survival for themselves and their children.  Probably, all of those so forced hoped and longed for the opportunity to escape the grip of Islam, but the grip of Islam on families, neighborhoods, and nations is very  tight indeed. Dreams of freedom became sad resignation, and after a generation or two none remember or recite the old hopes and dreams.  It is interesting to note that Islam today is made up from what essentially is a conscripted army.  Islamic efforts to make that army tow the official line and become more responsive and obedient warriors (terrorists) continue to this day. Calls to arms and Jihad seem constantly issued from various sources, and there seems to be a new crop of recently indoctrinated energetic young people ready to answer the call to prove their devotion, and to make their teachers and family proud. Those who respond are also enthralled by the promise of glory, luxuries, and virgins in the next life.  Properly incited, they depart on their dangerous journeys knowing nothing about the root causes and circumstances of their ancestral parents forced conversion.  Their father’s, father’s father and an entire previous lineage cry from the dust lamenting the choices of their prodigy, but are unable to speak to the hearts so filled with hatred and blood-lust. It is a huge tragedy and travesty spanning generations with little hope of redemption.



Chapter 10

Actions of the four "Rightly Guided" Caliphs:


      Previously it was mentioned we would review the actions of some of Muhammad’s closest companions, particularly the four "rightly guided" caliphs. The rightly guided Caliphs were the rulers of the Islamic Empire after Muhammad’s death. Following Muhammad’s death, these men reigned over Islamic lands, each one after the death of the previous one. These men are: Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali (Muhammad’s son-in-law). Below is a brief timeline of some of their actions and conquests. We do not have detailed information of all their military actions, … they are too numerous. This information is drawn from various volumes of the History of Tabari, op cit, the "History of Islam", by Robert Payne, [32], and "Jihad", by Paul Fregosi, [33]. These books will provide a much fuller account of the offensive Islamic crusades. Of important significance: it should be noted that these conquests were not defensive in nature, but offensive. These men were conquering the world for Islam – exactly as Muhammad instructed. We should also add that during Ali’s reign, Islamic conquests paused slightly. The Islamic empire experienced its first civil wars during Ali’s reign, (all this within a generation of Muhammad’s death). 

     Note that these Caliphs are called ‘rightly guided’, as opposed to ‘wrongly guided’.  This is because of the Universal recognition that they always acted in full compliance of true Islam (or Real Islam) as guided by Muhammad’s final and clear teachings and example. 


A.H. 11 (622, 623) Abu Bakr makes war upon the people of Yamana who wished to leave Islam

A.H. 12 Muslim armies attack the Christians in Palestine


A.H. 13 The conquest of Damascus, Syria

A.H. 14 & 15 Syria and Palestine conquered

A.H. 15 – 21 Iraq, Southern Persia, and Egypt conquered


A.H. 24 The conquests in Northern Persia and Armenia

A.H. 28  The Attack on Cyprus


      During Ali’s reign there were two civil wars. The first Islamic civil war occurred between Ali, Muhammad’s son-in-law, and Aisha, (Abu Bakr’s daughter, a child, Muhammad consummated a marriage with when she was 9 years old). 

     13,000 Muslims died killing each other as Ali defeated Aisha. Not long thereafter, Ali fought Muwawiyya, Abu Sufyan’s son. Muwawiyya was appointed governor of Damascus / Syria, and moved against Ali to take power. In the end, Ali won out as the two sides negotiated a peace of some sorts. Not long thereafter, Ali was murdered by Muslims, (as was Uthman), (Umar was killed by a slave). Muwawiyya then assumed power as Caliph. 

     As you can tell from the brief chronology, the Caliphs made war like the Nazis. They went on conquest after conquest. Their message was the same as Muhammad’s: convert, pay extortion taxes, or die. Islam, Real Islam, their Islam, was a religion of terror, war, oppression, and conquest. 

      Below are Hadith dealing with the conquests and subjections of the Caliphs. 

Bukhari  vol.4, book 53, number 386:   Narrated Jubair bin Haiya:

'Umar sent the Muslims to the great countries to fight the pagans. When Al-Hurmuzan embraced Islam, 'Umar said to him. "I would like to consult you regarding these countries which I intend to invade." Al-Hurmuzan said, "Yes, the example of these countries and their inhabitants who are the enemies of the Muslims, is like a bird with a head, two wings and two legs; If one of its wings got broken, it would get up over its two legs, with one wing and the head; and if the other wing got broken, it would get up with two legs and a head, but if its head got destroyed, then the two legs, two wings and the head would become useless. The head stands for Khosrau, and one wing stands for Caesar and the other wing stands for Faris. So, order the Muslims to go towards Khosrau." So, 'Umar sent us (to Khosrau) appointing An-Numan bin Muqrin as our commander. When we reached the land of the enemy, the representative of Khosrau came out with forty-thousand warriors, and an interpreter got up saying, "Let one of you talk to me!" Al-Mughira replied, "Ask whatever you wish." The other asked, "Who are you?" Al-Mughira replied, "We are some people from the Arabs; we led a hard, miserable, disastrous life: we used to suck the hides and the date stones from hunger; we used to wear clothes made up of fur of camels and hair of goats, and to worship trees and stones. While we were in this state, the Lord of the Heavens and the Earths, Elevated is His Remembrance and Majestic is His Highness, sent to us from among ourselves a Prophet whose father and mother are known to us. Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says:-- "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master." (Al-Mughira, then blamed An-Numan for delaying the attack and) An-Nu' man said to Al-Mughira, "If you had participated in a similar battle, in the company of Allah's Apostle he would not have blamed you for waiting, nor would he have disgraced you. But I accompanied Allah's Apostle in many battles and it was his custom that if he did not fight early by daytime, he would wait till the wind had started blowing and the time for the prayer was due (i.e. after midday)." 

Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0029:

It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) breathed his last and Abu Bakr was appointed as his successor (Caliph), those amongst the Arabs who wanted to become apostates became apostates. 'Umar b. Khattab said to Abu Bakr: Why would you fight against the people, when the Messenger of Allah declared: I have been directed to fight against people so long as they do not say: There is no god but Allah, and he who professed it was granted full protection of his property and life on my behalf except for a right? His (other) affairs rest with Allah. Upon this Abu Bakr said: By Allah, I would definitely fight against him who severed prayer from Zakat, for it is the obligation upon the rich. By Allah, I would fight against them even to secure the cord (used for hobbling the feet of a camel) which they used to give to the Messenger of Allah (as zakat) but now they have withheld it. Umar b. Khattab remarked: By Allah, I found nothing but the fact that Allah had opened the heart of Abu Bakr for (perceiving the justification of) fighting (against those who refused to pay Zakat) and I fully recognized that the (stand of Abu Bakr) was right.



     We’ve examined many verses from the Quran, and associated context from Sira and Hadith, along with commentaries from Islamic scholars regarding violence and jihad. We also put together a list of violent incidents that demonstrate various facets of Islamic jihad. Below is a long selection of Hadith regarding violence and jihad. I add this to widen the reader’s understanding of Islamic jihad and violence. In some cases I will not quote the Hadith in full because of the length of the Hadith. Most of these Hadith are available on the internet and can be downloaded for free. As you read these below, allow me to inject this question: "What is Muhammad’s fundamental position towards the use of violence to further Islam?" [NOTE. Most of these Hadith come from the collections of Bukhari and Muslim. These two collections are regarded as absolutely reliable and truthful to the Sunni branch of Islam (85% of the Islamic world is Sunni). The collection of Abu Dawud is also held is high esteem, but not as highly as the other two]. 

Sahih Muslim, Book 007, Number 3200:

Sufyan b. Abd Zuhair reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Syria will be conquered and some people will go out of Medina along with their families driving their camels. and Medina is better for them if they were to know it. Then Yemen will be conquered and some people will go out of Medina along with their families driving their camels, and Medina is better for them if they were to know it. Then Iraq will be conquered and some people will go out of it along with their families driving their camels, and Medina is better for them if they were to know it.


Sahih Bukhari, vol. 4, book 52, number175:

Narrated Khalid bin Madan:

That 'Umair bin Al-Aswad Al-Anasi told him that he went to 'Ubada bin As-Samit while he was staying in his house at the sea-shore of Hims with (his wife) Um Haram. 'Umair said. Um Haram informed us that she heard the Prophet saying, "Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition." Um Haram added, I said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Will I be amongst them?' He replied, 'You are amongst them.' The Prophet then said, 'The first army amongst' my followers who will invade Caesar's City will be forgiven their sins.' I asked, 'Will I be one of them, O Allah's Apostle?' He replied in the negative." 

Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4294:

"It has been reported from Sulaiman b. Buraid through his father that when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him to fear Allah and to be good to the Muslims who were with him. He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war, do not embezzle the spoils; do not break your pledge; and do not mutilate (the dead) bodies; do not kill the children. When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. Then invite them to migrate from their lands to the land of Muhairs and inform them that, if they do so, they shall have all the privileges and obligations of the Muhajirs. If they refuse to migrate, tell them that they will have the status of Bedouin Muslims and will be subjected to the Commands of Allah like other Muslims, but they will not get any share from the spoils of war or Fai' except when they actually fight with the Muslims (against the disbelievers). If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them…."




Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4321:

It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them. 

Bukhari vol. 4, book 52, number.256:

Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama:

The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle." 


Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Number 4645:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Sa'id Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said (to him): Abu Sa'id, whoever cheerfully accepts Allah as his Lord, Islam as his religion and Muhammad as his Apostle is necessarily entitled to enter Paradise. He (Abu Sa'id) wondered at it and said: Messenger of Allah, repeat it for me. He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah! 

Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Number 4646:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Qatada that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) stood up among them (his Companions) to deliver his sermon in which he told them that Jihad in the way of Allah and belief in Allah (with all His Attributes) are the most meritorious of acts. A man stood up and said: Messenger of Allah, do you think that if I am killed in the way of Allah, my sins will be blotted out from me? The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Yes, in case you are killed in the way of Allah and you were patient and sincere and you always fought facing the enemy, never turning your back upon him. Then he added: What have you said (now)? (Wishing to have further assurance from him for his satisfaction), he asked (again): Do you think if I am killed in the way of Allah, all my sins will be obliterated from me? The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Yes, it you were patient and sincere and always fought facing the enemy and never turning your back upon him, (all your lapses would be forgiven) except debt. Gabriel has told me this. 


Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Number 4681:

The tradition has been narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah b. Qais. He heard it from his father who, while facing the enemy, reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: Surely, the gates of Paradise are under the shadows of the swords. A man in a shabby condition got up and said; Abu Musa, did you hear the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say this? He said: Yes. (The narrator said): He returned to his friends and said: I greet you (a farewell greeting). Then he broke the sheath of his sword, threw it away, advanced with his (naked) sword towards the enemy and fought (them) with it until he was slain. 

Bukhari vol.4, book 52, munber 266A:

Narrated Salim Abu An-Nadr:

(the freed slave of 'Umar bin 'Ubaidullah) I was Umar's clerk. Once Abdullah bin Abi Aufa wrote a letter to 'Umar when he proceeded to Al-Haruriya. I read in it that Allah's Apostle in one of his military expeditions against the enemy, waited till the sun declined and then he got up amongst the people saying O people! Do not wish to meet the enemy, and ask Allah for safety, but when you face the enemy, be patient, and remember that Paradise is under the shades of swords.", " Then he said, "O Allah, the Revealer of the Holy Book, and the Mover of the clouds and the Defeater of the clans, defeat them, and grant us victory over them." 

Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4324:

It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be burnt and cut. These palms were at Buwaira. Qutaibah and Ibn Rumh in their versions of the tradition have added: So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed the verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks, it was with the permission of Allah so that He may disgrace the evil-doers" (lix. 5). 

Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Number 4597:

It has been narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Abbas that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said on the day of the Conquest of Mecca: There is no Hijra now, but (only) Jihad (fighting for the cause of Islam) and sincerity of purpose (have great reward) ; when you are asked to set out (on an expedition undertaken for the cause of Islam) you should (readily) do so. 

Bukhari vol. 4, book 52, number 79:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

On the day of the Conquest (of Mecca) the Prophet said, "There is no emigration after the Conquest but Jihad and intentions. When you are called (by the Muslim ruler) for fighting, go forth immediately." (See Hadith No. 42) 

Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Number 4626:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah (may peace upon him) said: Allah has undertaken to look after the affairs of one who goes out to fight in His way believing in Him and affirming the truth of His Apostles. He is committed to His care that He will either admit him to Paradise or bring him back to his home from where he set out with a reward or (his share of) booty. …By, the Being in Whose Hand is Muhammad's life, if it were not to be too hard upon the Muslims. I would not lag behind any expedition which is going to fight in the cause of Allah. But I do not have abundant means to provide them (the Mujahids) with riding beasts, nor have they (i. e. all of them) abundant means (to provide themselves with all the means of Jihad) so that they could he left behind. By the Being in Whose Hand is Muhammad, I love to fight in the way of Allah and be killed, to fight and again be killed and to fight again and be killed. 

Sahih Muslim, Book 020, Number 4652:

It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Sa'id Khudri that a man came to the Holy Prophet (may peace he upon him) and said: Who is the best of men? He replied: A man who fights in the way of Allah spending his wealth and staking his life. The man then asked: Who is next to him (in excellence)? He said: Next to him is a believer who lives in a mountain gorge worshipping hid Lord and sparing men from his mischief.

Bukhari  vol. 4, book  52, number 177:

 Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him." 

Bukhari vol. 4, book 52, number 180:   Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "The Hour will not be established till you fight with people wearing shoes made of hair. And the Hour will not be established till you fight with people whose faces look like shields coated with leather. " (Abu Huraira added, "They will be) small-eyed, flat nosed, and their faces will look like shields coated with leather.")

 (The text note says these people are the Turks).


Bukhari vol. 4, book 53, number 355: 

Narrated Abu Musa Al-Ashari:

A Bedouin asked the Prophet, "A man may fight for the sake of booty, and another may fight so that he may be mentioned by the people, and a third may fight to show his position (i.e. bravery); which of these regarded as fighting in Allah's Cause?" The Prophet said, "He who fights so that Allah's Word (i.e. Islam) should be superior, fights for Allah's Cause." 

Bukhari vol. 4, book 52, number 41:

Narrated Abdullah bin Masud:

I asked Allah's Apostle, "O Allah's Apostle! What is the best deed?" He replied, "To offer the prayers at their early stated fixed times." I asked, "What is next in goodness?" He replied, "To be good and dutiful to your parents." I further asked, what is next in goodness?" He replied, "To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause." I did not ask Allah's Apostle anymore and if I had asked him more, he would have told me more. 

Bukhari vol. 4, book 56, number 792:

 Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

The Prophet said, "A time will come when the people will wage holy war, and it will be asked, 'Is there any amongst you who has enjoyed the company of Allah's Apostle?' They will say: 'Yes.' And then victory will be bestowed upon them. They will wage holy war again, and it will be asked: 'Is there any among you who has enjoyed the company of the companions of Allah's Apostle ?' They will say: 'Yes.' And then victory will be bestowed on them."


Bukhari vol. 6, book 60, number 493:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

'Umar asked the people regarding Allah's Statement:

'When comes the Help of Allah (to you O Muhammad against your enemies) and the conquest of Mecca.' (110.1) They replied, "It indicates the future conquest of towns and palaces (by Muslims)." 'Umar said, "What do you say about it, O Ibn 'Abbas?" I replied, "(This Surat) indicates the termination of the life of Muhammad. Through it he was informed of the nearness of his death." 

Bukhari vol.1, book 8, number 387:

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."

 Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2635:

Narrated Anas ibn Malik:

The Prophet said: I am commanded to fight with men till they testify that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is His servant and His Apostle, face our qiblah (direction of prayer), eat what we slaughter, and pray like us. When they do that, their life and property are unlawful for us except what is due to them. They will have the same rights as the Muslims have, and have the same responsibilities as the Muslims have.


Bukhari vol. 5, book 59, number 568:

Narrated Usama bin Zaid:

Allah's Apostle sent us towards Al-Huruqa, and in the morning we attacked them and defeated them.  

Bukhari vol. 5, book 59, number.641:

Narrated Jarir:

In the Pre-Islamic Period of Ignorance there was a house called Dhu-l-Khalasa or Al-Ka'ba Al-Yamaniya or Al-Ka'ba Ash-Shamiya. The Prophet said to me, "Won't you relieve me from Dhu-l-Khalasa?" So I set out with one-hundred-and-fifty riders, and we dismantled it and killed whoever was present there. Then I came to the Prophet and informed him, and he invoked good upon us and Al-Ahmas (tribe). 

Bukhari vol. 5, book 59, number 716:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:

Thursday! And how great that Thursday was! The ailment of Allah's Apostle became worse (on Thursday) and he said, fetch me something so that I may write to you something after which you will never go astray." The people (present there) differed in this matter, and it was not right to differ before a prophet. Some said, "What is wrong with him ? (Do you think ) he is delirious (seriously ill)? Ask him ( to understand his state )." So they went to the Prophet and asked him again. The Prophet said, "Leave me, for my present state is better than what you call me for." Then he ordered them to do three things. He said, "Turn the pagans out of the 'Arabian Peninsula; respect and give gifts to the foreign delegations as you have seen me dealing with them." (Said bin Jubair, the sub-narrator said that Ibn Abbas kept quiet as rewards the third order, or he said, "I forgot it.") (See Hadith No. 116Vol. 1)


Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2478:

Narrated Imran ibn Husayn:

The Prophet said: A section of my community will continue to fight for the right and overcome their opponents till the last of them fights with the Antichrist.


Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2493:

Narrated Abu Malik al-Ash'ari:

Abu Malik heard the Apostle of Allah say: He who goes forth in Allah's path and dies or is killed is a martyr, or has his neck broken through being thrown by his horse or by his camel, or is stung by a poisonous creature, or dies on his bed by any kind of death Allah wishes is a martyr and will go to Paradise.


Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2496:

Abu Hurairah reported the Prophet as saying:

He who dies without having fought or having felt fighting (against the infidels) to be his duty will die guilty of a kind of hypocrisy".


Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2506:

Narrated Abu Ayyub:

Abu Imran said: We went out on an expedition from Medina with the intention of (attacking) Constantinople. Abdur Rahman ibn Khalid ibn al-Walid was the leader of the company. The Romans were just keeping their backs to the walls of the city. A man (suddenly) attacked the enemy.

Thereupon the people said: Stop! Stop! There is no god but Allah. He is putting himself into danger.

Abu Ayyub said: This verse was revealed about us, the group of the Ansar (the Helpers). When Allah helped His Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and gave Islam dominance, we said (i.e. thought): Come on! Let us stay in our property and improve it.

Thereupon Allah, the Exalted, revealed, "And spend of your substance in the cause of Allah, and make not your hands contribute to (your destruction)". To put oneself into danger means that we stay in our property and commit ourselves to its improvement, and abandon fighting (i.e. jihad).

AbuImran said: AbuAyyub continued to strive in the cause of Allah until he (died and) was buried in Constantinople.


Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2535:

Narrated Mu'adh ibn Jabal:

The Apostle of Allah said: If anyone fights in Allah's path as long as the time between two milkings of a she-camel, Paradise will be assured for him. If anyone sincerely asks Allah for being killed and then dies or is killed, there will be a reward of a martyr for him. Ibn al-Musaffa added from here: If anyone is wounded in Allah's path, or suffers a misfortune, it will come on the Day of resurrection as copious as possible, its color saffron, and its odor musk; and if anyone suffers from ulcers while in Allah's path, he will have on him the stamp of the martyrs.


Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2631:

Narrated Ka'b ibn Malik:

When the Prophet intended to go on an expedition, he always pretended to be going somewhere else, and he would say: War is deception.

Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2632:

Narrated Salamah ibn al-Akwa':

The Apostle of Allah appointed Abu Bakr our commander and we fought with some people who were polytheists, and we attacked them at night, killing them. Our war-cry that night was "put to death; put to death." Salamah said: I killed that night with my hand polytheists belonging to seven houses. 

Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2664:

Narrated Samurah ibn Jundub:

The Prophet said: Kill the old men who are polytheists, but spare their children.


Abu Dawud, Book 14, Number 2665: 

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:

No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? She said: I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. She said: The man took her and beheaded her. She said: I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed. 



Chapter 11

Early History of Peaceful Islam:


     Islamic leaders and politicians constantly tell us in English that “Islam is a peaceful religion”, but one can’t help wondering if they would say it quite so often if they were absolutely sure it was true.


Some recorded massacres of Muslim history: On December 30, 1066, Joseph HaNagid, the Jewish vizier of Granada, Spain, was crucified by an Arab mob that proceeded to raze the Jewish quarter of the city and slaughtered its 5,000 inhabitants. The riot was apparently incited by Muslim preachers that had angrily objected to what they saw as inordinate Jewish political power. Similarly, in 1465, Arab mobs in Fez slaughtered thousands of Jews, leaving only 11 alive, after a Jewish deputy vizier treated a Muslim woman in “an offensive manner.” The killings touched off a wave of similar massacres throughout Morocco. Other mass murders of Jews in Arab lands occurred in Morocco in the 8th century, where whole communities were wiped out by Muslim ruler Idris I; North Africa in the 12th century, where the Almohads either forcibly converted or decimated several communities; Libya in 1785, where Ali Burzi Pasha murdered hundreds of Jews; Algiers, where Jews were massacred in 1805, 1815 and 1830 and Marrakesh, Morocco, where more than 300 hundred Jews were murdered between 1864 and 1880.

     Decrees ordering the destruction of synagogues were enacted in Egypt and Syria (1014, 1293-4, 1301-2), Iraq (854­859, 1344) and Yemen (1676). Despite the Qur’an’s purported prohibition, Jews were forced to convert to Islam or face death in Yemen (1165 and 1678), Morocco (1275, 1465 and 1790-92) and Baghdad (1333 and 1344). Some escaped, but the Jews of Arabia who remained were pretty much completely wiped out.  Islamic revisionists claim they were killed because they were literally asking for it, is their apologetic rubbish propaganda.  These Islamic revisionists (Islamaniacs) claim that the Jews demanded it as per their own law.  I mean that’s like the Nazis claiming they were only accommodating the Jews demand to get warm by the ovens. Like Goebbels said, the bigger the lie, the easier it is for others to believe it. 

     In the violent, nearly 1,400-year relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, Jihad and Dhimmitude were firmly established by the 8th century. Perhaps the pre-eminent Islamic scholar in history, Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406), summarized five centuries of prior Muslim jurisprudence with regard to the uniquely Islamic institution of jihad:

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force... The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense... Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations. 

     Between 1894-96, the Ottoman Turks massacred over 200,000 (Dhimmi) Christian Armenians, followed by the first formal genocide of the 20th century, in 1915, at which time they slaughtered an additional 600,000 to 800,000 Armenians. Contemporary accounts from European diplomats confirm that these brutal massacres were perpetrated in the context of a formal Jihad against the Armenians who had attempted to throw off the yoke of Dhimmitude by seeking equal rights and autonomy. Regarding the 1894-96 massacres, the Turkish-speaking interpreter of the British embassy reported:

…[The perpetrators] are guided in their general action by the prescriptions of the Sheri [Sharia] Law. That law prescribes that if the "rayah" [dhimmi] Christian attempts, by having recourse to foreign powers, to overstep the limits of privileges allowed them by their Mussulman [Muslim] masters, and free themselves from their bondage, their lives and property are to be forfeited, and are at the mercy of the Mussulmans. To the Turkish mind the Armenians had tried to overstep those limits by appealing to foreign powers, especially England. They therefore considered it their religious duty and a righteous thing to destroy and seize the lives and properties of the Armenians…" 

     The scholar Bat Yeor confirms this reasoning, noting that the Armenian quest for reforms invalidated their "legal status," which involved a "contract" (i.e., with their Muslim Turkish rulers). 

This …breach…restored to the umma [the Muslim community] its initial right to kill the subjugated minority [the dhimmis], [and] seize their property… 

     In the following chronology, note how closely Islam’s inception is associated with war. From 623 to 777, a span of 154 years, there are 83 military conflicts involving the Muslims…. Muslims tell us Islam is a religion of peace, but all historical facts seem to discredit that claim rather convincingly. 

Chronology of early Islam

·        570 – Birth of Muhammad in Mecca into the tribe of Quraish.

·        577 – Muhammad’s mother dies.

·        595 – Muhammad marries, starts to have children.  

·        605 – Placement of Black Stone in Ka’aba. 

·        610 – Mohammed, in a cave, hears an angel tell him that Allah is the only true God.

·        613 – Muhammad’s first public preaching of Islam at Mt. Hira. Gets few converts.

·        615 – Muslims persecuted by the Quraysh.

·        619 – Marries Sau’da and Aisha

·        620 – Institution of five daily prayers .

·        622 – Muhammad immigrates from Mecca to Medina, gets more converts.

·        623 – Battle of Waddan

·        623 – Battle of Safwan

·        623 – Battle of Dul-‘Ashir

·        624 – Raids on caravans to fund the movement begin.

·        624 – Zakat becomes mandatory

·        624 – Battle of Badr

·        624 – Battle of Bani Salim

·        624 – Battle of Eid-ul-Fitr & Zakat-ul-Fitr

·        624 – Battle of Bani Qainuqa’

·        624 – Battle of Sawiq

·        624 – Battle of Ghatfan

·        624 – Battle of Bahran

·        625 – Battle of Uhud. 70 Muslims killed.

·        625 – Battle of Humra-ul-Asad

·        625 – Battle of Banu Nadir

·        625 – Battle of Dhatul-Riqa

·        626 – Battle of Badru-Ukhra

·        626 – Battle of Dumatul-Jandal

·        626 – Battle of Banu Mustalaq Nikah

·        627 – Battle of the Trench

·        627 – Battle of Ahzab

·        627 – Battle of Bani Qurayza

·        627 – Battle of Bani Lahyan

·        627 – Battle of Ghaiba

·        627 – Battle of Khaibar

·        628 – Muhammad signs treaty with Quraish. (The 628 Al-Hudaybiyya agreement, between the Prophet and the Meccan tribe of Quraish, was signed for a period of 10 years, which became, in Islamic tradition, the time limit for any agreement with non-Muslims. The agreement was broken after 18 months, Muhammad’s army then conquered Mecca)

·        630 – Muhammad conquers Mecca.

·        630 – Battle of Hunain.

·        630 – Battle of Tabuk

·        632Muhammad dies.           The reign of the Caliphs begins.

·        632 – Abu-Bakr, Muhammad’s father-in-law, along with Umar, begin a military move to enforce Islam in Arabia.

·        633 – Battle at Oman

·        633 – Battle at Hadramaut.

·        633 – Battle of Kazima

·        633 – Battle of Walaja

·        633 – Battle of Ulleis

·        633 – Battle of Anbar

·        634 – Battle of Basra,

·        634 – Battle of Damascus

·        634 – Battle of Ajnadin.

·        634 – Death of Hadrat Abu Bakr. Hadrat Umar Farooq becomes the Caliph.

·        634 – Battle of Namaraq

·        634 – Battle of Saqatia.

·        635 – Battle of Bridge.

·        635 – Battle of Buwaib.

·        635 – Conquest of Damascus.

·        635 – Battle of Fahl.

·        636 – Battle of Yermuk.

·        636 – Battle of Qadsiyia.

·        636 – Conquest of Madain.

·        637 – Battle of Jalula.

·        638 – Battle of Yarmouk.

·        638 – The Muslims defeat the Romans and enter Jerusalem.

·        638 – Conquest of Jazirah.

·        639 – Conquest of Khuizistan and movement into Egypt.

·        641 – Battle of Nihawand

·        642 – Battle of Rayy in Persia

·        643 – Conquest of Azarbaijan

·        644 – Conquest of Fars

·        644 – Conquest of Kharan.

·        644 – Umar is murdered. Othman becomes the Caliph.

·        647 – Conquest of Cypress island.

·        644 – Uman dies, succeeded by Caliph Uthman.

·        648 – Byzantine campaign begins.

·        651 – Naval battle against Byzantines.

·        654 – Islam spreads into North Africa

·        656 – Uthman is murdered. Ali become Caliph.

·        658 – Battle of Nahrawan.

·        659 – Conquest of Egypt

·        661 – Ali is murdered.

·        662 – Egypt falls to Islam rule.

·        666 – Sicily is attacked by Muslims

·        677 – Siege of Constantinople

·        687 – Battle of Kufa

·        691 – Battle of Deir ul Jaliq

·        700 – Sufism takes root as a sect.

·        700 – Military campaigns in North Africa

·        702 – Battle of Deir ul Jamira

·        711 – Muslims invade Gibraltar

·        711 – Conquest of Spain

·        713 – Conquest of Multan

·        716 – Invasion of Constantinople

·        732 – Battle of Tours in France.

·        740 – Battle of the Nobles.

·        741 – Battle of Bagdoura in North Africa

·        744 – Battle of Ain al Jurr.

·        746 – Battle of Rupar Thutha

·        748 – Battle of Rayy.

·        749 – Battle of lsfahan

·        749 – Battle of Nihawand

·        750 – Battle of Zab

·        772 – Battle of Janbi in North Africa

·        777 – Battle of Saragossa in Spain

     Undeniably, Christians have in the past also committed despicable acts in the name of God, and in recent history the Serbia conflicts and the Protestant-Catholic Northern-Ireland clashes stand out as examples. But there are three major differences and distinctions that can be drawn between those crimes and the acts committed in Islam’s name. The first difference is that the unfortunate events were limited in both time and scope, they had an end. The second distinction is that terrorists acting from Christian cultures always did their vile deeds in violation of scriptural teaching and the example of Christ, not in fulfilment of it, as in Islam. The third dissimilarity is that people from Christian cultures who perform terrorist acts against others are recognized as criminals, not worshiped as heroes. To expect Muslims to drop their belligerence toward the West, which has existed since Islam’s founding in the 7th century, is to expect them to jettison core values of their faith — something for which there is no precedent in Islamic history. Although nowadays nothing seems less tolerated than pessimism, yet in relation to Islam this attitude is in fact simply just realism.

     Most Americans have a benignly positive attitude toward religion, but is our civic piety, allied with political correctness, blinding us and keeping us from asking reasonable questions about Islam, questions upon which the survival of our civilization may depend. Does Western cultures obsessed with tolerance render us incapable of drawing reasonable conclusions about Islam’s core values and designs. The general reluctance to criticize any non-Christian religion and the almost universal public ignorance about Islam make for a dangerous potentially lethal mix.

     Unlike Constitutional provisions in the US, there is no cultural or scriptural mandate for separation of church and state in Islam, making secular democracy an alien and hostile concept. Women have few rights over and against their husbands, who may legally beat their wives and concubines. Enslaving infidels and raping infidel women are justified under Qura’nic law (and still occur in some Muslim lands). Grotesque punishments for crimes — beheadings and the like — are not medieval holdovers; on the contrary, they will forever be part of authentic Islam as long as the Qur’an is revered as the perfect Words of Allah.

     While Muslims in the West live in peace, prosperity and religious liberty, Christians and other Infidels in Muslim lands have been, are now, and will continue to be persecuted, sometimes unto death. Turkey is the only Muslim country that could be called democratic, and that’s probably a stretch.  The example of Turkey is laudable, but sadly it shows that secularist values can only be imposed on Islamic societies by force, and will therefore remain tenuous. Because Islam demands death for heretics, moderate Muslims will always risk their lives if they offer more liberal interpretations of their faith. The problem is that for all its schisms, sects, and multiplicity of voices, Islam’s violent elements are firmly rooted in its central texts; as such, Islam cannot be other than a religion of violence. It would be too pessimistic to say that there are no peaceful strains of Islam, but it would be imprudent to ignore the fact that deeply imbedded in the central documents of the religion is an all-encompassing vision of a theocratic state that is intractable and fundamentally different from (and opposed toward) democratic values and Western governments based on them.

Chapter 12


The Qu’ran’s View Toward Christians and Jews:


 Muhammad’s actions against the Jews of Banu Qaynuqa, Banu Nadir, Banu Qurayza and several individuals identified as Jewish in the Qur’an have been previously chronicled and will not be repeated here.

    A basic principle of Islamism holds that humanity is divided according to a strict hierarchy of worth. At the top of this hierarchy are free Muslim males, the cream of humanity. Below them, in descending order of humanity, are: Muslim male slaves, free Muslim women, Muslim female slaves, the males of the "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians), and, then, the females of the ‘People of the Book’. Finally, the rest of humanity comes in dead last (excuse the pun), because they lack a soul they are regarded as worthless having no rights whatsoever. This unfortunate final grouping includes Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, agnostics, and others. But before Jews and Christians celebrate escaping last-place in this uniquely Islamic popularity contest, the fine print should first be carefully studied.

     With quotes referencing Christians and Jews from the Quran like: – "WORST OF CREATURES, PERVERSE, FRIENDS OF SATAN", it seems impossible to characterize Islam as a tolerant religion harmless to others.  By one widely accepted definition of a ‘Religion’; … “An organization dedicated to raising the spiritual awareness and moral standards and actions of its followers, and in improving peaceful relationships with others”, Islam seems to fall well short of qualifying. Early Islam was clearly neither harmless nor tolerant of non-believers. Intolerance seems the cruel norm in Islamic societies, while tolerance, charity and kindness towards different cultures and religions is glaringly absent.  The fruits of extreme Islam are bitter indeed, and it is by their fruits that we should judge them.

     The clear direction appears to be that Muslims are not allowed to even be friends or take favours from Jews and Christians, unless the devotion and tax is extracted by force or threat of force. 

98:1 Those who disbelieve from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and among Al-Mushrikun (polytheists) were not going to leave (their disbelief) until there came to them clear evidence.

98:6 Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Quran and Prophet Muhammad) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikun will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.

5:51 O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliya' (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but Auliya' to one another. And if any amongst you takes them as Auliya', then surely he is one of them. Verily, Allah guides not those people who are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong­doers and unjust).

58:19.  Shaitan (Satan) has overtaken them (the Jews). So he has made them forget the remembrance of Allah. They are the party of Shaitan (Satan). Verily, it is the party of Shaitan (Satan) that will be the losers!

4:76 Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Taghut (Satan, etc.).  So fight you against the friends of Shaitan (Satan); Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Shaitan (Satan).

47:35 So be not weak and ask not for peace (from the enemies of Islam), while you are having the upper hand. Allah is with you, and will never decrease the reward of your good deeds. 

      Christians and Jews then and now hold a special place in Islamic theology. In the end, they were regarded with contempt by Muhammad, and were presented in a hateful manner in the Qur’an and in modern Islamic theology today. The final direction appears to be this: When the Muslims have the upper hand, they are not to seek peace, but instead they are expected to sacrifice and toil for the continued destruction of all their enemies.  The final words reported from the mouth of the dying Muhammad were a curse on the favoured ‘People of the Book’. From Ibn Sa'd page 322: When the last moment of the prophet was near, he used to draw a sheet over his face; but when he felt uneasy, he removed it from his face and said:

"Allah's damnation be on the Jews and the Christians who made the graves of their prophets objects of worship."

     The bitterness of this final utterance from their beloved prophet, as he died a painful death at the hands of a Jewish girl, obviously still weighs heavy on the minds and hearts of all of Islam.  Revenge is a glorified mandate for Muslims yesterday and today.


The QURAN on Relations with Non-Muslim Family Members


     Earlier, it was pointed out that Muslims broke ties of allegiance and friendship with allied tribes and near family members. The Qur’an takes this a step further. Sura 58:22 shows that family blood ties are broken. Islam has an anti-family element, causing Muslims to fight and kill even their relatives if they reject Muhammad’s rule. Family ties, devotions, and sensibilities form the backbone of Western civilizations, from which we derive our strength and teach morality. In Islam, even normal, natural family bonds are subservient and must yield to Muhammad’s vision of Islam. That is why in many Muslim communities and households each family member is expected to police the acts, thoughts, and expressions of other members in the household.  On a slightly broader scale, communities are expected to monitor the conduct of families in their neighborhoods. So in Islamic lands, the control structure in place extends from the highest branches of the government (including the Judiciary), to the lowliest family member. The consequences imposed for failure to support the official family, neighborhood, tribal, national policy with respect to violent Jihad vary by tribe and region, but are often quite brutal. 

48:29 Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe (or ruthless, vehement) against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.

58:22 You (O Muhammad) will not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, making friendship with those who oppose Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), even though they were their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred (people). For such He has written Faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with Ruh (proofs, light and true guidance) from Himself. And We will admit them to Gardens (Paradise) under which rivers flow, to dwell therein (forever). Allah is pleased with them, and they with Him. They are the Party of Allah. Verily, it is the Party of Allah that will be the successful. 

     In the officially state-sponsored Wahhabi controlled elementary schools in Saudi Arabia (our alleged ally in the war on terror), there is a fifth-grade lesson book that reads as follows:

“It is forbidden for a Muslim to be a friend of one who does not believe in God and his Messenger or who fights the Islamic religion. God has severed the [link of] friendship between Muslims and infidels. The Muslim, even if he lives far away, is your brother-in-belief, while the infidel, even if he is your brother of kin, is your enemy by religion.”

     When one takes into consideration all that Muhammad and his devoted followers ask of the faithful, the direction to have no Muslim friends makes perfect sense.  It’s all part of the psychology of violence. Built-in natural human feelings of empathy and all impulses of conscience must first be overcome before an individual can perform an act of violence on another. Normal feelings of affection, respect, and trust toward a friend would get in the way of an Islamic Jihad movement.  So not only does Muhammad dehumanize non-Muslims, he also specifically tells followers not to develop personal relationships with others.  This philosophy and psychology, when internalized, is designed to groom the Muslim believer into becoming an effective, non-thinking, non-feeling Jihadist warrior (i.e. a killing machine). Not exactly in line with his oft repeated claim that ‘God is most merciful, most forgiving, most loving and charitable’, but that contradiction does not seem to register. Certainly any personal dilemma resulting from such contradictions are easily dismissed once fully immersed in the blood-lust and lynch-mob mentality of Islamic Militants.  Apparently ‘most-merciful’ in their minds only applies to Muslims, or to survivors who agree to pay tribute, or in other words, an eternal ‘survivor tax’.





Chapter 13


The Inescapable Inferences:


      Instead of trying to comprehend and facing the true roots of militant Islam, we have preferred to hope that Islamic violence is just the pernicious work of a few individuals or radical groups. We hope that by destroying the al-Qaida network the threat of Islamic terrorism will cease. We can then put it out of our minds and hope and pretend that it will no longer affect us. We are captivated by sports, Harry Potter, the Lord of the Rings, and rock stars. We are happy that the DOW is back up and interest rates have lowered, and hope the recession will soon be over. Yet, those planning our destruction are still living among us and saying that Islam is a religion of peace. All the while, just as Maslama deceived his good friend Ka’b b. al-Ashraf in order to murder him, militant Muslims are prudently, patiently planning their next acts of terrorism.


      At  the beginning of this work, we asked the readers to keep three questions in mind during this course of study. They were: reading, visualizing; and digesting the facts outlined herein has undoubtedly been distasteful. It tears at the natural human heart to contemplate and visualize what so many suffered at the hands of early Islam. Though intelligent, clear thinking individuals have undoubtedly drawn their own conclusions, the questions are repeated here, along with some of the obvious inferences drawn now with full support from the material covered.


1)     What are the teachings of real Islam found in the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira with respect to the use of violence, call it jihad if you like, to aggressively spread it’s power over non-Muslims, and are these teachings valid and applicable today?


ANSWER: It should be obvious that real Islam still calls for the use of jihad, force and violence, when able, to spread Islam’s power over non-Muslim people. The jihad may take the form of passing out literature for Islam, or it may take the form of assassination, or a bombing of a building, or a massacre, for worse. These teachings are valid and applicable even today.


2) Is real Islam behind and does it condone the murder of 3 000 Americans and the destruction of the WTC, or are these Muslim terrorists doing something well outside Muhammad’s religion?

ANSWER:  Yes. Real Islam is behind the murder of thousands of Americans and it condones the destruction of the WTC. Official Islamic theology taught in most parts of the world justify violent acts to further the cause of converting all to Islam, especially acts designed to weaken the “Great Satan”, deemed the biggest threat to that cause.


3) What does the future hold for Islam and America?


ANSWER:   Continued Islamic violence. Would that it could be said otherwise, but it appears likely that Muslims will yet perform many large and small acts of murderous violence against us. If given the chance they may, one day ,detonate a nuclear warhead, or warheads, in large American cities, as many in the movement see it as their only viable option. In order to advance Muslim theology as they see it, these militants know that America must be brought low, regardless of the cost. They are dedicated and may eventually succeed in obtaining the bombs or bomb material from Iran, Pakistan, Korea or perhaps from a former Soviet Republic Country. Muslim militants are cognizant of how to go about this, their goal is our incapacitation, and they believe the best way to accomplish this is through the use of WMD’s.


So, why is it that so many Muslims want to see America broken or destroyed?


      America is a powerful superpower; indeed, some say the last superpower.  Its military strength and cultural power represents the best hope against the violent spread of Islam. Obviously, if America is weakened or incapacitated, then Muslim terrorists can begin to act with more impunity throughout the world. The attack against the WTC was not simply an effort to kill large numbers of American people, had they wanted to do that they could have found better targets. Rather, the attempted attack against the Whitehouse, the attack against the WTC and at the Pentagon were strikes at America’s financial strength, government, and command and control centre, conveniently coupled with the murder and destruction of ordinary Americans. Muslims believe that if they can hurt us badly, we might capitulate and not reply to the threat from the extremists, or at least, hope to weaken us and make it much more difficult to deal with or pursue them elsewhere in the world. Just as Muhammad destroyed the financial strength and morale of the date-palm groves of the Banu Nadir, and had key leaders assassinated, so too, these Muslims have struck at our financial strength and leadership.


     Take the current war in Afghanistan and Iraq costing hundreds of billions. No country can long sustain such expenses. Eventually, our capacity to counter Islamic violence will spread too thin and diminish. Calculate the results of 9/11/01. Billions of dollars have been lost. Tens of thousands of Americans have lost their jobs as a result. The stock market crashed, taking two years to partially recover, and it is still somewhat tenuous. The economy fell deeper into recession. Looking further down the road, they probably hoped that once America is broken or destroyed, then the rest of Europe, Australia, or other regions could next be targeted.


     If Muslims in Algeria can slit the throats of small Algerian children and throw them down wells, then zealots cut from the same violent cloth will not care one iota about any American life. These murdered children were fellow Algerians and sometimes fellow Muslims. Perhaps they weren’t Muslim enough to the Muslim terrorists. In either case, the devoted Muslims we are dealing with are of the same spirit that murdered these children, and the same spirit that had the Jews of the Banu Qurayza tribe massacred. This is a spiritual war, where militant Muslim extremists are pawns in the hands of a force with a truly evil agenda.  The spiritual power behind terrorism is bigger, and more perverse, than all failed political theologies propagated to date. It does not know Islamic bounds. Militant Muslims serving their terror masters will not care about millions of American deaths; instead, they will cherish it.  Just as devout Muslims in Chicago and on American campuses rejoiced at the destruction of the WTC, so too, large numbers of Muslims here and abroad still look forward to the day that America can be brought low.


     Frequently we hear that these terrorists are very, very few, and that the Islamic community is universally peace-loving. Now should we blindly accept those assurances and really believe that this type of Islamic terrorism is the work of just a few individuals?  Everyone should be asking himself; did the 19 Muslim hijackers operate in a vacuum? Should we believe that no other Muslims, currently living in America, knew about their plans? The thinking man would have to conclude that these Muslims were known about, and aided by many other Muslims living here. These and many other Muslims came here long ago and over an extended period, as men on a mission. They were known and supported by Muslims throughout America, and the world. If need be, Muslim accomplices will proclaim that "Islam is a religion of peace", fly an American flag, cry crocodile tears, and proclaim, "we feel your pain". But just as Muhammad’s followers betrayed fellow citizens at an opportune time, these Muslim handlers (terrorists) and their Muslim accomplices betrayed America. "Islam has broken the former ties", just as the early Muslims betrayed those who were once their friends. They ate with you, drank with you, shared part of their lives with you, but the call of Islam is stronger then American citizenship, personal friendship, or simple values of integrity and trust. Make no mistake about it, when the time is ripe, many more Muslims living here in the states may support or commit the same type of violent actions that were committed on 9/11/01. They aren’t done, and in their hearts, it ain’t over, not by a long shot.


     In truth, the world is filled with Islamic violence, committed by Muslim terrorists found in all nations. The 19 Muslim hijackers came from several Muslim countries. The Taliban are filled with Arabs, Chechens, Indonesians, Chinese, Afghans, Pakistanis, and so on. Even some British and American Muslims have gone to Afghanistan to fight fellow British and American soldiers. This type of Islamic terrorism is a worldwide movement and is not the work of a few hot-headed radicals. It is the work of dedicated, devout, determined Muslims. American Muslims will continue to betray American citizens as they have done in Guantanamo and Afghanistan. The next batch of Muslim terrorists need not be Arab, or dark skinned. They may be white, blue-eyed, and, blonde. Their dedication to Islam will override any commitment to America and its people.


     Below is the text of fatwa urging Jihad against Americans which was published in Al-Quds al-'Arabi on February 23, 1998:

 On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims the ruling to kill the Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim.

This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God." 



     By their own words and works, Islam is apparently a violent religion after all, and large parts of it continue to condone and allow the use of aggressive violence to spread its dominion over non-Muslims. The war that Muhammad launched long ago continues today, but the stakes are getting higher. America, European and Asian nations will continue to be adversely affected by the actions of real Muslims – those that are obeying their God and Prophet – as they have been in the past.  America (and other countries) previously insulated by distance and oceans are no longer safe and have become the relatively new targets of expansionist Islam.  For all the cries against Zionism by Muslims, it is in truth Islam that has the most aggressive ambitions and designs on other peoples and lands.


"Will you listen to me O Meccans? By him who holds my life in His hand I bring you slaughter." (Muhammad, some of the earliest words spoken in Mecca, shortly after his first visit by "Gabriel", to people who rejected his claim to prophethood). "The Life of Muhammad", by A. Guillaume, page 131. Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle (Muhammad) have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled."


     We see that Muhammad had many people murdered. By request, by command, by implication, Muhammad had many killed, some while they slept. There were no trials, no judgments, no dialog. If you insulted Muhammad, if you doubted his credibility, or if you spoke out, you were killed. Men and women, young and old, all were killed because of Muhammad's intolerance, anger, hatred, and disdain towards those who spoke out against him. Today, Fatwas continue to be issued demanding that faithful kill any perceived to insult the prophet or discredit his divinity. One wonders if the thin skin and short temper of Islam is due to insecurity stemming from the inherent weaknesses of its doctrine.  The fact remains that challenging the doctrine of Islam or hearsay against the prophet carries the penalty of death to this day. The intellectually insincere individual full of hatred will certainly not benefit from this book; rather he will undoubtedly be greatly offended by the facts outlined herein.  As the saying goes,  ... “A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still”.  A closed mind will forever be unable to draw correct inferences from a set of facts plainly laid out before him.

     Make no mistake about it: By any standard of any age, Muhammad deployed murderous tactics that can only be described as terrorist in nature. Muhammad, indeed, taught his followers to oppress or kill non-Muslims. Today's Muslim terrorists are following his actions literally, … like prophet, like followers. Today's Muhammedan terrorists commit their acts with full understanding and belief that they are based upon what Muhammad said and did, and what he expects of them. Based upon Muhammad's actions and teachings, large parts of Islam continues to practice, justify, support, finance, or tolerate terrorism against non-Muslims today. The life of Muhammad is and will continue to be used by militants as justification to attack and murder those who differ from them.


     Muhammad taught his followers that Islam is the final and universal religion. Where Islamic law has been instituted, no other religion is tolerated, unless it agrees to submit to Islamic rule. Today, more than forty nations have a majority population of Muslims, and Muslim leaders have spoken of their goal to spread Islam in the West, until Islam becomes a dominant, global power.  That global agenda is in keeping with Muhammad’s final clear orders: convert... pay with submission ... or die.

Chapter 14


Muslims who Leave Islam:


Under Islamic law [the Sharia is based on the Qur’an, the example of Muhammad (sunna) and the consensus (ijmaa)], anyone falling away from faith in Islam commits an "unforgivable sin". Such "apostates" must be taken into custody by force, and called on to repent. Anyone so confronted and who does not immediately repent and turn back to Islam has forfeited his life, and is to be put to death by the state. While this is not carried out on a regular basis in the many Islamic lands practicing Sharia, the threat is ever present.


      One of Islam’s most respected theologians and prolific writers in the last century, Pakistani Abu’l Ala Mawdudi, insists that both Qur’an and Hadith demand an apostate’s execution. He quotes the Qur’an (9:11-12) and the canonized Hadith: “Any person, i.e. Muslim, who has changed his religion, kill him” (Al-Bukhari, Vol. 9, p. 45). The Islamic scholar, Majid Khadduri, agrees that Qur’anic commentaries say a believer who turns back from his religion must be killed if he persists in disbelief (p. 150).


     Today "Islamic jihad" draws on religious texts whose interpretations, some genuinely peaceful Muslims dispute. They challenge this interpretation of jihad because they wish to live in peace with non-Muslim peoples and nations, and as a result, their lives are also threatened. Muhammad was not content to conquer by force, or kill those that merely opposed him verbally. Muhammad also taught that Muslims who leave the Islamic faith are to be murdered as well. Here are some quotes from Bukhari's collection of Hadith. Remember, Bukhari's Hadith is the second most important writing in Islam, following the Quran.


Bukhari, volume 9, #17

"Narrated Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: in Qisas (equality in punishment) for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (Apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

Bukhari volume 9, #57

Narrated Ikrima, "Some atheists were brought to Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's messenger forbade it, saying, "Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire)." I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Messenger, "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him."

Bukhari volume 9, #64

Narrated Ali, "Whenever I tell you a narration from Allah's messenger, by Allah, I would rather fall down from the sky, then ascribe a false statement to him, but if I tell you something between me and you, (not a Hadith), then it was indeed a trick (i.e., I may say things just to cheat my enemy). No doubt I heard Allah's messenger saying, "During the last days there will appear some young foolish people, who will say the best words, but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will leave the faith) and will go out from their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for whoever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection."


     Not only did Muhammad teach that Muslims are to murder those that have left Islam, "wherever you find them", he further taught that a Muslim who commits this type of murder of fellow Muslims will also be doing God's service and will be rewarded. It is in this spirit and understanding that many ‘honor’ killings occur in Muslim communities. The following is a news release of one such killing that happen to be recorded, thousands of other incidents have occurred with no record, there are many dark secrets to for Islam to hide.


Islamic Dissent:

November 1989 - St. Louis - The FBI inadvertently tape-recorded the entire episode of a teenage girl being killed by her Palestinian father and Brazilian mother (the Feds were looking for evidence of terrorism, which they also found). Apparently their daughter had not lived according to their view of Islam. In a ghastly eight-minute sequence, Zein Isa stabbed his daughter Palestina thirteen times with a butcher's knife as his wife held the girl down and responded to Palestina's pleas for help with a brutal "Shut up!" The killing ends with Zein screaming; "Die! Die quickly! Die quickly! … Quiet, little one! … Die, my daughter, die!" By this time, she is dead. The 1989 killing in St. Louis was captured on a court-approved FBI telephone tap of a Palestinian, Zein Isa, who was suspected of supporting terrorist causes. Agents were not listening as the killing took place. The FBI ultimately handed over the tape, which was used to help convict the couple of murder.  An egregious example of a family honor killing, permitted in some Islamic cultures, the murderous couple killed their daughter to insure she did not expose their terrorist plans and affiliations.


The Associated Press - Nov. 7, 2002 - TEHRAN, Iran — A prominent reformist scholar has been sentenced to death on charges of insulting Islam's prophet and questioning the hard-line clergy's interpretation of Islam.  A court in Hamedan in western Iran sentenced university professor Hashem Aghajari to death, Saleh Nikbakht told The Associated Press.  Aghajari was detained in August after a closed hearing in Hamedan where he made a speech in June questioning the hard-line interpretations of the ruling clerics. Nikbakht said Aghajari, a top member of the reformist political party, Islamic Revolution Mujahedeen Organization, was also sentenced to 74 lashes, banned from teaching for 10 years and exiled to three remote Iranian cities for eight years. Iranian courts often impose such multiple sentences in cases where it wants to make an example of the accused. In cases where the death sentence is imposed, the others are not carried out. Nikbakht insisted his client had not said anything that insulted the Prophet Muhammad, as the charges alleged. "There has never been a word insulting the prophet in Aghajari's speech. This verdict is nothing but a rule against Iran's national interests," Nikbakht said. In his speech, Aghajari had said clerics' teachings on Islam were considered sacred simply because they were part of history, and he questioned why clerics were the only ones authorized to interpret Islam. Later, he was charged with insulting Islamic sanctities and the court described his speech as blasphemous.


In the city of Multan in Pakistan, Ayub Masih (Christian), who had previously been accused of insulting the Prophet Muhammad under the “Blasphemy Law,” is being held in solitary confinement in a four-by-six foot cell. He also faces the death penalty.


Suspected Collaborators:

The Associated Press — April 23 2002 HEBRON, West Bank - Palestinian militiamen killed three suspected collaborators in Hebron Tuesday ... A mob strung up two of the battered, bullet-punctured bodies, and some brought their children to see the gruesome act of revenge.  Hooded vigilantes shot the three alleged informers and dumped their bound and gagged bodies on the same spot where a missile from an Israel helicopter gunship killed Marwan Zalloum, a commander of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militia, in a targeted attack just hours before. The militia is linked to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement. "The fate of all collaborators will be like this," one of the masked men told reporters as he and the others sped away in a car. A similar action occurred in Ramallah on Monday, the public shooting of three alleged collaborators on the main square of Ramallah, while a large crowd watched as they lay on the ground, writing in pain. Bystanders tried to block approaching ambulances, but the three were eventually taken to a city hospital where one later died.  … several dozen alleged informers have been killed by fellow Palestinians in the past 19 months of fighting with Israel.

In Hebron, a large crowd quickly gathered around the corpses lying in Salam Street. One of the bodies was strung up by one leg from an electricity pylon and stripped by the crowd down to his green underwear, his blood-soaked shirt pulled over his head to reveal deep cuts and bruises. Another body was strung up from a lamppost. People stuffed burning cigarettes in the bullet holes in the torso. Some kicked, spat and threw rocks at the corpses.

The three men suffered multiple gunshot wounds in the head and body, with their hands tied behind their backs. Their limbs also appeared broken, though it was not clear whether the injuries were inflicted before or after they died. Seven men in a car, all wearing woolen hoods or keffiyehs wrapped around their faces, claimed responsibility. The driver of the car, wearing a headband of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, told a reporter that the killings were in revenge for Zalloum's death (Zalloum and his bodyguard were killed in an Israeli missile attack). Thousands of people paraded past the bodies until a white municipal pickup truck came to take them away 3 hours later. As each body was thrown into the back of the truck, the crowd clapped, cheered, whistled, and chanted "Allahu akbar," or God is great. Some men lifted small children in the air for a better look. Others climbed up the stairs of a nearby mosque or onto rooftops for an unobstructed view.  No one in the crowd objected to the violence. Many were smiling. Men whistled their approval on the street and women yelled from rooftops. Young children wandered past the sticky pool of blood on the ground and stared. Local reports later said one of the men died. "No problem," said a 16-year-old boy standing nearby. "They deserved it. They talked to Israel." But a 20-year-old woman who walked quickly past the crowd disapproved. "What will the world think when they see this?" she asked.


The Associated Press – Aug 7, 2003 West Bank, Israel — Palestinian militants executed a suspected collaborator with Israeli intelligence in the central square of the West Bank town of Ramallah on Thursday, while a halt to attacks against Israelis continued to hold. The Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, linked to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement, carried out the summary execution in Ramallah, not far from Arafat's office. Witnesses said three gunmen pulled the man into a car and drove to the center of town. Then, one of the gunmen pulled the man from the car and shouted, "In the name of the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, we carry out the sentence of death," and shot him. He was identified as Samer Sharour, in his early 20s. Doctors said he was hit by six bullets in the head and chest. During the past decade, Palestinian militants have executed dozens of suspected collaborators, sometimes hanging their bodies in public squares, drawing criticism from human rights groups. The Palestinian Authority also has publicly executed several such suspects after quick trials.


Reuters – Aug 7, 2003 - SRINAGAR, India (Reuters) — Muslim separatist guerrillas in Indian Kashmir beheaded two people, one of them a teacher, Tuesday in the latest violence in the disputed Himalayan region, police said. The teacher was abducted in the Anantnag district, south of Kashmir's main city Srinagar, and later beheaded because the rebels suspected he was an informer for the security forces, a police spokesman said. "Militants abducted and later beheaded Abdul Ahad Sheikh and his son," a police official said. The killings took place in Baramulla district in northern Kashmir. Militants also beheaded a villager in a neighboring district, also because he was suspected of being an informer, he said.





Chapter 15

The American Muslim


     We now ask the question: ‘What about all the Muslims living with us here in America’? Of course, not all Muslims here are terrorists. Undoubtedly, the majority of Muslims living in America are nominal citizens living a devout personal piety but without the essential political dimension of orthodox Islam, and are certainly (or hopefully) not bent on terrorist actions. Many are content to continue to raise their families and prosper with the rest of us and do not want violence, being people with a better moral code than militants and their view (right or wrong) of what Muhammad expects today.  They try to follow a path dictated by personal conscience as exemplified by Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian lawyer and human-rights fighter who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.  Ebadi insists that no one, least of all the mullahs, has the right to tell others how to live and practice their faith. "There are no priests and no church in Islam," she repeats. "As Muslims we are alone responsible for our deeds and shall face Divine Judgment as individuals. Because we are not robots, no one could programme us with his version of religion. … All human beings are of equal worth simply by existing". That, of course, is in direct opposition to the basic principles of Islam, which hold that humanity is divided according to the strict hierarchy of worth mentioned earlier.


     Ebadi is a woman and as such is regarded by Iran’s Khatami and other mullahs as, at best, half of a human being. In much of the world she represents more a fringe minority than a majority, and she and others so inclined continue to face mortal danger for such heretic views in opposition to true Islam and the example of their esteemed Prophet. While perhaps most Muslims are peace-loving people wanting to "live together in peace and harmony" with those of other beliefs, the question that must be answered is: Are these Muslims for peace because of Islam or in spite of Islam? The fact will remain that Muslims are saddled with a system that has a spiritual force behind it, with violence firmly planted as a systemic root. In the end it is inescapable that to be a Muslim is to be aligned with the same spirit that choked and influenced Muhammad in the cave, that caused Muhammad to wage war and massacre those that rejected him, and that caused Muhammad to teach his followers to continue to do the same. To truly reject militant Islam is to reject Muhammad and much of what he taught. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but the fundamental, orthodox Muslims will continue to teach and pressure nominal Muslims towards obeying Muhammad’s commands to establish the rule of Islam, if necessary through the use of violence.  Nominal Muslims only need to awaken to the actual call of the Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira, to perhaps transform their faith and begin to use violence for Islam’s sake. It appears that more and more of them are awakening, as evidenced by the fact that their violence is increasing along with the number of Muslims involved in violent activities.


    Until -all- Muslims abandon the violent philosophy of Jihad and Islam, we must protect ourselves.  We must seek and apply the rule of law, but it would also be wise to present alternate social, religious, and political options to good, kind-hearted Muslims who are still bound to what amounts to a totalitarianism system deliberately disguised as a religion of peace. That disguise is paper thin, as evidenced by the many actions of Islam with non-Muslims over time, and which is becoming more translucent daily.


     So, despite the fear and difficulties faced by those seeking to separate themselves from the ‘faith’, the difficult question must be posed to any and all true peace loving Muslims, "Why follow Muhammad?  Why follow Muhammad in every respect – including his commands to do violence against those who reject him as a Prophet? If you truly disapprove of Muslim terrorist actions, why continue to tie yourself and your families eternal future to the man?" If you truly believe that the Muslim terrorists were and are wrong then why continue to follow Muhammad, for he taught and led a totalitarian movement enforced by the sword strikingly similar to the one led by Hitler or Stalin. Hitler justified heinous acts in his efforts to make the Third Reich the ‘only’ Reich, and Muhammad and militants today justify anything to make the entire world bow to Islam.  A person who chooses to follow Muhammad and trust his eternal future to Muhammad’s word, by extension approves of Muhammad’s brutal teachings, …and all his brutal acts.  The same will surely reap the same reward, but it will not be the 70 virgins and mansions so often spoken of and hoped for.  There are already millions of ‘martyred’ Muslims on the other side of the veil separating life from death, who lament that fact today from their spirit prison.  The dead cannot change their lives, only the living have the power to choose the acts they will be judged by.


     Although most Muslims in America are not terrorists, and many abhor the actions of their Muslim brethren around the world, …still, since Islam teaches world domination, these moderate Muslims rarely raise their voices in protest to their own brethren. If the Israelis bomb Hezbollah camps in Lebanon or Hamas camps in Syria, Muslims in New York, Detroit, and Los Angeles will organize a mass demonstration. But getting Muslims to condemn the terrorist actions of a brother, … say of those in Sudan, Egypt, Algeria, Afghanistan, Iraq, … is like pulling teeth. While the Muslims worldwide continually condemn Israel, few Muslims have ever raised their voices in protest over Palestinian homicide bombers or Saddam Hussein's genocidal war upon the Kurds. None ask why Bin Laden failed to help the Kurds (reports now indicate that he was working with Saddam Hussein to kill them).


     Although virtually all terrorists working to destroy Americans are in their own minds devout Muslims, it needs to be re-emphasized that not all Muslims in America are terrorists. Many of them are good people, but the seeds of terrorism are planted deep within the theology of Islam. This theology, when free to grow and blossom, shows itself in the actions normal Muslims take when they feel that Islam is challenged. Mob attacks in Pakistan, and the attacks by Muslim mobs in Nigeria and Indonesia, are examples of Islamic violence and mob mentality from otherwise ‘peaceful’ moderate Muslims. And as was demonstrated in “Not Without My Daughter”, who knows when a peaceful, liberal or moderate Muslim will be persuaded, enticed, or incited to turn to fundamentalism and embrace the violence of Islam?


     There have been increasing instances where Wahhabi Muslims have successfully penetrated key U.S. institutions, such as the military and our prison system. As recent media reports have noted, the two groups that accredit and recommend Muslim chaplains to the military have long been suspected of links to terrorist organizations by the federal government (The Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences and an organization under the umbrella of the American Muslim Foundation). Recently, one of the key architects of the U.S. military’s chaplain program, Abdurahman Alamoudi, was arrested and charged with an illegal relationship with Libya, long a state sponsor of terror. Federal investigators also have detained Captain James Yee (a Muslim clergymen), once stationed at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and who is being investigated for potential ties to al Qaeda.  A ‘moderate’ Muslim employed by the FBI even refused to take part in a surveillance of a suspected Al-Qaeda operative because he said, "Muslims do not spy on Muslims".


     The Graduate School and ‘The Islamic Society of North America’, another group with ties to Islamic extremists, also refer Muslim clerics to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons.  The New York State prison system promoted a Muslim cleric to a position that allowed him to supervise the hiring and firing of all prison chaplains. He was later removed from his job when officials discovered he was an al Qaeda sympathizer who incited prisoners against America. Jose Padilla, a terrorist accused of trying to build a “dirty bomb” to unleash in the United States, was exposed to radical Islam in the U.S. prison system. Richard Reid, the so-called “shoe bomber,” was converted to fundamentalist Islam while serving time in a British prison.

     A Senate subcommittee has been formed and an inquiry is underway to analyse and scrutinize (for terror-related activities) the procedures used by the military and prison system to recruit Muslim clerics. The senators are looking into whether the instances of Wahhabi infiltration at key U.S. institutions may be part of a larger pattern. In response, many pundits have been quick to accuse investigators of Muslim bias. These same Muslim organizations and their supporters (the ‘convenient masses’) are falsely charging “bigotry”.


     Despite an ever-growing body of evidence, many individuals, groups, and nations continue to function as a propaganda machine deceiving much of the American public, academia, and even our government. The stakes are becoming too great to continue our naïve and gullible habits. A tolerant, welcoming nation has given Islam the benefit of the doubt, but too many have already proven unworthy of that hope and confidence. Many of those spewing the incorrect or incomplete propaganda are aware they are not telling the whole truth about Muhammad and Islam, knowing the purpose of the misinformation is to weaken our resolve and keep us from instigating effective counter-measures. Despite the continuing rivers of blood flowing all over the world, they want to calm our fears that Islam is not a violent religion and that Muhammad was not a terrorist, proclaiming he was a lover of peace. But history (recent and distant) speaks for itself, and if would be unwise for any to welcome the kind of peace that Muhammad and his modern day followers seek. Those that defend Islam, or try to portray it in only a positive light, are deliberately or ignorantly misleading us and causing us to be inadequately prepared for their next deadly strike. Even the Muslim terrorists who flew the planes into the NY towers would undoubtedly have declared that Islam was a religion of peace, and Muhammad was a benevolent, merciful leader.  Someone saying something it true does not make it true, and that cause is not helped if a million or even a billion repeat the lie.  Truth is truth, to the end of reckoning!


     After Pearl Harbor and the tragic internment of Japanese-Americans, those same persecuted people sent their Sons in large numbers to join the fight in Europe against Hitler.  Those volunteers were amongst the fiercest, bravest, and most loyal patriots to join the conflict, and none today question their (or their parents and communities) loyalties. Through such contributions and actions they proved that the suspicion and paranoia was unjustly heaped upon Japanese and German Americans, and in fact now the consensus is that they would probably have provided even greater service to this country had they been fully trusted and deployed against Japanese forces. The jury is still out on whether the religious convictions and political leanings of the many large American Muslim communities justify the hope and brotherhood they have been offered in contrast. When we see the vast majority of American Muslim communities sacrificing for this country in like manner, then we should welcome those communities in full faith and welcome Islam into the great melting pot of our nation.  Think of what these individuals could accomplish in terms of penetrating and to bring down terrorist groups and all their supporters.  I hereby render the invitation and challenge for American Muslims to become full partners in this war.  An effective on-site intelligence section and a division or two of properly equipped, fierce, devoted, patriotic Muslim American men with social and language skills from the region would quickly penetrate and make short work of the kind of terrorists we are currently facing in Iraq and Afghanistan.  But alas, I fear that is a dream based on pure fantasy.  Please American Muslims, prove me wrong!

Chapter 16

Worldwide Islam Today


     There are many stories to be found; all over the world, detailing Muslim terrorists, operating for Islam's sake, attacking, bombing, and murdering those they feel inhibit their aims. Violence occurs between Muslims and Orthodox Serbs in the Balkans, Jews in Israel, Hindus in India, Buddhists in Burma and Catholics in the Philippines. From its inception, Islam has always had bloody borders, and not by accident, violence has always been integral to Islam. It appears a majority of Muslims in the world today may indeed view America as the last great wall that stops the natural advance of Islam. In their mind, America must be destroyed or brought down, by any means necessary. This is what motivated Sheik Rahman to blow up the New York towers. This is what motivates many Muslims throughout America to speak of a day when America will fall to Islam's power.


     Many Muslims might be peace-loving and thoroughly disgusted about the acts of Islamic terrorism, but it is a sad fact that most of them are afraid to do anything about it.  They know better than anyone the number, strength, and probable consequences of opposing the extremists.  Also, it should be pointed out that many Muslims do not know in any detail the historical facts surrounding their own Prophet. But in contrast, Muslim terrorists are usually very well educated in Islamic history, doctrine, and theology. They are the pious members of the ‘religion’, … spiritual leaders, and they do what they do, following the example of their prophet.  So often we hear of the fire-breathing clerics, even in this country, spewing hateful sermons inciting followers to act against many perceived enemies. The western expectation is that ‘moderate’ Muslims sanction them and appoint/elect better teachers and representatives, but to hope for such is naive.  To become a pious leader in Islam is to become fully acquainted with the real Muhammad and real Jihad.  There are, in reality, relatively few religious leaders who teach a doctrine different than the one taught by Muhammad, and those are rightly considered apostate or corrupt teachers by most Islamic bodies in the world. In most parts of the Muslim world, there are the fire-breathing types of leaders who make no bones about their violent leanings, and then there are the more savvy diplomatic types who speak conciliatory tones when non-Muslims are near.  But to their own people and in their native tongues, often those same diplomats can be heard praising all terrorists who act in Islam’s name calling them Heroes and Martyrs.  Remember that lying and deceiving non-brothers is explicitly allowed by Islamic doctrine set down by Muhammad himself.


Recent Muslim Views on Islam and Terrorism


     Several Muslims have written about the reasons they are allowed to wage war. From "The Quranic Concept of War", by Pakistani Brigadier S.K. Malik, it says, [in the preface]

"But in Islam war is waged to establish supremacy of the Lord only when every other argument has failed to convince those who reject His Will and work against the every purpose of the creation of mankind."

"Many Western Scholars have pointed their accusing fingers at some of the above verses in the Qur’an to be able to contend that world of Islam is in a state of perpetual struggle against the non-Muslims. As to them it is a sufficient answer to make... that the defiance of God's authority by one who is His slaves exposes that slave to the risk of being held guilty of treason and as such a one, in the perspective of Islamic law, is indeed to be treated as a sort of that cancerous growth on that organism of humanity.... It thus becomes necessary to remove the cancerous malformation even if it be by surgical means, in order to save the rest of humanity."


     The Muslim writer states that those that reject Islam are viewed as a cancerous growth to be violently removed, i.e., murdered. And, note that the Muslim writer basically agrees with the "Western Scholars" that say that Islam is indeed "in a state of perpetual war", with non-Muslims. But in viewing what has happened in Algeria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, etc. it appears that it is Islam which seems out of control causing more death and despair in the world than any other religious or political illness.  Review the following news release from an Egyptian party newspaper issued after Sept 11th.


The Middle East Media and Research Institute (“MEMRI”) www.memri.org

Posted: Wednesday, October 03, 2001
Special Dispatch No. 280: Terror in America (11)

The Egyptian newspaper, Al-Sha'ab, the mouthpiece of the Egyptian Islamist Al-Amal (Labor) party, … in the cover story for the September 23, 2001 issue, which was dedicated to the attacks on N.Y. and D.C., by Dr. Muhammad Abbas Following are excerpts from his article:

"I would have liked… to add to the flood of crocodile tears flowing from the four corners of the earth, as an expression of sorrow for America's victims… but I have found that my reservoir of tears ran dry a hundred years ago… Perhaps in [yet] another hundred years the time will come for me to cry over five thousand or even fifty thousand slain Americans."  "Did I say five thousand? Did I say fifty thousand? By Allah, this number is miniscule…"  "The tyrants of the world and of history (i.e. the Americans) suddenly discovered that their leader too could be attacked, and that the white Christian man can scream, suffer pain, bleed, and die…"   "Do you want me to cry, right this minute, over two or three buildings? By Allah, that's ridiculous. How can someone who knows how you destroyed countries and obliterated cities from the face of the earth be sorry about two buildings…"  "Despite all this, I did not exult. Death has glory and majesty, even when it is a dog that dies, let alone five thousand souls.  I sat in front of the television and tears filled my eyes. I admit, I did not cry out of sympathy [for the victims]; [I cried] out of fear of Allah the powerful, the precious, the victor, the avenger, the just; how he takes the tyrants just when they think they rule the Earth and are capable of confronting Him…"   "Islam is alive and well. The hero martyrs in Palestine are the ones who showed the world the incredible potential of the martyr's body. Whoever the perpetrators of the act [in the U.S.] may be, Islam is their teacher and their professor…"


Recent Islamic Terrorism Actions


FRANCE - Several years ago, Muslim terrorists began bombing innocent French civilians. Here is one article:

TERROR Campaign widens; Bomb in Paris Subway

Chicago, IL., July 25, 1995 --At least four (4)people were killed and another 35 wounded in an afternoon terror attack that took place today in the Paris Saint-Michel underground station, near the Latin quarter. Police officials are investigating and wouldn't immediately comment, but French Prime Minister Alain Juppe is quoted by the Reuters News service as saying that he believes that "there is a very strong suspicion of a (terrorist) attack".

These attacks were similar to bombings carried out by Muslim terrorists in France in 1986, in which dozens of people were killed.



Approximately 100,000 people have been killed in Algeria during the last 7 years or so. Below is one story from one of the survivors of an Islamic terrorist attack. The Muslim terrorists are not responsible for all the deaths; the Algerian police and Army have also killed many. However, the Muslim terrorists frequently target civilians, children, and those that are unable to defend themselves. By one account Muslim terrorists stabbed to death 4 French nuns.

Islamic guerrillas hold captive brides hostage to terror by Martin Regg Cohn Toronto Star Middle East Bureau

BLIDA, Algeria - In the dead of night, in the name of Islam, four terrorists burst into the home of 17-year-old Salima Amina Zenagui.

Accusing her of loose morals, the Islamic fundamentalists ordered Zenagui to cover her auburn hair with a hijab head-scarf. Then they abducted her at gunpoint to their underground hideout, where the teenager was forced to marry a terrorist twice her age.

After a religious wedding ceremony, he raped her - with a warning that any resistance would mean certain death. The bleeding didn't stop for 15 days. The mental torture, and the physical cruelty, continued for another five months. During the long nights and endless days, Zenagui slowly lost her sanity and the will to live.

Zenagui is one of thousands of young women and teenage girls believed been kidnapped by fundamentalist terrorists during Algeria's five-year Islamic insurgency. Forced into so-called temporary marriages that are a religious license to rape, their screams are soon silenced.

Most of the victims have their throats slit, their bodies dumped in wells like the one discovered last week in Bentalha, just outside Algiers. Police were drawn by the stench of death to the 40-metre-deep well, where they found about 30 badly decomposed corpses of women and girls believed to have been abducted and raped after a massacre in the area a month ago.

Known as "zawaj al mutaa", or "marriage of pleasure,'' the controversial practice is disdained by mainstream Muslims today. It dates from Islam's early years, when fighters in a holy war helped themselves to single women during periods of hardship or isolation.

Zenagui believes her captors were fundamentalist terrorists from the GIA, who rationalize rape as a way of motivating their men to sacrifice themselves for Islam. Even as they mistreat their captive women, they worship their God. In their hideout, Zenagui watched them pray toward Mecca five times a day. They read the Koran, Islam's holy book, and often played inspirational cassette tapes about the Prophet Mohammed.



In March 1992, Muslim terrorists blew up the Israeli embassy in Argentina, killing 29 people.

On July 18, 1994 a car bomb blew up the Argentine-Israeli Mutual Association, killing nearly one hundred people.



In August, 1994 two car bombs blew up in London, one at the Israeli Embassy and another at a Jewish charity shop. An Iranian expatriate by the name of Manoucher Motamer indicated that Iran was responsible for the bombings.



In July, 1991, a Muslim murdered Hitoshi Igarashi the Japanese man who translated "The Satanic Verses" into Japanese. He was stabbed to death in Tokyo. A Muslim living in Britain - Abdul Quddus, who is a senior vice president of Britain's Muslim league, said, "The attacks are justified because people translating the book are also insulting the faith."



The Voice of the Martyrs Magazine writes that, "around 280 churches have been burned, demolished, stoned, attached and closed since 1991 in Indonesia (Sept 1996 issue). [That number is up to around 500 churches today.] The article continues, "The June 9, 1996 attack in Surabaya, the second largest city in the country was the worst yet as 10 churches were simultaneously attacked by Muslim mobs." The article further records that 5,000 Muslims took part in the riots.

Again, these actions are not the work of a few select terrorists. They are the work of normal Muslims. They know that Islam is fundamentally violent, and as Muslims they exercised their faith to attack and destroy Churches. It was their type of Jihad for Allah.



A Muslim stabbed, but failed to kill, Ettore Capriolo, the man who translated "The Satanic Verses" into Italian. The attack occurred in Milan Italy.



In Sept 1991, in Imbaba, a district of Cairo, hundreds of Muslims attacked the minority Christians there, burning down a church with a Pastor's wife inside. Other churches were attacked, and Christians were beaten. The government had to send in 3000 troops to stop the Muslims from continuing to attack the Christians.

During the last 8 years in Egypt, hundreds of Coptic Christians have been murdered by Muslims in Egypt. Even the worshippers in churches have been sprayed by Muslims weilding automatic weapons.


In the deadliest attack on tourists, it was reported that at least 60 people were killed when unidentified gunmen opened fire at the world famous temple site of Luxor in southern Egypt. Tourists from Egypt, Switzerland, Germany and Japan were among those killed in the attack, which took place about 300 miles (500 km) south of Cairo. State television issued a brief statement saying "attackers hit a number of foreigners, Egyptians and policemen who exchanged fire with them," and the statement added that six attackers were killed in the shoot-out with police. A spokesman for a travel agency in Luxor was quoted as saying that the gunmen opened fire indiscriminately on tourists after the tourists got off a bus and were about to enter a temple in the morning. The assailants later left an empty tour bus, which they had apparently hijacked in an escape attempt, and reportedly fled toward the desert and nearby mountains. Prior to the event, attacks by Muslim militants had killed 34 international tourists in the past five years. Overall, about 1,100 people have been killed since 1992, when the extremists launched their campaign aimed at ousting President Hosni Mubarak.



In Oct. 1991, thousands of Muslims attacked Christian churches, businesses, and homes in Kano, Nigeria. Kano is in northern Nigeria, which is predominately Muslim. It was estimated that 300 Christians were murdered by Muslim mobs. Muslims were upset because Christian evangelists had been converting Muslims in the region to Christianity.



When the Muslims in Pakistan found a torn up Quran in a mosque, 30,000 Muslims attacked the only majority Christian town (Shanti Nagar) in Pakistan and destroyed half of it! Churches were burned, businesses were destroyed, and women and girls were raped. The army had to come in to stop the Muslims. A worldwide outcry against the action prompted Pakistan's Prime Minister Sheriff to help re-build the Christian homes, churches, businesses that were destroyed. [Note: This action was not the work of an organized terrorist group; rather it was a display of real Islam, as the majority of average Muslims in the region understood it. There was no Bin Laden leading this effort, there was no Hamas or Hezbollah orchestrating the action, it was ordinary Muslims, 30,000 of them, attacking a Christian village, because they thought that some Christian had torn up a Quran.]



     When Muhammad got offended, he murdered.... today, Muslims get offended, they murder. It is motivated by one and the same spirit and philosophy - the same dark spirit that appeared to Muhammad which caused him to attempt suicide - the same malevolent spirit that then talked him out of killing himself.... it had better plans for him. The same demonic spirit that had him massacre 800 Jewish men and adolescent boys, then enslave their women and children. These Jews had never clashed swords with Muhammad or his followers until he attacked them. The purpose that drove them had a thirst for blood, and during Muhammad's last 10 years, the blood flowed.


     Not only have Muslims attacked non-Muslims in Pakistan (Hindus have also been attacked and murdered in Pakistan), but the religious strife between Sunni and Shia Muslims there has taken the lives of hundreds during the last few years. Bombings of each other's mosques and gunfights outside of Mosques have taken place. Even inside of the Mosques, people have been shot.





Chapter 17


More News from Peaceful Islam:

     There is constant bloodshed in Algeria. Jihad is disseminating death and terror in Israel. In Southern Sudan, jihad has caused the death of some two million people, generated an even larger number of refugees, lead to the enslavement of tens of thousands, and produced deadly famines.  The Muslim Government of Sudan, in February 1998, imposed a veto on humanitarian aid flights to the southern, predominantly Christian province of Bahr el-Ghazal, and up to 60,000 men, women and children died of starvation in a matter of weeks. On July 14, 1999 it repeated the ban, leaving 200,000 people starving and trapped without food. Some claim that the Muslim King of Libya, Moamar Ghadafi, is paying Billions of Dollars to Sudan and other African Countries, to kill Christians to make Africa an all Muslim Continent.


     This culture of hate has multiple heads from Algeria to Afghanistan, to Indonesia, via Gaza and the West Bank, Damascus, Cairo, Khartoum, Teheran, and Karachi. It scatters the seeds of terrorism from one end of the earth to the other. In Indonesia, some 200,000 deaths resulted from jihad violence in East Timor. Christians have been pursued, and massacred, and their churches burned down by jihadists in the Moluccas and other Indonesian islands. The additional death toll in those violent attacks is over 10,000, while an additional 8,000 Christians have been forcibly converted to Islam. Atrocities are also being committed by jihadists in both the Philippines, and some northern Nigerian states. Hundreds of innocent people died when jihad struck at the Jewish Community Center of Buenos Aires in Argentina, and the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. In Egypt, jihadists have massacred Copts in their churches and villages, and murdered European tourists. Christians in Pakistan and in Iran live in terror of accusations of blasphemy, which, if “proven,” can yield a death sentence. And a cataclysmic act of jihad terror resulted in the slaughter of nearly 3,000 innocent civilians of multiple faiths and nationalities in New York, on September 11, 2001. None of these victims were guilty of any crime. They were murdered and mutilated out of hate, inspired by the political ambitions of radical ‘Islam’.  Consider in their entirety these facts along with the following releases.


June 5, 1968 – Los Angeles, California – Robert Francis Kennedy (Attorney General of the United States, U.S. Senator – Presidential Candidate), was shot dead in 1968 at Los Angeles’ Ambassador Hotel by Sirhan Sirhan. At the time, Kennedy was a Democratic senator and presidential candidate. A Palestinian Arab, Sirhan Sirhan, stepped forward and fired a .22-caliber revolver at Senator Kennedy. Although he was quickly tackled, Kennedy and five others were wounded. Sirhan Sirhan was arrested at the scene and later convicted of first-degree murder and given a life sentence. Senator Robert F. Kennedy died the next day.  Sirhan Sirhan is a 25-year-old Palestinian Muslim immigrant who said he felt betrayed by Kennedy’s support for Israel in the 1967 Mideast war.


THE NEWS-JOURNAL – Sept. 24, 1997: Algiers, Algeria. – Massacre leaves more than 200 dead near Algiers, Algeria. Brutal Killings belie government assurances. Attackers with machine guns, firebombs and knives invaded a neighborhood out side the Algerian capital early Tuesday and methodically killed scores of men, women and children in one of the worst episodes in nearly six years of political bloodshed by Islamic insurgents. Although the government reported 85 people killed, medical workers, gravediggers and eye witnesses said they counted more than 200 bodies in the suburb of Baraki, just south of Algiers…Large groups of armed men attack at night, often close to police and military barracks. They appear able to carry out horrendous murders undisturbed, then melt away with the daylight. …the incidents are reported in newspapers – but frequently are not confirmed by the government… Meanwhile, the scale of death has spiraled. A few months ago, when attackers were hitting isolated villages, a raid might have left several dozen people dead. But in the past two months, massacres have moved into greater Algiers, and death tolls have risen correspondingly. On Aug. 29, in what was apparently the worst single massacre of the insurgency, about 300 people were slaughtered in Rais, a village 15 kilometers from the capital. Tuesday’s massacre occurred less than 48 hours after Prime Minister Ahmed Ouyahia appeared on national television Sunday to announce that because of “the increased vigilance of the population, the determination of the security forces and the end of political bargaining, the country now faces only residual terrorism.” He proclaimed. Those words meant little Tuesday. The heavily armed attackers arrived shortly after midnight surrounding the neighborhood, then systematically forced victims out of their homes, where they were gunned down or had their throats slit, according to news agency accounts. Homemade grenades and Molotov cocktails were thrown into houses, said survivors quoted by the French news agency AFP. “They even tossed children from the terraces,” one man said. The recent massacres have fueled demands for an intentional effort to end the conflict. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who condemned the Tuesday massacre as a ‘brutal act of terrorism”, offered three weeks ago to mediate between the government and the Islamic insurgents but was sternly rebuffed by the Algerian leadership”.


The News-Journal (AP) December 10, 1998 - ALGIERS, Algeria – 45 Killed in Algeria’s Latest Massacre.  An armed band killed 45 people in a pre-dawn attack Wednesday that was the bloodiest massacre in Algeria in months, security forces said. Separately, authorities said Wednesday they had pulled 46 bodies from a 180-foot-deep well used as a mass grave. Many more victims remain in the mass grave, which could be as much as two years old. Security forces said in a statement that Wednesday’s massacre in the mountain town of Tadjena, about 125 miles west of the capital, Algiers, was committed by a “terrorist band” – language signifying Muslim insurgents blamed for many such massacres in recent years. The last massacre of this magnitude was in March, when 52 people were reported killed at Had Sahary Youb, 150 miles southwest of the capital. In the past, the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which starts Dec. 20 this year, has brought an increase in violence, and the trend appeared to be continuing this year. Wednesday’s massacre raised the death toll since the start of the month to at least 115 people.

Meanwhile, south of the capital, in an area referred to as the “Triangle of Death,” security forces said they had dug 46 bodies from a well at a farm in Meftah, 10 miles from central Algiers. It is not known how many more people may have been thrown into the mass grave, which specialists date to 1996 or 1997.


The Associated Press- March 17 2002 ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, — A grenade attack on a Protestant church packed with Sunday worshippers killed five people including an American woman and her daughter in an assault clearly aimed at Pakistan’s foreign community. No group claimed responsibility for the attack, in which at least one young man in black some witnesses said two ran through the center of the church hurling grenades. But suspicion fell on Islamic extremists. Ten Americans were among the 45 people injured, most of whom were foreigners, police and hospitals said.  The attack occurred at 10:50 a.m. during a sermon before 60 to 70 worshippers. Dozens of police and soldiers rushed to the scene. The church, about 400 yards from the U.S. Embassy, is located in the guarded diplomatic quarter in the heart of Pakistan’s capital and primarily serves the foreign community. The overwhelming majority of Pakistanis are Muslim and few Pakistani Christians live in Islamabad. Survivors spoke of deafening blasts, choking smoke and pandemonium. They said terrified parents screamed for their children and stunned worshippers dived beneath chairs and behind cement pillars as bits of flesh were hurled through the air. Parents groped to find their way downstairs, where their children were attending Sunday School. Other parishioners feared touching the wounded, because unexploded grenades lay near their bodies.

“There was blood, blood, blood, intestines lying on the floor,” said Elisabeth Mundhenk, 54, of Hamburg, Germany as she awaited treatment for shrapnel wounds at a hospital. “It was horrific. There was a horrible smell and we could barely breathe.” Mark Robinson of San Clemente, Calif., who was being treated at a clinic for a minor leg injury, described “total pandemonium.” “Everyone panicked,” Robinson said. “I saw one woman on the steps with a piece of shrapnel in her carotid artery. She bled to death right there.”

The U.S. Embassy identified the dead Americans as Barbara Green and her daughter Kristen Wormsley, a senior at the American School in Islamabad. Green and her husband, Milton Green, worked at the U.S. Embassy she in administration and he in the computer division. Milton Green and the couple’s young son were also injured but not seriously, according to police.  In addition to the Americans, 12 Pakistanis, five Iranians, one Iraqi, one Ethiopian and one German were injured, police said. The government said the injured also included Sri Lankans, Afghans, Swiss, Britons, Australians and Canadians.

The kidnap-slaying of Wall Street Journal correspondent Daniel Pearl was seen as part of an extremist campaign to embarrass the government and undercut its support in the West.  The attack was the second against Christians in Pakistan since the war on terrorism began. On Oct. 28, gunmen killed 15 Christians and one Muslim guard in an attack on a church in the town of Behawalpur.


BBC- 18 June, 2002- The Gaza Strip, Israel: By Middle East correspondent Orla Guerin. The mother of a Palestinian suicide attacker who killed two Israelis before being shot dead has spoken of her feelings about her son's actions.  A video released by Hamas shows a proud mother taking up arms beside her favourite son. First a warm embrace, then a loving kiss.  Naima al-Obeid was saying goodbye to her 23-year-old Mahmoud, a college student on his way to carry out a suicide attack.  "God willing you will succeed," she says. "May every bullet hit its target, and may God give you martyrdom. This is the best day of my life." Mahmoud says: "Thank you for raising me."

Naima got her wish.

            Mahmoud was shot dead attacking the Jewish settlement of Dugit in the Gaza Strip on Saturday. Two Israeli soldiers were killed in the ambush.  Their deaths are being celebrated near Mahmoud's home.  We found crowds coming to the mourning tent - and not just because of him.  People here aren't just remembering Mahmoud - they are honoring his mother.  She has become a heroine, being talked about on the streets, praised in the local papers.  Some Palestinians are taking a great deal of pride in a mother who saw her son go to kill and die without shedding a tear.  They are already saying she will inspire other women to do the same.

            In her home, in Gaza, she showed me pictures of the son she calls "my heart".  She had no sympathy for the dead Israelis, no regrets over the loss of her own son.  "Nobody wants their son to be killed. I always wanted him to have a good life.  "But our land is occupied by the Israelis. We're sacrificing our sons to get our freedom," she told me.  I asked her if it mattered whether her son killed women and children.  "The women and children are also Jews," she said, "They're all the same for me.  "And I want to tell Jewish mothers - take your children and run from here because you will never be safe. We believe our sons go to heaven when they are martyred. When your sons die they go to hell."  Naima is surrounded by wellwishers, no one asking why she gave her son a license to kill.  She has nine more children, whom, she says, all have a duty to fight the Israeli occupation.


Associated Press- July 31, 2002 BEIRUT, Lebanon— A disgruntled Education Ministry employee opened fire Wednesday at colleagues at a ministry office, killing eight people and wounding five before he was apprehended by police, police officials and witnesses said.  Muslim police chief Maj. Gen. Walid Koleilat claimed a financial dispute was behind the shooting, and dismissed any sectarian motives. But others, noting the gunman was Muslim and his victims Christian, questioned whether religious divisions contributed to the violence.  Koleilat said the gunman, who had worked for the fund for 23 years, went methodically through offices, shooting. Some of the victims ran out onto a balcony to escape the gunfire, but the gunman shot through the windows, killing two, whose bodies rested on the edge of the railing.  Mansour’s family said he worked as a clerk and “fixer,” a term used for people who help cut through red tape at government ministries in return for a tip. He is married with four children.  As news of the shooting reached Mansour’s village of Loubieh in south Lebanon, relatives and friends gathered at the family house for support. His wife, Mona Khalil, cried out: “This is a catastrophe. … I can’t believe Ahmed would do something like this.” She said Mansour is a diabetic who also took tranquilizers.  The building housing the fund is a few hundred yards from the main Education Ministry compound and across the street from the literature department of Lebanese University. About 200 police sealed the area.

About 20 relatives waiting outside wept as the bodies were being removed from the scene nearly three hours after the attack. They wailed whenever a body was carried out and tried to rush through the police cordon to remove the sheet to identify the victim.  Colleagues of the gunman who were in the building at the time of the shooting said the 43-year-old man arrived at midmorning armed with two pistols and a Kalashnikov assault rifle. He went to the third floor, where the teachers’ compensation fund has its offices and began shooting.  One witness, a government worker who refused to give his name, said after the gunman ran out of ammunition, he dropped his weapons, walked down the stairs and lit a cigarette. At about the same time, police arrived at the scene and arrested him.  Koleilat, the police chief, told reporters at the scene that the attacker tried to conceal himself by mixing in the crowd but later tried to run.  The police chief dismissed concerns that the attack may have been sectarian-motivated. “It is tragic. It was personal and isolated. We hope that no one makes of this incident more than its isolated nature,” he said.  But George Saade, the Christian head of the teachers’ union whose daughter-in-law was among the dead, was yelling outside the building: “He killed the Christian employees. How can we live in this country?”

Muslim Education Minister Abdul-Rahim Murad, who rushed to the scene, said money was the reason behind the shooting. Murad said the gunman was angry that the compensation fund sought repayment of a loan of $12,000 he had taken earlier.  “They asked him to sell his car, he sold it, got upset and consequently came and committed his crime,” Murad said.


The Associated Press- August 01, 2002 NEWARK, N.J. — A Jersey City man charged with killing his pregnant wife, mother-in-law and sister-in-law was arrested Wednesday by Canadian authorities as he tried to cross the border into Canada, officials said.  A fugitive warrant for the arrest of Alim Hassan issued by the Hudson County prosecutor’s office indicated there had been a dispute over his desire that his wife convert to Islam, according to Lt. Larry Baehre of the Buffalo, N.Y., police department, which took custody of Hassan from the Canadians.  “The warrant said that he and his wife had previous disputes that she convert to the Muslim religion,” Baehre said. The victims were Hindu, he said.  Hassan, 31, was taken off a Greyhound bus after the Royal Canadian Mounted Police received an anonymous phone call Tuesday evening, said Edward J. DeFazio, the Hudson County Prosecutor. The caller warned that a man who had stabbed the three women to death in their Jersey City home earlier in the day was headed to Toronto from New York City, DeFazio said.  On Tuesday morning, Bernadette Seajatan, 49, and her daughters, Sharon Yassim, 30, and Marlyn Hassan, 29, who was married to the defendant, were found dead in the house they shared on Fox Place with their husbands and Yassim’s two sons.  The two boys, ages 3 and 6, discovered the bloody bodies of their mother, aunt and grandmother, after the three men had left the house Tuesday morning.

The Associated Press- August 05, 2002 ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Monday five unidentified gunmen stormed the gates of a Christian school in a popular mountain resort Monday, killing at least six people and wounding two others before escaping.  The attack occurred at the Murree Christian School in Murree Hills, about 35 miles north of Islamabad in the Himalayan foothills. The school was founded in 1956 to train the children of missionaries here and in neighboring countries.  A statement by the school said there had been “several deaths and injuries”.  Federal officials in Islamabad said they did not know the identities or the motive of the attackers. The dead were identified as two security guards, two school employees, one unknown person and a retired teacher who was at the school to collect his pension.  It was the third fatal attack against Christian institutions in this predominantly Muslim country since President Pervez Musharraf joined the U.S.-led war against terrorism last year.  Sixteen people were killed in October when gunmen opened fire on a Protestant congregation in the city of Behawalpur. On March 17, an attacker hurled grenades into a Protestant congregation in Islamabad’s diplomatic enclave, killing himself and four others, including an American woman and her 17-year-old daughter.


The Associated Press- Aug. 9 2002 TAXILA, Pakistan — Three attackers hurled grenades Friday at women leaving a church on the grounds of a Presbyterian hospital in Pakistan, killing three nurses and wounding 23 in the second attack this week against Christians.  The attack is the latest in a series of terrorist incidents here since Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf sided with the United States against the Afghan Taliban, outraging extremists. Police said they believed the attack in Taxila, 25 miles northwest of Islamabad, was linked to an assault four days ago against a school for children of Christian missionaries in which six Pakistanis were killed. “It is clear that terrorists are targeting the Christian community in Pakistan,” said S.K. Tressler, the government minister in charge of minority affairs. Chief investigator Raja Mumtaz Ahmad told The Associated Press that the attackers wanted to kill Christians or Westerners to express anger over Pakistan’s support for the U.S.-led war against terrorism. The attack occurred as worshippers were leaving a church on the hospital grounds, according to Dr. Ernest Lall, a former hospital director who was in the church. The service was attended mostly by women and children, and women traditionally exit first.  Doctors said 23 people, mostly female nurses, were wounded and two were in serious condition. Three men had been waiting by the hospital gates for the daily morning service to end before they struck, according to police at the scene in Taxila, 12 miles west of the capital Islamabad.  S.K. Tressler, a Christian who is Muslim Pakistan’s minister for minority affairs, told Reuters the dead assailant was shot by an accomplice after being wrestled to the ground by a hospital worker, possibly to prevent him revealing the group’s identity. His account was based on police information. “I was still inside the church when I heard explosions,” said staff member Margif Tariq. “Windowpanes were falling on us, everyone was crying, everyone was in pain. … When I came out, I saw dozens of women were lying on the pavement and most of them were bleeding.”

The hospital, which is supported by the Presbyterian Church USA and the Presbyterian Church of Pakistan, was founded in 1922 and treats mostly poor Muslim patients.  “We have been here since 1922, and someone throws a bomb,” Lall said. “I don’t know why. It is somebody who must be against Christianity. We never thought we would be a target like that.” Shah, the regional police commander, said he believed the assailants were linked to the Murree shootings on Monday because the attacker who died was wearing clothing similar to that of the school attackers. One day after the Murree attack, three men believed to have carried out the school raid blew themselves up with grenades after being stopped by police in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. Before killing themselves, the three men in Kashmir admitted to attacking the school and warned that other groups like them “plan to carry out similar attacks on Americans and nonbelievers, and you will soon hear about it,” Shah said.

Extremists have vowed revenge against both Musharraf and his Western supporters since the Pakistani government broke with the Taliban and began a crackdown on hard-line Islamic groups. “If immediate steps are not taken by authorities to provide protection to Christians, I fear that it will lead to the start of genocide in Pakistan,” said Shahbaz Bhaddi, leader of the All-Pakistan Minorities Alliance.  On March 17, a grenade attack on a Protestant church in Islamabad’s heavily guarded diplomatic quarter killed five people, including an American woman, her 17-year-old daughter and the lone assailant. In October, 16 people were killed in an attack on a Christian church in Behawalpur, a city in south-central Pakistan.


The Associated Press – Aug. 12, 2002 ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — A man in Pakistan’s eastern city of Lahore allegedly killed his wife and four children Monday because he suspected her of adultery, police and residents said.

Investigators said Mohammed Sadiq was taken into custody and that unspecified weapons were seized. The four children were between 7 and 14 years old, police said. Hundreds of women and children in Pakistan are killed by their husbands or other male members of their family every year when the woman is suspected of having an immoral character.  In most of the cases, the murder suspects are acquitted due to a lack of evidence [in what some say is tacit state approval of extreme private applications of Sharia (Islamic) Law] . The slaying follows the highly publicized case of a woman who was allegedly gang-raped on the order of a tribal council as punishment for her teenage brother having sex with a woman from another clan.


The Associated Press Aug. 16, 2002 ALGIERS, Algeria — Islamic insurgents reportedly killed 26 people early Friday, including women and children, in a rural hamlet in western Algeria, the official APS news agency reported.  The agency, citing security sources, said the victims were members of three families in Bokaat Laakakcha in the region of Chlef, 155 miles west of the capital, Algiers.  The attack was carried out by a “terrorist group,” APS said, language used to refer to Islamic extremists who have been locked in a bloody 10-year battle with security forces. The Chlef killings were the latest in what has proved a bloody summer for Algeria. A marketplace bombing on July 5 in Larbaa, just south of Algiers, left 35 people dead. About 170 people were killed in July alone, according to an unofficial count by the press.  The violence was sparked by an army decision to cancel legislative elections in January 1992 that a now-banned Muslim fundamentalist group was poised to win.

The Associated Press- Sept. 23, 2002 CAIRO, Egypt— Two assailants killed a recently engaged 89-year-old woman and stole the jewelry her fiance gave her at their engagement party, police said Monday.  Police found Hekmat Hanna dead with her neck slashed Monday, a day after she was attacked. Hanna lived alone in an apartment in Shoubra, a low-income district in Cairo. Her fiance, George Demyan, also 89, presented the jewelry, worth about $3,000, to Hanna at their engagement party, police said. The Coptic Christian couple were to be married in October. It was to be Hanna’s first marriage.


Reuters-   Sept. 25  2002 —  KARACHI, Pakistan – Two gunmen burst into the offices of a Christian charity in the Pakistani city of Karachi on Wednesday and tied up and gagged Christians before shooting them at point blank range, police said. The attack was the latest in a series of bloody assaults on Christian or Western targets.  Doctors said an eighth man faced permanent paralysis of his left side from a head wound and needed an operation, while a ninth was under sedation after being beaten up in the attack. The gunmen fled the scene and were being hunted. The attack took place at the city center offices of the Idare-e Amn-O-Insaf, or the Organization for Peace and Justice. “The gunmen first roped all the people inside the room, they also taped their mouths,” a police officer told Reuters. “After, they fired straight at their heads.” “The dead bodies were found lying on chairs,” said provincial police chief Syed Kamal Shah. “It appeared that they were forced to sit there. Their hands were tied and their mouths were also taped. We found eight empty bullet shells of a TT pistol which means that they were shot point blank,” he said.  The attack came a day after two gunmen attacked a Hindu temple in Gujarat state in western India and killed at least 29 people. Indian Deputy Prime Minister Lal Krishna Advani has implicitly blamed Pakistan for that attack.

Interior Minister Moinuddin Haider told state-run Pakistan Television authorities would track down those responsible. “It’s a very sad incident,” he said. “We condemn it and whosoever has done it, it is matter of time, we will unmask them. But that certainly is not helping Pakistan.” Leaders of the country’s tiny Christian community, however, said the government was not doing enough to protect them. “It seems that nobody except Muslims will live in Pakistan,” Salim Khursheed Khokhar, a local leader of the All Pakistan Minorities Alliance told Reuters by telephone. “Fundamentalism is taking root in Pakistan, and Christians’ places of worships and welfare institutes are being targeted one after the other.” The charity has its offices, which are unmarked, on the third floor of Rimpa Plaza, a 12-storey block in downtown Karachi. A doctor in the next-door office said he had seen two gunmen. “They were wearing shirts and trousers and were clean shaven,” he said.

As a large crowd gathered around the office, the bodies were brought out wrapped in white sheets. Blood dripped off the stretchers carrying the dead men, and there were large blood stains around their heads. At the hospital female relatives of one victim, Edwin Foster, wailed and beat themselves in grief. “We were already shattered,” said his mother, Salima. “His father died just a few months back. And now my son… We are ruined, we are ruined.”

In March, a grenade attack on the Protestant International Church in Islamabad killed five people, including the wife and daughter of an American diplomat.


Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Lopsided statistics citing only the number of deaths of each side do not answer the question of the parties’ moral culpability and standing for acts causing the casualties.  Consider that, of the current causalities in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, 2.5% of Palestinian deaths were female, all unintended targets (or female homicide bombers).  Contrast that with 35% of Israeli victims being female, and targeted.  The respective percentages of children causalities are not as dramatic, skewed by the fact that Palestinians have no qualms about sending their young ones to carry out attacks, or to hide behind them when firing on Israelis.  There have also been hundreds of other shooting, vehicular, mortar, bomb, and stabbing attacks not listed here. Jun 24th it was reported that in 1000 days of violence, over 2,400 have been killed on the Palestinian side (including over 170 suicide bombers and suspected informers for Israel killed by Palestinian militants), and 870 on the Israeli side. Yet the state department warns Israel daily to show restraint. The following is a chronology of only the Palestinian homicide/suicide bombing attacks since Palestinians chose violence September 2000:

1.        Oct 26, 2000 – Homicide bomber strikes near an IDF post in the Gaza Strip, wounding a soldier.

2.        Dec 22, 2000 – Homicide bomber at Restaurant in Jordan River Valley; no Israelis killed, 3 wounded.

3.        Jan 1, 2001 – Homicide bomber, Netanya no Israelis killed, 60 injured.

4.        Mar 1, 2001 – Homicide bomber in taxi near Mei Ami, 1 killed, 12 wounded.

5.        Mar 4, 2001 – Homicide bomber, rush-hour bus stop in Netanya, 3 killed, 51 wounded.

6.        Mar 27, 2001 – Homicide bomber, next to a bus in Jerusalem’s French Hill area, injured 30 Israelis.

7.        Mar 28, 2001 – Homicide bomber, Neve Yamin gas station (near Kfar Saba) kills 2 schoolboys, hurts 4.

8.        Apr 22, 2001 – Homicide bomber kills a doctor and wounds 41 in a rush-hour attack in Kfar Saba.

9.        Apr 29, 2001 – Car homicide bomber near Israeli school bus outside Nablus; no Israelis killed, none hurt.

10.     May 18, 2001 – Homicide bomber kills five people and wounds around 60 at a crowded Netanya shopping mall.

11.     May 25, 2001 – Homicide bomber in Truck at military Junction in Gaza Strip; no Israelis killed, none hurt.

12.     May 25, 2001 – Homicide car bomber, attack in Hadera, 0 killed, 20 Israelis wounded.

13.     June 1, 2001 – Homicide bomber among teenagers at a Tel Aviv nightclub, 22 killed, 120 wounded.

14.     June 22, 2001 – Homicide attack, Jeep at Dugit in Gaza Strip; 2 soldiers killed, 1 wounded.

15.     July 9, 2001 – Homicide car bomber near Kissufim Junction; no Israelis killed, none wounded.

16.     July 16, 2001 – Homicide bomber, bus stop in Binyamina, 2 IDF soldiers killed, several wounded.

17.     Aug 8, 2001 – Homicide bomber stopped at military checkpoint in Jordan Valley; no Israelis killed, 1 wounded.

18.     Aug 9, 2001 – Homicide bomber in Sbarro pizzeria in Jerusalem, 15 killed, dozens wounded.

19.     Aug 12, 2001 – Homicide bomber, restaurant in Kiryat Motzkin (northern Israel), wounds 15 people.

20.     Sept 4, 2001 – Homicide bomber outside a Jerusalem hospital., wounds 15.

21.     Sept 9, 2001 – Israeli Arab blows himself up at a railway station in Nahariya, killing 3, many wounded.

22.     Sept 9, 2001 – Homicide Car bomb next to a bus at Beit Lid Junction; no Israelis killed, 13 wounded.

23.     Oct 7, 2001 – Homicide attack near Kibbutz Shluhot; one killed, others wounded.

24.     Oct 17, 2001 – Homicide bomb attack at Nahal Oz kibbutz, no Israelis killed, 2 wounded.

25.     Nov 8, 2001 – Homicide bomber foiled at Baka al-Sharkiyeh, West Bank, no Israelis killed, 2 soldiers wounded.

26.     Nov 26, 2001 – Homicide bombing at Erez crossing, Gaza Strip; no Israelis killed, 2 wounded.

27.     Nov 29, 2001 – Palestinian blows himself up on a bus in Hadera, killing three, wounding many.

28.     Dec 1, 2001 – Double homicide car bombing, central Jerusalem Ben Yehuda pedestrian mall, 11 killed, 150+ hurt.

29.     Dec 2, 2001 – Homicide bomber on a bus in Haifa kills 15 people and wounds 40.

30.     Dec 5, 2001 – Homicide bomber outside a Jerusalem hotel wounds three people.

31.     Dec 9, 2001 – Homicide bomber, hitch-hiking post near Haifa, wounds eight people.

32.     Dec 12, 2001 – 2 Palestinians blow themselves up at a Gaza Strip settlement, wounding 3 people.

33.     Jan 25, 2002 – Palestinian blows himself up near a café in Tel Aviv, wounding 25 people.

34.     Jan 27, 2002 – Female homicide bombing on the Jaffa Road in Jerusalem. 2 people killed, 111 injured.

35.     Jan 30, 2002 – Homicide bomber, Shin Bet security service near Taibeh, wounds two.

36.     Feb 16, 2002 – Homicide bomber, shopping center in Karnei Shomron (West Bank), kills 2, wounds 20.

37.     Feb 18, 2002 – Homicide car bomb at Al-Zaim checkpoint on Jerusalem-Maale Adumim road, 1 policeman killed.

38.     Feb 19, 2002 – Homicide bomber kept from boarding Bus near Mehola., none killed.

39.     Feb 22, 2002 – Homicide bomber thwarted, Efrat supermarket in West Bank; no Israelis killed, one wounded.

40.     Feb 27, 2002 – Female homicide bomber at an IDF checkpoint near Modi’in. 5 people wounded.

41.     Mar 2, 2002 – Homicide bomber, Jerusalem Orthodox neighborhood kills 11 (5 children) wounds many more.

42.     Mar 5, 2002 – Homicide bomber, on bus in the Galilee city of Afula killed 1, wounded at least 5.

43.     Mar 7, 2002 – At Ariel, café homicide bombing thwarted, no Israelis killed.

44.     Mar 7, 2002 – Homicide bomber at entrance to West Bank settlement, 4 wounded.

45.     Mar 8, 2002 – Homicide bomber intercepted and killed at Beit Hanina; no Israelis killed.

46.     Mar 9, 2002 – Homicide bomber, crowded Moment Café in Jerusalem, kills 13 people, injures more than 50.

47.     Mar 17, 2002 – Homicide bomber near bus in French Hill in Jerusalem; no Israelis killed, 25 wounded.

48.     Mar 20, 2002 – Homicide bomber on bus near town of Umm al-Fahm, killing 7, wounding 27.

49.     Mar 21, 2002 – Homicide bomber King George Street in heart of Jerusalem kills 3.

50.     Mar 22, 2002 – Homicide bomber at Roadblock interception near Jenin; no Israelis killed, 1 soldier wounded.

51.     Mar 26, 2002 – Homicide bomber near Malha Mall in Jerusalem; no Israelis killed, only accomplices wounded.

52.     Mar 27, 2002 – Homicide bomber, seaside Park Hotel lobby in Netanya, killing 29, wounding more than 100.

53.     Mar 29, 2002 – Female homicide bomber, Jerusalem Kiryat Yovel suburb supermarket, killed 2, injured 20.

54.     Mar 30, 2002 – Homicide bomber, busy Tel Aviv Coffee shop on Allenby Street, 1 killed, at least 20 hurt.

55.     Mar 31, 2002 – Homicide bomber, Matza restaurant in Haifa, 15 people are killed and 44 are injured.

56.     Mar 31, 2002 – A second homicide attack wounds 6 at West Bank Ambulance station of Efrat.

57.     Apr 1, 2002 – Homicide Car bomb in Jerusalem, policeman who approached car killed, 4 others hurt.

58.     Apr 10, 2002 – Homicide bomber, commuter bus near Haifa, kills eight and wounds 12.

59.     Apr 12, 2002 – Female homicide bomber, Jerusalem’s main Mahane Yehuda market, killed 6, wounded 104.

60.     Apr 19, 2002 – Homicide car bomb at Kissufim checkpoint in Gaza Strip; no Israelis killed, 2 soldiers wounded.

61.     Apr 20, 2002 – Checkpoint near Qalqiliya in West Bank, no Israelis killed.

62.     May 7, 2002 – Homicide bomber, snooker club in Rishon Letzion south of Tel Aviv, killing 16, wounding 55.

63.     May 19, 2002 – Homicide bomber rocks a market in Netanya killing 3, 59 wounded.

64.     May 20, 2002 – Homicide bomber at Taanakhim Junction exploded when approached. No Israelis killed.

65.     May 22, 2002 – Homicide bomber at Park in town of Rishon Letzion kills two people, wounds 27.

66.     May 24, 2002 – Terrorist attempted to ram a car bomb into the Studio 49 Disco in Tel Aviv. Bomber killed, 5 injured.

67.     May 27, 2002 – Homicide bombing Petah Tikva shopping center Ice-cream parlor, 2 people dead, 37 wounded.

68.     June 5, 2002 – Homicide car bomb, Tiberias bus at Megiddo road junction, 17 dead, 37 hurt.

69.     June 11, 2002 – Homicide bombing, restaurant in Herzliya; one killed, 15 others wounded.

70.     June 17, 2002 – West Bank, north of Tul Karm, Palestinian youth blows himself up as Police approach him.

71.     June 18, 2002 – Homicide bombing, Jerusalem commuter/high-school bus. 20 killed, 50 injured.

72.     June 19, 2002 – Homicide bombing at French Hill bus stop in Jerusalem; 7 killed, 35 wounded.

73.     July 16, 2002 – Explosive detonated next to Dan bus #189. Terrorists with IDF uniforms then opened fire. 9 killed, 20 injured.

74.     July 17, 2002 – Two homicide bombers kill 5 and wound 40 in Tel Aviv’s foreign worker neighborhood.

75.     July 30, 2002 – Homicide bomber wounds 5 Israelis in a fast-food store in Jerusalem.

76.     July 31, 2002 – Bomb in Jerusalem’s Hebrew University student cafeteria 9 dead (5 American) 85 wounded.

77.     Aug 4, 2002 – Series of violent events, including homicide bomb on bus near Safad. 10 killed, many hurt.

78.     Aug 5, 2002 – Car at the Umm al-Fahm junction in northern Israel, killing the terrorist and wounding the driver.

79.     Sept 18, 2002 – Bomber, waiting for bus, kills policeman who approached him at Umm al Fahm junction. 3 wounded.

80.     Sept 19, 2002 – A homicide bomb attack on a bus in Tel Aviv kills 6 injuring more than 50.

81.     Oct 10, 2002 – Denied boarding, homicide bomber at bus stop near Tel Aviv, killing elderly woman, wounding 30.

82.     Oct 13, 2002 – Tel Aviv Café homicide bomber thwarted/arrested by security, none hurt, belt unexploded.

83.     Oct 21, 2002 – A homicide car bomb exploded next to bus between Hadera/Afula, killing 16, wounding 40.

84.     Oct 27, 2002 – Jerusalem, homicide bomber at a gas station, killing 3, and injuring 20 more.

85.     Nov 2, 2002 – Thwarted at Tappuah junction checkpoint in the West Bank, 2 carrying explosive belt in car.

86.     Nov 4, 2002 – Homicide bomber in shopping mall in Kfar Saba kills 3, wounds 70 (including 2 infants).

87.     Nov 7, 2002 – Homicide bomber killed rushing guards at checkpoint near Jewish settlement of Kedumim.

88.     Nov 10 2002 – Kibbutz Metzer, car exploded killing Palestinian homicide bomber when Israeli police moved to stop it.

89.     Nov 21 2002 – Homicide bomber, Jerusalem bus packed with students/elderly/commuters, killed 11, wounded 50.

90.     Jan 5, 2003 – Tel Aviv, dual homicide bombers killed 23 bystanders and injured more than 100.

91.     Mar 5, 2003 – Haifa, homicide bomber on a bus filled with students/commuters, killing 17, injuring 53.

92.     Mar 30, 2003 – Pedestrian mall at Café entrance in the center of Netanya. Bomber killed, over 40 wounded.

93.     Apr 24, 2003 – Security man killed confronting bomber outside railway station in the town of Kfar Saba.

94.     Apr 30, 2003 – Popular café in Tel Aviv, just after a new Palestinian cabinet wins approval. 4 killed, dozens injured.

95.     May 17, 2003 – Hebron, bomber disguised as a religious Jew kills an Israeli man & his pregnant wife. 3 killed

96.     May 18, 2003 – Homicide bomber in Egged bus #6 near French Hill in northern Jerusalem. 7 killed, 20 wounded.

97.     May 18, 2003 – A second bomber kills self, minutes after bus bombing as emergency crews arrive. 0 killed

98.     May 19, 2003 – Gaza Strip, homicide bomber riding a bicycle detonated his explosives. 3 soldiers injured.

99.     May 19, 2003 – Woman bomber in shopping mall, northern town of Afula. 3 killed, 70 injured.

100.  Jun 11, 2003 – Homicide bomber in Egged Bus #14 in Jerusalem (Jaffa Road). 17 killed, 100 wounded.

101.  Jun 19, 2003 – Grocer killed approaching homicide bomber in his store waiting for commuters, south of Beit Shean.

102.  Jul 7, 2003 – Islamic Jihad homicide bomber in a home near Tel Aviv, killing a 65-year-old Israeli woman.

103.  Aug 12, 2003 – Homicide bomber at a Rosh Haayin strip mall, one dead, 9 wounded.

104.  Aug 12, 2003 – Homicide bomber at Ariel settlement Bus stop, one dead, 2 seriously wounded teenagers.

105.  Aug 19, 2003 – Homicide bomber in Jerusalem Bus, 22 Killed including 8 children and infants, 135 wounded.

106.  Sep 9, 2003 – Homicide bomber at a Tel Aviv bus stop serving hospital workers and soldiers, 8 killed, 15 wounded.

107.  Sep 9, 2003 – Homicide bomber at a popular Hillel Café on Jerusalem’s Emek Refaim Street, 7 killed, 30 wounded.

108.  Oct 4, 2003 – Woman homicide bomber in Haifa restaurant, 21 dead including several children, 60 wounded.

109.  Oct 9, 2003 – Suicide bomber at the entrance to Tulkarm, injuring two IDF soldiers and a Palestinian.

110.  Oct 15, 2003 – Bomb demolishs armor-plated jeep in Gaza Strip convoy carrying U.S. diplomats (3 dead, 1 wounded).

The Associated Press - Oct. 25, 2002 — Moscow, Russia – Armed assailants from Chechnya stormed a theater Wednesday and took hundreds of people hostage Muslim Chechen rebels threatened to begin killing their 600+ hostages at dawn Saturday. The head of the Russian Federal Security Service, Nikolai Patrushev, said the approximately 50 rebels’ lives would be guaranteed for the freedom of all hostages including 30 children and 75 foreigners. The terrorists, including women who claim to be widows of ethnic insurgents, have demanded that Russia withdraw its troops from the Caucasus province of Chechnya. Earlier, a Web site linked to the rebels said they would blow up the theater if the Russians did not withdraw in seven days. On Thursday, two women raced to freedom under fire from a grenade launcher. Their escape came after medics dragged the body of a young woman from the theater. She was shot in the chest, reportedly killed as she tried to move around inside the theater after the attack began. The hostages include Americans, Britons, Dutch, Australians, Austrians and Germans. In the initial minutes of the hostage taking, the rebels released some children and those identified as Muslims.

Russian NTV crews were allowed inside with a doctor Friday and videotape was broadcast showing three male captors in camouflage and carrying Kalashnikov-style rifles. Two wore black masks. The television identified a third man, who wore no mask, as group leader Movsar Barayev, a nephew of rebel warlord Arbi Barayev, who reportedly died last year. Two women in the group of rebels wore robes with Arabic script on the head coverings. Only their eyes were exposed, and they cradled pistols against their chests. The women had what looked to be explosives wrapped in tape around their waists. The packages were wired to a small button the women carried in their hands. A hostage, said the situation inside the theater was tense and conditions were worsening. The captives had not received food or water and were using the theater’s orchestra pit as a toilet. Yelena Malyonkina, also a spokeswoman for the “Nord-Ost” musical being staged in the theater, said captive production official Anatoly Glazychev told her a bomb was placed in the center of the theater and the stage and aisles were mined. “Both the terrorists and hostages are nervous,” Malyonkina said.


Putin said the audacious raid was planned by terrorists based outside Russia, and the Qatar-based satellite television channel Al-Jazeera broadcast statements allegedly made by some hostage-takers and apparently prepared well in advance of the incident. “I swear by God we are more keen on dying than you are keen on living,” a black-clad male said in recorded remarks. “Each one of us is willing to sacrifice himself for the sake of God and the independence of Chechnya.”


Over the past decade, Chechens or their sympathizers have been involved in a number of bold, often bloody hostage-taking situations in southern Russian provinces, especially in Dagestan. Nearly 200 hundred hostages and rescuers died in two of operations. Nov 4th, 2002 update, 120 hostages killed (most by gas), hundreds saved, most terrorists killed.

Other recent Russian terrorist incidents perpetrated by Muslim Chechen rebels or their supporters:

;     June 14, 1995: Chechen gunmen took 2,000 hostages at hospital in southern Russian town of Budyonnovsk, near Chechnya. After failed attempts at force, Russia negotiated hostages’ release after week in exchange for gunmen’s escape. More than 100 dead.

;     Jan. 9, 1996: Chechen militants seized 3,000 hostages at hospital in southern Russian town of Kizlyar. Rebels released most, then headed for Chechnya with about 100 hostages. Stopped in village and attacked by Russian troops. At least 78 dead in weeklong fight.

;     Jan. 16, 1996: Six Turks and three Russians held 255 hostages on ferry in Black Sea, threatening to blow up ship if Russia didn’t halt battle near Kizlyar. Surrendered after three days.

;     March 9, 1996: Turkish sympathizer hijacked jetliner flying out of Cyprus to draw attention to situation in Chechnya. Surrendered after plane landed in Munich, Germany.

;     Sept. 4, 1999: Bomb destroyed building housing Russian military officers and families in Buinaksk in Russia’s Dagestan region. Sixty-four dead. Russian officials blamed Chechen rebels.

;     Sept. 9, 1999: Explosion wrecks nine-story apartment building in southeast Moscow. At least 93 killed. Authorities suspected Chechen bomb.

;     Sept. 13, 1999: Suspected bomb destroyed apartment building in southern Moscow, killing at least 70. Officials blamed Chechens.

;     Sept. 16, 1999: Bombs sheared off front of nine-story apartment building in Volgodonsk, 500 miles south of Moscow. Nearly 20 killed. Chechens blamed.

;     April 22, 2001: Some 20 gunmen held about 120 people for 12 hours at hotel in Istanbul, Turkey, to protest Russian actions in Chechnya. Surrendered to police and released hostages unarmed.

;     March 16, 2001: Three Chechens hijacked Russian airliner leaving Istanbul and diverted it to Saudi Arabia. Saudi forces stormed plane, killing one hijacker and two hostages.

;     May 4, 2002: Lone gunman held 13 people hostage at hotel in Istanbul to protest situation in Chechnya, later surrendered.

;     Sept. 3, 2003: Two bombs were planted on the track under a commuter train of the railway line linking Kislovodsk to Mineralnye Vody in the Caucasus region. There were about 50 people in the third car of the six-car train which was directly hit by the blast. The bombs killed five people, and 30 people were wounded. An officer at the headquarters of the Caucasus Military District, which oversees Chechnya, said that the military had received intelligence information that Chechnya rebels (terrorists) were preparing a series of attacks in southern Russia.


The Associated Press - Oct 2, 2002 JAMMU, IndiaIslamic Militants Kill 11 in Kashmir. Suspected Islamic militants opened fire on supporters of the pro-India governing party in Indian-controlled Kashmir on Wednesday and a bomb exploded on a bus filled with Hindu pilgrims on a day of violence that left at least 11 people dead.  The attacks came a day after voters went to polls in the third of four phases of Jammu-Kashmir state elections, which separatist Islamic militants have vowed to disrupt, saying they are rigged in favor of pro-India politicians. In the first attack, a bomb exploded on a bus filled with Hindu pilgrims after it left Jammu, the state’s winter capital, killing at least two passengers and injuring 22 others, police and hospital officials said.

The worshippers were bound for the starting point of a pilgrimage to the shrine of the Hindu goddess of power, Vaishno Devi. Hours later, five paramilitary soldiers were killed when suspected insurgents triggered an explosive device while the soldiers were checking a road for land mines in the village of Pashtoon, about 40 miles south of Srinagar, a police officer said. Voting for the state legislature was held in that area on Tuesday. The Pakistan-based Hezb-ul Mujahedeen, the largest guerrilla group in Kashmir, claimed responsibility for the attack.

Also Wednesday, suspected guerrillas shot and killed three political activists with the ruling National Conference party in Haihama, a small town about 65 miles north of Srinagar, the officer said. And police said one officer was killed and another injured in a remote-controlled explosion in Bhaderwa, 127 miles northeast of Jammu. Nine people were killed in a raid on a bus near the Pakistan border in Kashmir’s Kathua district on Tuesday, just before polls opened for the third round of state assembly elections, and six paramilitary soldiers were also killed in an explosion Tuesday.

The militants have waged a 12-year insurgency for the independence of Indian-controlled Kashmir or its merger with Muslim Pakistan. More than 60,000 people have been killed and thousands are missing.


Reuters – Oct. 9, 2002 KUWAIT — By Ashraf Fouad.  Kuwait said on Wednesday it had arrested up to 50 people suspected of aiding two Kuwaitis to kill a U.S. Marine and wound another in what the government said was a “terrorist attack”. The two Kuwaitis approached the Marines in a pick-up truck on Tuesday, stepped out of the vehicle and opened fire on troops during the annual U.S. Eager Mace exercise on Failaka Island.  U.S. defense officials, who asked not to be identified, said the Kuwaitis had attended training camps in Afghanistan run by Saudi-born fugitive Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda network.

The attackers, killed by the Marines in Tuesday’s incident on a Kuwaiti island, were buried on Wednesday in what witnesses said turned into an anti-Western rally amid loud chants of “Allahu Akbar,” or God is Greatest. Writer Mohammad al-Mulafi, who attended the burial of the two Kuwaitis, said: “A dispute erupted when the brothers (fellow Islamists of the attackers) chanted that they were martyrs and in Islam it is not right to pray ahead of burying martyrs.” Mulafi said a clergyman addressing hundreds of people at the burial had said “The Jews and Christians must exit from the peninsula of the Arabs” – a long-standing demand by bin Laden. The clergyman also said “what the attackers did was their duty.”

The security source said the attackers were known to authorities as Islamic activists who had been questioned about visits to Afghanistan. “When we held them before, they said they were there (in Afghanistan) for humanitarian efforts and that kind of talk,” the source said, adding that direct links to Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda group were being investigated. Abdullah al-Kandari, the brother of attacker Anas Kandari, told Reuters he was not aware if Anas was linked to al Qaeda, but he had earlier asked to be buried as a “martyr.”


Reuters – Oct. 17, 2002 ZAMBOANGA, Philippines — Bombs ripped through the main shopping district of a mostly Christian city in an area of the southern Philippines at the heart of Muslim insurgency Thursday, killing six and wounding about 150. It was the second major bomb attack in southeast Asia in less than a week and suspicion immediately focused on a radical Muslim group also being investigated for Saturday’s explosions on the Indonesian island of Bali, in which more than 180 people died. Shouts of “There’s a bomb,” “Another explosion,” “Run…Run” rent the air in the city of Zamboanga as terrified shoppers and shopkeepers ran on to narrow streets littered with wreckage, glass and mutilated bodies from the twin midday blasts.

The military blamed radicals fighting for an Islamic state in the south of the Roman Catholic nation and said investigators were looking into the possible involvement of the militant Jemaah Islamiah group. “All threat groups are suspect in this incident, including the Jemaah Islamiah…and others,” armed forces deputy spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Danilo Servando told reporters in Manila, referring to the Indonesia-based group linked by some to Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda network. The twin explosions in Zamboanga came amid a heightened security alert across the country after the Bali bombings, in which carnage Jemaah Islamiah is also suspected. Police said they were questioning 16 people, including two Turkish nationals and a Malaysian, over the Zamboanga explosions. The blasts occurred about two weeks after a homemade bomb exploded near a karaoke bar in the city, killing a U.S. soldier and two Filipino civilians. Police blamed that explosion, on October 2, on the Abu Sayyaf. Asked if Muslim extremist groups might be involved, Zamboanga Mayor Maria Clara Lobregat said: “Most probably. They are the only ones who would do this. One can only weep at what these terrorists have done.” She said six people were killed and that at least 20 of the 143 injured were in critical condition. The dead included at least three women and a child. One man’s head was blown off. At least one man had his limbs blown off. Police were seen later dragging away bodies, some horribly disfigured. The first bomb, which exploded around noon in the Shop-o-Rama, one of the most popular malls in Zamboanga, wrecked cars, flung motorcycles down the street and tore open shuttered shops. One man was thrown through a plate glass window. Thirty minutes later, an explosion rocked a store nearby.

Troops found and defused at least two other bombs. “The bombings are apparently coordinated,” newly installed southern military command chief Lt. Gen. Narciso Abaya told reporters. “They are targeting crowded places where there are plenty of civilians.” Blood smeared the floors of the hospital where doctors and paramedics worked furiously to save lives. Zamboanga has been the scene in recent years of bombings blamed on the Muslim Abu Sayyaf guerrillas, whom the United States has linked to al Qaeda. The region is home to most of the four million Muslim minority in an overwhelmingly Christian country of 76 million.


Reuters – Oct. 17, 2002 KARACHI, Pakistan — Authorities are questioning eight post office employees about a series of parcel bombs that exploded in quick succession in Karachi, injuring nine people, police and postal officials said Thursday.  At least one of the packages had “From Mutahida Majlis-e-Amal,” written on it, a reference to the United Action Front, a coalition of anti-American religious parties that made unprecedented gains in last week’s national elections.

E-mails claiming responsibility on behalf of a militant Muslim group called Lashkar-e-Jhangvi were later received by a Pakistani daily newspaper and a local news agency. The e-mails said 35 packages containing 5 ounces of explosives each had been mailed from three different post offices. Four went off and six others were defused. It was not clear what happened to the others, or if they were ever sent. The e-mail said the bombs were “a warning to those police officers involved in operations against ‘Mujahedeen’ (holy warriors) at the behest of the Americans.” It said guerrilla operations would soon start against “anti-Islam police officers and other infidels.” Other Muslims are planning a mass attack on the United States, it said. Police said the e-mails claiming responsibility for the parcel bombs appeared authentic.


Reuters – Oct. 17, 2002 BALI, Indonesia — Indonesian police questioned four men Thursday over the weekend bomb blasts in Bali as Australia warned it had disturbing information of new threats against Westerners in the troubled country. Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said the information emerged just hours ago, and he urged Australians to leave the world’s most populous Muslim nation if they felt unsafe.

An international team of investigators is hunting for clues to the devastating Saturday night attacks which killed more than 180 people, including up to 119 Australians, and wounded hundreds more. Under increasing international pressure, President Megawati Sukarnoputri’s government has spoken of enacting emergency anti-terror measures but there was no indication when these might go into effect. Indonesia is considered a weak link in the U.S.-led war on terror in Southeast Asia, with critics saying the government is reluctant to crack down on radical Muslim groups for fear of upsetting the moderate mainstream.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard flew to Bali for a one-day visit to attend a memorial service for the victims and assess the situation. In an earlier interview with the BBC, Howard described Islamic extremism as “dangerous and evil,” but urged his compatriots to show tolerance toward moderate Muslims in the wake of the bombings that stunned Bali and its three million people. Australia bore the brunt of the casualties from the car bomb blast that ripped through several nightclubs. Two smaller bombs went off in Bali around the same time Saturday night. “I hope in a small way to express the feelings of the rest of the Australian community toward those people who have suffered and lost so much,” Howard said of his visit to Bali.

… suspicion has fallen on Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda and an Indonesian-based group, Jemaah Islamiah, which some link to al Qaeda. Australia said it could take weeks to identify many of the charred and mutilated victims and Howard said his one-day trip would give him a chance to assess the situation as criticism mounts about the slow pace of identification.

In her strongest move yet against extremist Islamic groups, Megawati is planning to bypass parliament and issue the anti-terrorism decree that would give police stronger powers to act against suspects. With Washington and jittery Asian neighbors piling pressure on Indonesia to take firm action, a presidential aide said the anti-terror decree would be issued “as soon as possible.” Asian countries point a finger at a Muslim cleric living in Indonesia, Abu Bakar Bashir, as leader of Jemaah Islamiah which they say has planned acts of terror throughout the region. Bashir denies any knowledge of the group or links to terrorism and Wednesday he told reporters “the bombings were engineered by infidels to launch war against Islam.” He has previously blamed the United States.


The Associated Press – Oct. 17, 2002 JAKARTA, Indonesia  — The government seeks expanded power to fight terrorism which could put it on a collision course with Islamic extremists widely blamed for the bombings that claimed more than 180 lives Saturday, including 7 Americans.  Human rights protections were written into law after the overthrow in 1998 of President Suharto, whose 32-year dictatorship saw hundreds of thousands of people sent to prison camps for long periods without trial. Megawati met Parliamentary Speaker Akbar Tandjung to discuss the decree, based on legislation that has been stalled in Parliament for months over fears it could give the security forces too much power. Indonesia has come under enormous pressure from the United States, Australia and other countries to strike against Jemaah Islamiyah, a militant group whose alleged spiritual leader, Abu Bakar Bashir, runs an Islamic boarding school. The government has long feared that taking action against Bashir could fuel a backlash by Islamic extremists. Ministers for the first time — delicately — said this week that Al Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah exist in the world’s most populous Muslim country, but have tiptoed around the issue of moving against it and Bashir.

Australia, which is believed to have scores of its citizens among the 183 killed in the bombing, said that it had new information about possible threats in Indonesia and urged Australians to leave the country. New Zealand issued a similar advisory.

Malaysia has pressured Indonesia without success for months to take stronger action against Jemaah Islamiyah. A Malaysian government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Associated Press that a long-sought suspect, Azahari Husin, 45, may be involved in the attack. Azahari received extensive bomb-making training in Afghanistan before late 2001 and was among seven militants who fled to Indonesia in January as Malaysia and Singapore arrested scores of suspects allegedly plotting to bomb the U.S. and other Western embassies in Singapore.

“Our intelligence shows that Azahari is likely to have had a hand about the bombing” in Bali, the Malaysian official told AP. “Azahari is well trained in all types of bombs, especially remote-controlled explosives.” An Indonesian cleric who was long the right-hand man of Bashir, Riduan Isamudin, or Hambali, may also have been involved in the attack, said the official. Both lived in Malaysia in exile in the 1980s.

Hambali is accused by Malaysia of arranging a meeting of two of the Sept. 11 hijackers and Al Qaeda operatives in Malaysia in January 2000, as well as organizing the Singapore bombing plot. His whereabouts are unknown.

He said Indonesian investigators sent to interview Omar al-Faruq, a Kuwaiti citizen arrested in Indonesia who has been in U.S. custody since June, had returned and were reporting on their findings. Al-Faruq is believed to have been a liaison between Al Qaeda and Jemaah Islamiyah.

In a sign of a newfound resolve, Jakarta police Thursday arrested Habib Rizieq Shihab, head of a Muslim group blamed for a spate of attacks against nightspots in the Indonesian capital. Although the group has been active for two years, in the past police have ignored it. …


The Associated Press -  October 17, 2002  KUWAIT –– Kuwaiti authorities arrested a teenager Thursday who had fuel explosives in his car near a shopping center and residential high-rise where some U.S. soldiers live just outside Kuwait City, government officials said.  A 17-year-old male was arrested near the Alia and Ghalia towers with explosives in Fintas, about 15 miles south of Kuwait City, an Interior Ministry official said on condition of anonymity.  The youth had 10 bottles holding gasoline-with soaked cloth fuses in his car and told police he had received orders from Pakistan via the Internet to place the explosives in the towers.


The Associated Press – Oct. 18, 2002 MANILA, Philippines — A bomb ripped through a bus in suburban Manila late Friday, killing at least three people and injuring 23 others, hours after a grenade blast in the capital’s financial district and a day after two deadly bombings in the southern Philippines.  There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the bus blast, but officials have said the al-Qaida-linked Abu Sayyaf group was the most likely suspect for Thursday’s noontime bombings in downtown Zamboanga city that killed seven people and injured more than 150.

The bus explosion took place at 10 p.m. on the EDSA highway, one of the capital’s main thoroughfares, in Quezon City, despite tightened security following the earlier attacks. The explosion in the back of the blue Golden Highway company bus ripped off its roof and part of its sides and sent debris flying 20 to 30 yards away. Two hours later, workers still had not managed to retrieve one badly mangled body from the vehicle, which had roughly 50 to 60 seats. “This is the handiwork of people with evil minds,” national police operations chief Vidal Querol said.


The Associated Press – Oct. 20, 2002 ZAMBOANGA, Philippines — A bomb on a parked bicycle exploded near a crowded Roman Catholic shrine Sunday in the southern Philippines, killing a soldier and injuring 18 people. It was the fifth bombing this month.  The blast demolished stalls selling food, candles and other religious items outside the historical site of Fort Pilar in Zamboanga, a predominantly Christian port city about 530 miles south of Manila. The ground was splattered with blood. Sunday’s bomb was concealed in either a box or a tin can and placed on a bicycle, witnesses said. The vehicle was parked near a gate to an open-air worship area where Mass is celebrated. “There was a loud explosion and everybody was screaming,” worshipper Fe Sanctuario said. “I knew that it was a bomb because the explosion was so loud and many stalls selling Christian icons had been destroyed.” Although the area was crowded with worshippers, the turnout was not as great as past Sundays because of rainy weather and fears of another attack. The blast injured 18 people and killed a Filipino marine corporal assigned to guard the shrine’s gate, police said. Two other bombings happened Friday in Manila. A grenade went off in Makati, the Philippines’ main financial district. No one was hurt in that blast. But later, a bomb ripped open a bus in the capital and killed two people and injured 20.  Security officials suspect that the Zamboanga blasts may have been staged by the Abu Sayyaf which Philippine and U.S. officials have linked to al-Qaida or Muslim separatists to divert ongoing military offensives. A police official, Napoleon Castro, said investigators were looking at the possibility of the involvement of the Jemaah Islamiyah, believed to be al-Qaida’s main ally in Southeast Asia, in Friday’s bus bombing. The attack was similar to a Dec. 30, 2000, bomb attack on a passenger bus, one of five almost simultaneous blasts in metropolitan Manila which killed 22 people.


The Associated Press – October 24, 2002 Seattle, WA — West Coast investigators are digging into the lives of two men named in connection with 13 sniper attacks in the Washington, D.C., area, searching for clues as to what may have motivated a killing spree.  John Allen Muhammad, 42, one of the men, is a former soldier at Fort Lewis and said to be sympathetic to the Sept. 11 hijackers, The Seattle Times reported Thursday, quoting unidentified federal officials.  He and John Lee Malvo, 17, a Jamaican citizen believed to be his stepson, may have been motivated by anti-American sentiments, the officials said. Neither was believed to be associated with the Al Qaeda terrorist network, authorities said. “It appears that they are and have acted on their own,” Bellingham Police Chief Randy Carroll said Thursday. Muhammad converted to Islam and changed his name last year from John Allen Williams, investigators told the Times. Muhammad had helped provide security for Nation of Islam Minister Louis Farrakhan’s “Million Man March” in Washington, D.C., according to Leo Dudley, a former Marine who lived a block from Muhammad. [National of Islam officials in Chicago admitted he was a member].  Muhammad, who was stationed at Fort Lewis in the 1980s and served in the Gulf War, had four children by two marriages that ended in divorce. Both involved bitter custody battles and at least one accusation that he abducted the children, the Times reported.  [Muhammad has since been tied to the murder of a woman in Washington State who was sympathetic to his X-wife.] Muhammad converted to Islam after divorcing his first wife 17 years ago; about the time he joined the Army.  Fox News learned from police sources that some people who knew both men said that 17-year-old John Lee Malvo, a Jamaican citizen, was nicknamed “Sniper” by Muhammad, who would call him that in public. The Seattle Times quoted federal sources as saying Muhammad and Malvo had been known to speak sympathetically about the hijackers who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.


The Associated Press – Oct. 25, 2002 ALGIERS, Algeria Attackers killed 21 members of the same family, including a three-month old baby, in a massacre that bore the hallmarks of Islamic extremists, Algeria’s official news agency said Friday.

The assailants stabbed and shot to death the victims in rural Ouled Abdallah, about 125 miles west of Algiers in the Chlef region, the APS agency said. Five people were in critical condition in Sobha hospital after being shot in the head.  APS referred to the killers as a “terrorist group,” language used in Algeria to refer to Islamic extremists. The radical Armed Islamic Group is present in the Chlef region and known for massacres of civilians.  It was the fourth large-scale killing this month in Algeria, where the government has been trying to end a decade-long Islamic insurgency. In the most recent attack, Algerian militants killed at least seven people on Oct. 20 at a highway roadblock.  Extremists are trying to topple the military-backed government and set up an Islamic state.


The Associated Press – Oct. 30, 2002 – Jerusalem, Israel — A Palestinian gunman killed two teenage girls and a woman in a Jewish settlement in the West Bank before being shot dead in a firefight with soldiers and residents.  The Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, a militant group affiliated with Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement, claimed responsibility for the attack on the Hermesh settlement. The gunman, identified as Tarek Abu Safaka, 22, crawled under a fence and opened fire at about 10:30 p.m.

Tzipi Kaliski, a resident, said the gunman killed the two girls as they were walking outside and a woman who was at home with her husband. Kaliski said she was in bed when shots rang out. “We all jumped,” she said. “We started hearing screaming west of the house. We immediately shut the lights, locked the doors. My husband held his weapon near him.”

“He (the gunman) saw the girls who had just walked out of the house…and he started shooting at them,” Kaliski said. Three days earlier the 81st suicide bomber detonated his explosives Sunday at a gas station, killing two other people and injuring 18 more, officials said.  ``Once again, the vicious agenda of Palestinian terrorists has taken its toll,’’ said David Baker, an official in Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s office. ``Like spectators, the Palestinian Authority stands by and does nothing while Palestinian terrorists continue to wage a campaign of terror against Israeli civilians.’’ David Baker, an official in Sharon’s office, called the Ariel blast further proof that the “cornerstone of Palestinian terrorists’ game plan” was killing Israelis. At least 623 Israelis have been killed and thousands wounded since the uprising began.

The Associated Press – Oct. 31, 2002 – JAKARTA, Indonesia  — Indonesian officials said Thursday it was possible that soldiers were behind the killings of two American teachers and an Indonesian in troubled Papua province, and the military chief promised justice if that is proven.  Indonesian military commanders initially blamed separatists who have been fighting a low-level insurgency in Papua for the Aug. 31 ambush on a convoy of teachers that killed the three. Ten others were wounded in the attack. The Free Papua Movement, which has a led the insurgency against Indonesian rule, denied any role. The Free Papua Movement members are overwhelmingly Christians and animists.  … Indonesian troops have a long history of attacks on civilians in Papua, a vast jungle territory forcibly incorporated into Indonesia in 1963. Ten special forces soldiers have been charged in last year’s assassination of the province’s top political leader, Theys Eluay.


Reuters Nov. 11, 2002 – JERUSALEM, Israel — Israeli Foreign Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called on Monday for the removal of Yasser Arafat’s “terror regime” after a Palestinian gunman killed five Israelis, including a mother and her two children, in a kibbutz. The hawkish ex-premier’s remarks were his most scathing attack on the Palestinian leadership since he was appointed last week after the collapse of a unity government and underlined the tensions facing a new U.S. peace mission to the region. A gunman slipped overnight into Kibbutz Metzer, near the dividing line between northern Israel and the West Bank, and opened fire outside a dining hall, killing a woman visitor and the kibbutz’s chief administrator. The militant then burst into a house, shooting dead a 34-year-old woman in the doorway of her children’s room and killing her two young sons, aged four and five, as they clutched covers over their head. On Monday, Avi Ohayon staggered through the toy-filled room where his ex-wife and children died, then collapsed on a mattress when he spotted several small objects on one of the beds. “God help me,” he screamed. “They killed a child who had a pacifier.” The Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, an armed offshoot of Arafat’s Fatah group, claimed responsibility. It said it was avenging Israel’s killing of an Islamic militant leader, and vowed “more martyrdom attacks until occupation leaves our land.”


The New York Times Nov. 21, 2002 – Egypt   An Investigation in Egypt Illustrates Al Qaeda’s Web By SUSAN SACHS  “It has nothing to do with age or era,” said Mr. Zayat, who has defended thousands of Islamic militants over the years and served time in prison for his youthful involvement in an extremist movement. “It is ideology. These groups have their own literature that is passed down from generation to generation. This literature promotes the idea of `jihad’ and the use of violence to overthrow those who do not rule according to God’s law.”

BBC News Nov. 22, 2002 – Nigeria, Africa  — ‘Riots spread to capital’:  Hundreds of Muslim youths have gone on the rampage in Nigeria’s capital, Abuja, following Friday prayers.  BBC’s Haruna Bahago in Abuja says people armed with sticks, daggers and knives set fire to vehicles and attacked anyone they suspected of being Christian.  Earlier rioting in the northern city of Kaduna, in protest at the Miss World beauty contest, left at least 100 people dead, according to Red Cross officials Thousands of Muslim youths went through the suburbs of Kaduna, putting up barricades of burning tires, setting fire to buildings, and attacking churches. Kaduna is one of Nigeria’s most volatile cities; more than 2,000 people died there in clashes between Christians and Muslims two years ago.  The Kaduna rioters demanded the cancellation of the Miss World contest. Muslim groups say it is immoral and degrading to women, and are also angry that preliminary events began during the holy month of Ramadan. The protests began after a newspaper suggested that the Prophet Mohammed would have probably chosen to marry one of the Miss World contestants if he had witnessed the beauty pageant – which Nigeria is currently hosting. The holding of the Miss World contest in Nigeria has also provoked international controversy.  It had been threatened by a boycott by beauty queens after a woman convicted of adultery, Amina Lawal, was sentenced by a Sharia court to death by stoning.

Reuters –Dec. 5, 2002 – KARACHI, Pakistan — An explosion and the slaying of three people on Thursday at Macedonia’s consulate offices whose bodies were found inside may have been the work of al-Qaida taking revenge for the killing of seven militant suspects in the Macedonian capital, police said.  Investigators found messages scrawled on a wall referring to al-Qaida and warning against “infidels”. The victims two men and a woman had their hands and feet bound and their throats slit.

The Macedonian Foreign Ministry called the assault “a professionally prepared terrorist attack” and instructed its embassies and consular offices worldwide to boost security. In a statement, the ministry also expressed “strong bitterness and deep condolences for the victims,” all believed to be Pakistani.  Counter terrorism police were investigating the possibility that the slayings and subsequent explosion may have been in retaliation for the killing of seven Pakistanis in Macedonia on March 2.

Macedonian police opened fire on a van that tried to drive through a roadblock in the capital, Skopje, killing seven Pakistanis inside. Police said they found seven Kalashnikov assault rifles, several hand grenades and ammunition in the van.  Macedonian officials said the seven had planned attacks on Western embassies. One of them was identified as Ahmet Ikaz, 24, a Pakistani listed as a known criminal by Interpol. Quereshi told reporters in Karachi the building should have been empty except for the night watchman.

Doctors at Karachi’s Jinnah Medical Center who performed autopsies on the victims said their hands and legs were tied, their mouths gagged and their throats slit, and the weapon used was still in the body of one victim. One of the dead was the night watchman, a Christian, police said. The other bodies were not immediately identified.

Associated Press –Dec. 26, 2002 – LAHORE, Pakistan — Mourners buried three girls killed in a Christmas grenade attack on a tiny church in eastern Pakistan, and police detained an Islamic cleric who allegedly called on followers to kill Christians days before the bombing. Police also detained three other people Thursday for questioning in the attack, which injured 13 people in Chianwala, about 40 miles northwest of Lahore.  Two assailants covered in burqas – the all-encompassing garment worn by women in some Islamic countries – tossed a grenade into the middle of worshippers at a Christmas service Wednesday.

On Thursday, about 2,500 people, several times the number of the church’s normal congregation, gathered for a memorial service for the girls killed in the attack. The coffins of the victims – aged 6, 10 and 15 – were carried on the shoulders of mourners to a local cemetery for burial. In a statement, newly elected Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali described the attack as “dastardly” and designed to “foment religious and sectarian strife” in Pakistan. Since Pakistan lent its support to the U.S.-led military campaign to overthrow Afghanistan’s hard-line Taliban, attacks on Christians by suspected Islamic militants have increased, killing more than two dozen people. The cleric, who uses only the one name, Afzar, was being detained because of hateful remarks toward Christians made three days earlier in a sermon at a mosque in the district of Daska, where Chianwala is located, police said. Authorities say they have no evidence yet that he was directly involved in the attack. Afzar reportedly told his congregation that “it is the duty of every good Muslim to kill Christians,” according to Nazir Yaqub, a police officer in Daska. “Afzar told people ‘you should attack Christians and not even have food until you have seen their dead bodies,”’ Yaqub told The Associated Press by telephone. Afzar’s son, Attaullah, was also detained for questioning. The two are open supporters of the banned group Jaish-e-Mohammed, a violent anti-India organization with ties to the al-Qaida terrorist network, said a police officer in Chianwala, Mohammed Riaz. Two other people have also been detained by police in Chianwala for the grenade attack, but it was not known whether they too had links to the group, which was outlawed in Pakistan last January. Security had been increased in churches ahead of Christmas celebrations around this mostly Islamic nation. But a policeman who was to guard the church failed to show up for work, according to his superiors. The policeman, identified as Shah Nawaz, was being questioned, but it was not yet clear whether he was simply negligent or was party to the attack, said Yaqub. About 40 people, mostly women and children and all Pakistanis, were attending the Christmas Day service.

Witnesses said the attackers wore burqas, said Amanat Ali, a police official in Daska. Ali said witnesses reported the attackers were taller than most women. Male Islamic militants in neighboring Afghanistan have worn burqas to hide their identities in at least one recent attack there. There have been four other deadly attacks on Christians in Pakistan this year. The last was on Sept. 25, when gunmen entered the offices of a Christian welfare organization in Karachi, tied seven employees to their chairs and shot each in the head. On March 17, a grenade attack on a Protestant church in Islamabad killed five people, including a U.S. Embassy employee and her 17-year-old daughter. On Aug. 5, assailants raided a Christian school filled with foreign children in Murree, 40 miles east of Islamabad. Six Pakistanis were killed, including guards and non-teaching staff. And on Aug. 9, attackers hurled grenades at worshippers at a church on the grounds of a Presbyterian hospital in Taxila, about 25 miles west of Islamabad, killing four people.


Reuters - March 7, 2003  - RABAT, Morocco — A court in Casablanca Thursday handed out prison sentences ranging from one month to one year to 14 heavy metal music enthusiasts, the official MAP news agency reported.  The trial followed articles in some newspapers which described the accused as "Satanists" who recruited for an international cult of devil-worship. The 14 men, aged between 22 and 35 years, were found guilty of "possessing objects which infringe morals" and of "acts capable of undermining the faith of a Muslim." Morocco's penal code allows a maximum sentence of three years for attempting to convert a Muslim to another faith. Nine of those sentenced are musicians in three Moroccan heavy metal groups.  The judge remarked during the trial that "Normal people go to concerts in a suit and tie," rather than in a black T-shirt with heavy-metal symbols which was shown to the court. The judge also found suspicious the fact that one of the musicians chose to pen lyrics in English rather than Arabic. The case was set against a background of rising electoral support for Morocco's Islamist Justice and Development Party. In legislative elections last September, the party emerged as the third largest in parliament, and it looks set to gain ground in local elections in June.


Associated Press – April 23, 2003 – TEHRAN, Iran— An Iranian actress was given a suspended sentence of 74 lashes for kissing a young actor on the cheek, the actress said Wednesday. Gowhar Kheirandish was prosecuted after she shook hands and kissed Ali Zamani at a public festival in the city of Yazd in September, provoking organized protests.  Iran’s strict Islamic laws ban socializing between unrelated men and women. Public kissing between men and women is considered un-Islamic and taboo.  “I’ve been sentenced to 74 suspended lashes,” Kheirandish told The Associated Press. She said the kiss was an “emotional, motherly gesture.”  Earlier this week, Yazd’s public court found Kheirandish guilty and sentenced her. The verdict means that she will be lashed 74 times if the offense is repeated.

Associated Press – May 7, 2003 – BEIRUT, Lebanon — A bomb exploded outside the home of a Christian missionary couple in northern Lebanon, killing an Arab neighbor as he attempted to dismantle it, officials said. Police said the bomb exploded Tuesday night outside the home of a Dutch missionary and his German wife in the predominantly Sunni Muslim port city of Tripoli. The neighbor victim, Jamil Ahmed Rifai, a Jordanian who converted from Islam to Christianity, was visiting the couple when they heard a noise outside and he went to investigate. He found the 4 pound bomb in a bag and it exploded as he tried to dismantle it, authorities said. Tripoli, Lebanon’s second-largest city, is home to Sunni fundamentalist groups. Qubba, the neighborhood, where the attack occurred, has a small Christian population.  It was the second attack on Christian missionaries since November, when an unidentified gunman killed an American missionary in southern Lebanon. That victim, Bonnie Penner, 31, who grew up in Vancouver, Wash., worked as a nurse at an evangelical center in Sidon, also a predominantly Muslim town. Several explosions have ripped through American fast-food restaurants and a British cultural center in Tripoli and Beirut in recent months.


Reuters – May 25, 2003 — ALGIERS, Algeria – Islamic militants killed seven people in western Algeria Sunday, including two children whose throats were slit, state radio and neighbors said. Between 100,000 and 150,000 Algerians have been killed in violence that erupted in 1992 after the government canceled elections that fundamentalist Islamists were poised to win. The attack took place in the Chlef region, some 200 km (125 miles) west of the capital Algiers, as the country grappled with the aftermath of an earthquake that has killed more than 2,100 people.
Ten armed men slit the throats of a woman and her two children before moving to a school where they shot dead four students and wounded a fifth, neighbors said. About 25 students escaped the attack early Sunday, they said. The Armed Islamic Group (GIA) and the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) are fighting Algerian authorities to create a purist Islamic state. The GIA became infamous for slitting the throats of their victims, carving unborn babies out of the bodies of pregnant women and wiping out entire families. The GSPC, on a U.S. list of terrorist groups, was set up in 1998 by a dissident of the GIA. The GSPC split with the GIA was reportedly over discontent with the massacres of civilians, the GSPC advocating a higher level of brutality against all non-Muslims civilians, which the area has since witnessed.

Associated Press – Aug 1, 2003 – Mozdok, Russia — A vehicle packed with explosives crashed through hospital gates with a homicide bomber behind the wheel and exploded outside a Russian military hospital near Chechnya, killing and wounding scores, according to officials and Russian news agencies. The evening blast completely demolished the four-story red brick hospital in the city of Mozdok in Russia’s North Ossetia region, the region’s Emergency Situations Minister Boris Dzgoyev told The Associated Press. Mozdok is the headquarters for Russian forces fighting in Chechnya and has been targeted by attackers before. The building, which had 115 people inside, including medical workers and patients, collapsed like a house of cards, Dzgoyev said. It follows several homicide bombings that have killed more than 100 people in and around Chechnya and in Moscow since May. The number of dead and wounded was still being determined as rescuers searched through the debris for survivors. Alina Totykova, deputy head of the North Ossetian regional hospital in the regional capital Vladikavkaz, said all available ambulances were sent to Mozdok. There was a serious shortage of medicine, anesthetics and bandages and a severe shortage of blood, she said, adding that an appeal for people to give blood would be broadcast on television in the region. President Vladimir Putin expressed condolences to relatives of the victims and urged the North Ossetian leadership to tell federal authorities in Moscow what was needed to aid the victims, the Kremlin said. Putin also ordered law enforcement officials to investigate the blast. In June, a female homicide attacker detonated a bomb near a bus carrying soldiers and civilians to work at a military airfield near Mozdok, killing at least 16 people. In May in Chechnya, a homicide truck-bombing also killed 72 people and a woman blew herself up at a religious ceremony, killing at least 18 people. A double homicide bombing at a rock concert in Moscow on July 5 also killed the female attackers and 15 other people. Soon afterward, a bomb authorities said a woman from Chechnya brought to a downtown Moscow street killed a bomb disposal expert.


Associated Press – Aug 3, 2003 – Bethlehem, Israel — Earlier this month, Israel turned Bethlehem back over to Palestinian security forces under terms of the U.S.-backed “road map” peace plan. Shortly after Palestinian and Israeli foreign ministers disagreed on terms to make the temporary cease-fire permanent, Palestinian gunmen opened fire on Israeli vehicles between Bethlehem and Jerusalem, wounding four people, police and rescue services said. Jewish settlers said the wounded were a mother and three children. The mother and her 9-year-old daughter were seriously hurt, hospital officials said, while two other children were wounded slightly. The Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, a violent group affiliated with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement, claimed responsibility for the shooting in a phone call to The Associated Press. Israel has urged the Palestinians to dismantle groups that have carried out terror attacks killing hundreds of Israelis — as stipulated in the peace plan — but Palestinian authorities have refused, arguing that full confrontation with militants would trigger civil war.


Reuters – Aug 5, 2003 – JAKARTA, Indonesia – A huge car bomb tore through one of the top US owned hotels in Indonesia’s capital on Tuesday, killing 14 people and wounding 150 in the second major attack to shake the world’s most populous Muslim nation in a year. The Marriott, popular with foreign businessmen, is on a major road through the city’s business district, close to where many Western embassies and consulates are based. Management said the hotel was 70-80 percent full. The blast was timed as workers poured out of offices for lunch. It came just two days before the first verdict is due in the trials of Muslim militants accused in the Bali bombings that killed 202. Diners were eating lunch in restaurants and cafes in the hotel and in a nearby office tower when the blast blew out windows and showered people with shards of glass. Wreckage from the charred lobby was strewn over a wide area. Police said a Dutch banking executive was among the dead, while four Singaporeans, two Americans, two Australians and a New Zealander were among those wounded.

Fox News – Aug 12, 2003 –ROSH HAAYIN, Israel  — Twin homicide bombings in the Middle East Tuesday morning left two Israelis dead and 11 wounded. The attacks took place at a strip mall in Israel and at a bus stop at a West Bank Jewish settlement, shattering a six-week period of relative calm. The homicide bombings were the first since an Islamic Jihad splinter cell member blew himself up inside a house near Tel Aviv on July 7, killing a 65-year-old Israeli woman.

The Islamic militant group Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack at the West Bank settlement of Ariel, which killed an Israeli army recruit. The other blast, which killed at least one bystander at a pharmacy in the Tel Aviv suburb of Rosh Haayin, was carried out by renegade members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades tied to Yasser Arafat’s Fatah movement, army officials said. Iranian-funded Fatah rebels have refused to comply with truce and have carried out several attacks in the past six weeks.

The Hamas military wing, claimed responsibility for the Ariel bombing, which killed an Israeli army recruit and seriously injured two others, said to be teenagers. … Under a U.S.-backed peace plan, the Palestinians must dismantle militant groups, but Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, has said he will not confront Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Aqsa. In Rosh Haayin near Tel Aviv, the bomber struck at the entrance to a supermarket and pharmacy in a small shopping center, leaving a mass of twisted blinds and shattered glass. Nine people were injured, one seriously, five moderately and three lightly. The blast sparked a large fire in the supermarket … firefighters with breathing equipment pulled casualties out of the shattered store. In Ariel, the body of the dead Israeli lay spread-eagled at the side of the road, covered by a white plastic sheet. Police and soldiers with sniffer dogs searched for more explosives. An Israeli security official said that since the June 29 cease-fire agreement between the violent Islamic groups, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the military had thwarted 36 Palestinian attacks and arrested more than 200 Palestinians.



Chapter 18


Real Islam:A Case Study

     The information and data presented thus far is overwhelming, to the point of desensitizing a reader deluged with it over a relatively short period.  The process of reading leaves insufficient time for contemplation and normal human emotion. So much has happened; so many lives have been altered forever or snuffed-out as a result of Islamic Jihadi actions throughout the world. It is simply impossible to digest and properly consider on a personal human level the full impact of Islam’s deeds yesterday and today.  The reader is encouraged in this section to put him/herself into the shoes of someone and thus more intimately consider the personal impact of the violent acts performed against them by the energetic Muslim militants.  A personal case study is given from the perspective of one victim and witness in Indonesia, which gives us the true human context to the many historical and current-news accounts cited herein.  The confusion, terror, and sorrow felt by the victim is representative of all victims of zealous Islamic militants acting out on their religious convictions.  In the end it doesn’t matter if the victim dies from beating, having their throat slashed, shot, stabbed, burned, blown up, run down, or forced to jump off a burning sky scraper, the terror is the same, and the feelings and experiences of both the victim and victimizer are roughly identical.  What matters is that just before the attack the victims were largely at peace with their attackers, having no designs to harm them in any way, and that the victimizers carried out their acts having no empathy towards them.


Joel-News-International: 21 June, 1998 Jakarta, INDONESIA – ‘CHINESE GIRLS RAPED’  Bill Hekman, a missionary to Indonesia, reported:  Here I submit a victim’s account of being raped during the May riots here in Jakarta. Reference to Huaran Bulletin Board June 12, 1998.

            “My name is Vivian, and I am 18 years old. I have a little sister and brother. As a family we live in what is supposed to be a “secure” apartment.  At 9.15 am, May 14th, 1998 a huge crowd had gathered around our apartment. They screamed, “Let’s butcher the Chinese!”, “Let’s eat pigs!”, “Let’s have a party!” We live of the 7th floor and we got a call from a family on the 3rd floor saying that the crowd had reached the 2nd floor. They even chased some occupants upstairs. We were all very frightened. In our fright we prayed and left everything in God’s hands.
            Afterward we left our room and went upstairs to the top floor, as it was impossible to go downstairs and escape. We got to the 15th floor and stayed with some friends. Not long afterwards we were surprised because some of the crowd coming out of the elevators right before we entered the room. We hurried into the room and locked the door tightly. At that time we heard them knock at the other rooms loudly and there were some screams from women and girls. Our room was filled with fear.
            We realized that they would come to us. So we spread throughout the room hiding in the corners. We could hear girls of 10 to 12 years old screaming, That time I didn’t know that these little girls were being raped. After about half an hour the noise diminished and we had some guts to go out and check. It was indescribable. A lot, some of them young girls, were lying on the floor. “Oh my God, what has happened?” Seeing all of this we screamed and my little sister Fenny, screamed hysterically and hugged her father.
            Tears started coming down from my eyes. With our friends, a newlywed couple, we started going downstairs. Reaching the 10th floor, we heard a scream for help. The scream was very clear and we decided to go down and see. But as we turned we saw a lot of people. I saw a woman in her 20s being raped by 4 men. She tried to fight back but she was held down tightly.
            Realizing the danger we ran as hard as we could. But unfortunately the mob caught Fenny. We tried to rescue her, but could not do anything. There were about 60 of them. They tied us up with ripped sheets, myself, my father, my mother Fenny, Donny, Uncle Dodi and my Aunt Vera. They led us to a room. Uncle Dodi asked what they wanted, but they did not reply.
            They looked evil and savage. One of them grabbed Fenny roughly and dragged her to a sofa. At that time I knew she was in great danger. I screamed loudly but one of the mob slapped me in my face. My father who also screamed was hit with a piece of wood and he fainted. My mother has fainted when Fenny was dragged to the sofa. I could only pray and pray that disaster would not befall us.
            Uncle Dodi kept trying to stop them by offering money. His efforts were fruitless. And in the end 5 people raped Fenny. Before beginning with the raping they always said “Allahu Akbar” (an Islamic phrase in Arabic meaning “God is great”). They were ferocious and brutal.
            Not long afterward, around 9 men came to the room and dragged me. I also saw them forcing and dragging my Aunt Vera. But at that time I passed out and everything went blank. I became conscious at around 5 or 6 pm. My head hurt and I realized I had no clothing on my body. I cried and realized my family was still there. My father was hugging my mother and little brother Doni. I also saw uncle Dodi lying on the floor and Aunt Vera was crying over his body. I felt so weak and fainted again.
            The next day I was in the Pluit hospital. My father and mother were beside me. With all the pains on my body I asked, “Mom, why Fenny. Mom?” I felt a stinging pain as I said these words. My cheeks were swollen. My mother cried again and couldn’t speak any words, while my father, holding back his tears, managed to smile at me. After 4 days in treatment, my condition has improved. With a sad look, my father told me then what had happened. After I fainted 7 people raped me. At that time my father still couldn’t see well after being hit with a piece of wood.
            They raped me repeatedly. Then my father said “Vivian, Fenny is gone…” I was confused and cried out, “Why Dad?” My father couldn’t answer. He told me to rest and went out of the room. I cried over and over again, feeling that my life had no meaning any more. A week ago, after I was released from the hospital I was told everything that had happened.
            When Fenny was raped she kept on fighting and so she was repeatedly slapped by her rapists. The last time she fought Fenny spitted on one of them. Offended, the man grabbed a knife and stabbed Fenny’s stomach over and over again. Finally she died with blood over her whole body.
            My father told me that uncle Dodi had the same fate watched by aunt Vera who was also raped. “God…why should all of this happen? Where are you God? Are you still alive?” My aunt Vera now stays with her parents. She is in shock. Her face is blank and she refuses to eat. Almost every hour my mother and I cry over all these happenings. I can never forget. These mobs of people are monsters.”


     Additional comments from Bill Hekman:  This is one of many victims. Hundreds of women and children were raped, mutilated and killed by Muslim mobs. Some had their vaginas ripped apart, their bodies cut into pieces. Over 5000 of the Chinese Indonesian’s shops were looted and burned down. A few days ago another 63 shops were burned in Tegal, Central Java. The city of Solo was burned down too. There is no protection and no justice in this country any more. Yesterday, I was in the Kelapa Gading area and that area was spared from destruction. The police and military had guarded all the entry roads. The people there had collected large sums of money from door to door and paid for their protection. A similar situation took place in the Pondok Indah area. For the people who cannot pay millions to the armed forces there is no protection. Right now the hundreds of thousands of thugs, robbers, rapists, and killers live all around us. They are our neighbours. There is no punishment for the criminals and no justice for the victims. Yet, all Indonesians call themselves believers in God almighty. Some Christians are putting signs on their shops “Owned by Muslim.”


     The next article attempts to describe the indescribable. It delves into the spirit and mentality and family support structure that is the force behind homicide bombers.  All involved are completely void of empathy, a key characteristic of a certain personality dysfunction better known by its technical term ‘narcissistic personality disorder’.


The killing mantra (Washington Post 6/21/2002) by Diana West

And Palestinian mothers? …  The sickening fact is, the strongest desire of certain Palestinian parents is for their children to die, killing as many Jews as possible, from infants to old people, in the process.

Take Mariam Farhat. When she got word her 19-year-old son, Mohammed, had been shot dead after murdering five Israeli teens and wounding 23 others, she told the Saudi-owned daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat: "I began to cry, 'Allah is the greatest,' and prayed and thanked Allah for the success of the operation. I began to utter cries of joy and we declared that we were happy. . . . I encouraged all my sons to die a martyr's death." (Translation by Middle East Media Research Institute.)
The maternal death wish may seem freakish, but Mrs. Farhat is not alone. "May every bullet hit its target and may God give you martyrdom," Naima el Abed tells her son, Mahmoud, on a video released by Hamas that records the 23-year-old college student's preparations for a rampage against Israel. "This," she says, "is the best day of my life."
Almost as good, no doubt, as the day of her son's funeral. This came after Mrs. el Abed's little terrorist was shot dead attempting to infiltrate a Jewish community, killing two Israeli soldiers. Consider the Palestinian scene of bereavement that followed: "All around her were women, clapping and celebrating his death, while his father Hassan quietly received congratulations," the Associated Press reported. "Several of their nine other children handed out candy to visitors. 'I wish all my children would be like him and carry out operations like that,' Naima el Abed said."  Chances are excellent that they will —and not just to please mom. The Palestinian Authority may blindly blame Israel for creating a generation of suicidal maniacs, but it is the PA itself that has helped nurture—if such a word applies—such taboo-breaking evil through its relentless propaganda machine.
With subtitled clips from Palestinian-controlled television (available through WorldNetDaily.com), MSNBC's Alan Keyes this week gave American viewers an eye-popping look at the pernicious role the PA plays in teaching young people to kill and be killed. It starts with state-sponsored sing-alongs for the romper-room set—ditties about blood-drenched soil and warriors of jihad. It continues with shows featuring girls in party dresses delivering bloodthirsty harangues: "When I wander into the entrance of Jerusalem, I'll turn into a suicide warrior! I'll turn into a suicide warrior! In battle-dress! In battle-dress! In battle-dress!" And it goes on through the seemingly continuous loop of government-broadcast sermons. From one tele-imam comes, "Bless those who wired themselves, putting the belt around his waist or his sons, and who enter deeply in the Jewish community and say, 'Allah is great.' " Or: "Wherever you are, kill these Jews and these Americans who are like them and support them."

Mr. Keyes pointed out a young boy in one congregation. Can a child thus indoctrinated ever make peace? This same boy is probably now caught up in the latest Palestinian craze — trading charms, Pokemon-style, that feature the faces of suicide bombers. Maybe he'll go on to Al-Najah University in Nablus, alma mater of this week's bus bomber, Mohammed "How beautiful it is to kill and be killed" al-Ghoul. Al-Najah, it must be noted, was the scene of last fall's commemoration of the Sbarro pizza-parlor attack, complete with fake pizza slices, plastic body parts and play explosions.  … That PA sure teaches its children well.



     This body of evidence is sickening, overwhelming, and undeniable.  Can a thinking man deliberate on these facts and come to any kind of reassuring conclusion other than Islam has not quite finished its bloody conquests? Unfortunately, electing a pacifist President and locking the door will not protect our children from the designs Islam has upon this people.


     By any historical definition both bin Laden's followers, the Taliban, and all other Islamic militants are fascists. As violent devotees of Islam, they believe in the innate superiority of a fanatical elite, and are anxious to torture, jail, and kill any who disagree with them. Non-Muslims of any religion, women, homosexuals are all dehumanized as their innate and naturally inferiors. Despite the trappings of religious fervour, Islamist totalitarianism is strikingly similar to its defunct, secular cousins. It is not an expression of higher spirituality, but of anomie: in particular, a seething resentment of Western prosperity and strength. Though they differ in their methods of control, make no mistake, … German Nazism, Italian Fascism, Japanese Imperialism, Stalinist Communism, and now Islamic Fundamentalism are all cut from the same totalitarian cloth. The Columbia Encyclopedia, 2001 Sixth Edition defines totalitarianism as; “A modern autocratic government in which the state involves itself in all facets of society, including the daily life of its citizens. A totalitarian government seeks to control not only all economic/political matters, but also the attitudes, values, and beliefs of its population, erasing the distinction between state and society. The citizen’s duty to the state becomes the primary concern of the community, and the goal of the state is the replacement of existing society with a perfect society.”

Chapter 19

The Question of Aid (Jizya)


Paying subsidies to suspend global jihad terrorism is tantamount to paying ransom to terrorist states, buying one’s own peace and security as temporarily ransomed privileges. Societies that pay a tribute to survive are destined to disappear. The not too surprising news since Sept 11th is that our own contributions have sometimes been funneled to support terrorism groups. Even before Sept 11th the US had been the largest contributor of humanitarian aid in Afghanistan and other parts of the Islamic world. Some plead that the best way to deal with the extremists is to pacify them with aid and support, but those who pay ransom for peace and security will always find themselves indebted to their masters.  It is a slippery slope that strengthens an enemy and weakens the giver. In light of current realities, all aid should probably now be qualified to insure none of it will be used, directly or indirectly, to destroy us or strengthen in any way militant Islam.  The extortion North Korea is currently trying to extract from the US and world should not be paid.  All aid given to Palestinians should probably be withdrawn, and the aid given to Egypt should be reviewed.


   The giver of aid, by principle, neither asks for nor expects thanks. He holds no requirement criteria, but is content to give purely for the sake of charity and their overwhelming desire to ease the condition of human suffering and hunger.  While many people are benefited from our assistance, it is a sad fact that the response from individuals and societies is often much less than grateful.  This is hardly noticed by givers, because it is in the delivery of aid wherein benefactors receive their very personal reward.  We see today neither a grateful world nor societies inclined to speak or act more favorably towards us.  We have neither sought this nor been disappointed at its conspicuous absence, as an army of charitable US personnel fan out continuing to serve.


   When we know of a family’s need for food, it is reasonable and neighborly to impart of our substance and deliver it to their doorstep.  We will redouble our efforts if we know that a widow, the elderly, or children may suffer without our help.  However, as a practical matter it would be unthinkable to deliver a spaghetti dinner to a neighbor who sometimes shoots at our children as they play.  When a society, government, or culture seeks your destruction, the last thing you want to do is enable that effort.  It seems completely irrational to us, but a rationale exists in the minds of some peoples that it is proper to teach their youth to hate and seek the destruction of Americans.  We are not talking simply about a militant fanatical terrorist cell inciting its already corrupted members in a rally or meeting, we are talking about the foundation of those attitudes as they are instilled into young people by mothers and fathers, by religious leaders, by school teachers, by media, and by civic organizations and national governments.  The root of all prejudice, including the hatred felt by those who hijacked the four aircraft, is first taught in the home. Though it may seem cruel, we need to evaluate if we enable local government, militia, or activist groups to ignore the plight of its own people in order to pursue an agenda destructive to democracy.


   Would the militants and extremists be quite so anxious to destroy us if circumstances otherwise required them to be more actively engaged as providers, or would the absence of aid force these able bodied individuals to concentrate on legitimate efforts to meet its basic needs of food, shelter, and clothing?  We must be pragmatic and realize that the first order of business of any society is self-preservation.  We must, without paranoia see our enemy, HATRED, clearly with all its roots and support structures, even if part of that structure comes from our own government and other charitable sources of aid.


   To help in raising the standard of living and self sufficiency of others is a noble cause of worthy pursuit, but does common sense and self preservation now cry out for re-focusing those efforts toward more worthy recipients less inclined to kill us. Certainly there is no shortage of needy peoples in North, Central, and South American countries, or in Russian and European societies as they struggle to transition to democratic governments and free economies. So how to respond, … throw bags of wheat at them? … Bury them in charity, sympathy, and understanding?  At issue is weather we should be providing logistical support to any nation where majorities of extreme Muslim people express hatred towards free democratic nations, and wherein organizations exist, drawn from a core anti-American culture, with designs to harm us.

   When the British retook the Falkland Islands, the fact that Argentina had failed miserably to provide for the support of their own forces was an important factor in the decision making process for them to give up the fight, which resulted in reducing friendly causalities and expediting the campaign.  This is the nature of war.  A military siege, by definition, is to force an enemy into submission and capitulation by extreme methods, which outside of war are considered inhumane.  Historically, the ‘civilian’ population suffers all kinds of shortages when a government struggles for conquest or its survival by arms.  Although collateral damage and innocent blood are regrettable and should be avoided, an enemy cannot be allowed to cower behind the protection of its own innocent victims.  It is incumbent on the peoples who suffer at the hands of repressive and dictatorial leaders who bring War and hunger to their lands to rise up and depose of the scoundrels.  The people who suffer must understand that the solution to the problem is for everyone to rise up against terrorism.  Humanitarian aid and rebuilding activity is normally considered appropriate after capitulation, because logistical support to an enemy is unthinkable. Yes, it is cruel and brutal, but war is impossible to sanitize to a form palatable to liberal western sensibilities.


   The Red Cross and other international aid organizations did not make humanitarian deliveries to Japan between Pearl Harbor and the Japans unconditional surrender, nor to Germany and Hitler. On Dec 7th 1941 the Sermon on the Mount was temporarily suspended in pursuit of War – once a beleaguered West realized that pacifism meant suicide.  On Sept 11th enemies we neither provoked nor sought bring death to us, eating the bread we gave them.


   Many attribute the advent and core cause of terrorism to poverty and desperation, and have proffered the solution of undermining terrorists support base by providing increased aid.  The assumption is the recipients of the food, clothes, and money we send will be grateful and perhaps start to love us instead of hating us, but such hopes are wishful ‘magical’ thinking. A study of radical Islam suggests that it is delusional and dangerous to assume that Jihadists’ ideology is rooted only in social deprivation, backwardness, injustice, or despair, and can be reversed by handing out benefits while attempting to bring them democracy and free market reform.  I am afraid that the lack of gratitude is because the recipients view the donations as a Jizya tax, which Muhammad instructs they are entitled to. History teaches us that societies that pay tribute eventually disappear.

Feb 11, 2003 – The chronically cash-strapped United Nations Relief Works Agency, or UNRWA, said in a statement that it needs more money to continue its assistance to Palestinians. During two years of violence, UNRWA has more than doubled its services to the refugees, because the effects of the conflict have worsened conditions in the already poverty-stricken camps. Israel charges that the Palestinians kept refugees in the camps, instead of resettling them, to maintain the crisis over Israel’s creation. Israeli officials also charge that UNRWA supports schools that foment hatred toward Jews. UNRWA denies that it is involved in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Hansen said UNRWA exceeded its $400 million budget, distributing food parcels consisting of sacks of flour, lentils, cooking oil and other staples, rebuilding houses destroyed by the Israeli military and maintaining emergency clinics.



Chapter 20

Spin… The Art of Ignoring the Obvious:

            In any debate, to confuse an opponent, one classical approach is by and through obfuscation, tangential diatribes, and/or classic political spin.  The desired effect is to weaken an opponent’s resolve and momentum through diversionary tactics.  It is an age-old approach employed when ones own arguments have weak moral or logical foundations.  The tactic is often the only option when tasked with presenting an inferior argument, which cannot be promoted through persuasiveness based on reason, logic, or moral clarity.  This method becomes the only viable option because a more progressive concept cannot be beaten by an inferior philosophy without those arguing in behalf of the lower standard first concealing obvious truths in layers of fogs. On hearing such rhetoric, a reasonable layperson may detect that there is something wrong with either the message or the delivery, but sufficient time for careful analysis and appropriate response is seldom available, as expediency quickly sweeps both the obvious facts with the muck into the past.


            Once the audience has been so prepared, one can then make suggestions and offer premises that would have otherwise been easily recognized as irrational or unconscionable.  When carefully prepared and delivered under the axiom “the bigger the lie, the easier it is for people to swallow”, otherwise outlandish suggestions can result in a mental shock effect, which over time can break down resistance. To the masses for which the spin was constructed, the net effect is confusion and the blunting of reasonable responses and actions, as well as more of an inclination to accept the unacceptable, or at least to tolerate the intolerable.  Indeed, when not properly recognized and challenged, there is the potential that otherwise good people might eventually accept that good is evil, or that evil means can be sanctified if associated with a seemingly good cause.


            Take the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, for example.  Claiming that Israel is the sole instigator and villain in this passionate and tragic play is a tactic designed to hide many truths in plain sight.  The weak-minded demonstrate personal failure when they bury their heads in the sand, and are akin to the Germans who “closed their drapes” as the Jews were rounded up.  We all see and hear about the things going on in the Middle East every day, yet many continue to hide behind silly libels against the US and Israel to either justify continued support for the Palestinian cause and methods, or to remain silent.


            In a population of 6.3 million, Israel has endured over a hundred suicide bombings and other attacks.  If the same proportion of attacks had occurred in the USA (288 Million people), there would have been 4571 suicide bombings with over 40,000 killed and hundreds of thousands wounded (often maimed for life).  The number killed would be the equivalent of twelve ‘Sept-11/Pear-Harbor’ type mega-attacks!  Almost everyone would know more than one victim.  Pause … and think about it.  The reaction of this nation would likely be more severe and violent than the Palestinians have faced to date from all Israeli actions.  Without second thoughts or significant dissention we would be sending our armies marching orders to destroy everyone suspected of supporting the attacks in any way. Political correctness would yield to the logic of survival and nearly every American would support any and all means necessary to completely ruin individuals, organizations, and governments deemed remotely culpable, with collateral damage of much -much- less concern.


            Truth is truth, to the end of reckoning.  Spin may distract, but does not diminish her.  When “Old Europe” and our own schizophrenic State Department say, “create a Palestinian state, coddle the Saudis, don’t offend anyone”, it only serves to embolden despots and their terrorist foot soldiers.  When we respond to left-leaning media, our Arab “allies” and the Europeans, we lose moral authority and give sanctuary and encouragement to despots and terrorists alike.  As with the Israelis, our survival and democracy depends on us living with both eyes wide open, willing to do the hard things necessary to protect our children’s future.  Islamic extremists and Palestinians in particular, continually debase themselves as they bask in their hatreds, blood lust, and thirst for revenge.  Ongoing anxiety and suffering cries out for intelligent deliberation, judgment, and then effective action.


            The world should with unison loudly reject when terrorists weave pure spin claiming violent murderous tactics are a legitimate option in pursuit of freedom and self-determination.  In fact they have had, and do have, control of their future and superior options, but have chosen to surrender that future by engaging in illegal and immoral activities.  They have used up all their green stamps pursuing these doomed options, and now claim to be victims when facing the unavoidable consequences of their poor choices.  Obfuscation aside, no people have the right to exercise their right to self-determination, if the path they choose in pursuit of the same involves bombing café’s, night-clubs, busses, targeting women, children, students, simple commuters and pedestrians, and families in their homes.  It is the opinion of this author that engaging and supporting such activities disqualifies an individual, culture and even a whole people from normal inherit rights to freedom of movement, association, assembly, self-determination, and self-rule.  Palestinian extremists, who appear to enjoy support by the majority of locals, are simply not advanced, mature, or grown-up enough to be trusted with certain freedoms. Current events and past history has proven they will only exercise those freedoms to terrorize, kill and maim.  To propose otherwise is to essentially argue to immediately empty all prisons worldwide and to abolish all laws and punishments based on concepts of personal responsibility.  And it follows that opposing the rule of law is in fact a proposal for wholesale regression to principals akin to middle-age tribal conquest and rule. While it is heart wrenching to see and hear of the suffering of innocent Palestinian children in the current conflict, yet we must not forget the culpability lies squarely on the shoulders of the parents and leaders who have failed them.  The only thing we can do to help them take that necessary first step of real change (accepting personal responsibility for their mistakes and failures), is to expose and resolutely reject the spin they spew to deceive themselves and others.

Chapter 21

The Gathering Storm:

            To quote Edmund Burke – “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”  Germany proved this true in 1942 when hundreds of thousands of good, intelligent, educated men said and did little or nothing, thus failing to slow down or stop the Nazi juggernaut. Today in Islam, hundreds of millions stand silent, allowing men with irrational prejudices and violent inclinations to hijack their cultures, peoples, and children. History repeats itself.


            Westerners are taught from birth to respect variety in religious beliefs, racial backgrounds, and cultural differences.  These same tolerant principles, having led to peace and prosperity for us, are viewed with contempt by many Arab and Asian Islamic tribal cultures.  They are viewed as conclusive evidence of Western corruption and weakness. Replacing these concepts are core values where people are taught from birth that blind, fanatical obedience to whatever their local clerics demand is required for their eternal salvation, indeed for their temporal well being as well.


            My family enjoyed the company of Muslim University students from Jordan staying at our household for two years.  We call them friends today.  My father, stepmother, and two siblings also spent 10 years living and working in Saudi Arabia and have a unique perspective on the Sept 11 attack and Islamic Arab culture.  While living in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, he also visited Afghanistan several times, traveled to Yemen, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Bahrain, Quatar, Kuwait, Oman, Srinagar, India, Beirut, Damascus, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, all over Saudi Arabia and had had many discussions with Muslims about their perception of the US and the West.  In all cases the young (young men, that is, young women are unapproachable by edict and mandate), although not expressing animosity toward any particular Westerner personally, had problems with Western nations, peoples, and cultures in general, and all had a deep irrational hatred of all Jews. My father tells me that he learned there are many decent Muslims in the world including many he now calls personal friends.  But the historical and religious background of Islam makes it all too easy for common Muslims to become transformed into “terrorists”. It is the religion (by virtue of current popular interpretations of its tenants and lack of a controlling governing body), which renders many average worshipers susceptible to abhorrent suggestions.   Justifications for prejudices/intolerance, and demands for fanatical obedience, up to and including the murder of non-Muslims by any means possible, are common.  Unless you have been intimately exposed to their culture, one has absolutely no idea of the ferocity and total dedication of the faithful, nor the depth of their hatreds.  Most of the younger Muslims my family came in contact with were resentful of the West and its freedoms and seemed all too anxious to believe any religious leader who calls for Jihad over any perceived insult to Islam.


            Understanding fanatical Muslim reasoning requires thinking ‘outside of the box’.  One must be prepared to first accept the inconceivable.  Tolerance, to many devout Muslims means something quite different than to the rest of us. Unfortunately, tolerance usually means accepting different degrees of hatred and extremism within their own neighborhoods and amongst their Imams and clerics.  True tolerance toward non-Muslims or ‘Infidels’ is unthinkable, except as required by political necessity, then temporarily employed for appearance sake only (usually as part of a strategy of eventual conquest).  This judgment of Muslim culture and thinking seems harsh, but before you call it bigoted to point out Islamic bigotry, examine the facts.  Aside from rare carefully crafted rebukes spoken only in English to Western news organizations, ask yourself where are the ‘peace marches’ in Palestine and protesters against Bin Laden, homicide bombers, and other terrorists the non-Muslim world has to contend with.  Is there no opposing political party, no differing opinion, or ‘other side’ within Islamic countries in any current or past Arab/Muslim conflicts with any other culture or people on the planet?  Surly there must be opposition to Islamic fanaticism, terrorism, and ‘holy war’ solutions proffered in so many conflicts.  Pro-Palestinian and anti-Jew protests are present in Tel Aviv, New York, Washington, London, and everywhere.  But where are the anti-terrorism / pro-peace protests or the smallest protest against Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades by moderate or left-wing Arabs in Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Iran, Libya, Turkey, Jordan, Indonesia, or Saudi Arabia?  The answer is simple; we do not see them, because they do not exist!  They do not exist, because their core religious values do not allow opposition.


            The problem is certainly not for lack of sensitivity, passion, or the inability to identify injustice, as history has clearly demonstrated the willingness of all Muslims to rally around many causes they see as relevant.  Nor are they blind, uneducated, or unaware of the basic facts relating to current and past  terrorist events.  The silence and inaction of ‘Moderate Islam’ is due to an overall irreversible and intractable culture prejudiced against non-brothers, and Westerners and Jews in particular.  The root of the problem, unfortunately, is because most do not interpret the violent acts of extremist ‘brothers’ as too terribly serious problem since the victims are, after all, only infidels.


            The superiority many Muslims feel over non-brothers is enshrined in the Koran, embedded in Islamic Law, and unquestionably enforced by principalities and governments.  Societies based on Islamic law can and do discipline, up to death, anyone perceived violating their strict unbending tenants. Your government, where Qur’anic Law is codified into law, will also prosecute and pursue anyone who is perceived to gently or aggressively speak out against Islamic rule, policy, or law.  Justifications for prejudices/intolerance, and demands for fanatical obedience are simply a part of common every-day life. Blind acceptance, devout and passionate adherence to every doctrine sanctioned by the local leaders is required.  Punishments for expressing or following any more tolerant doctrine are extreme.  The consequences are often severe, up to death.  Conversion to any other religious doctrine is also punishable by death. This extreme, intolerant social code of right and wrong is normally enforced within the home of simple Muslim families.  Dissent is simply not an option within families or neighborhoods.  Opposition, critical thought, debate of any kind is simply not allowed.  It many ways,  it is very much like Mafia or Gang mentality in that once your in, … you can’t get out … your own family is sometimes required to hunt you down and apply the required punishment.  Today and in recent and distant history, other examples of this type of culture exist.  What we are talking about is pure political totalitarianism, unique only in the fact that today it hides behind the guise of, and seeks the protection of, a religion.


            Islam, by virtue of current popular interpretations of its tenants (and lack of a controlling governing body) renders many average worshipers susceptible to abhorrent suggestions, making it all too easy for common Muslims to become transformed into “terrorists”.  The ferocity and total dedication of those transformed faithful and the depths of their hatreds are insurmountable.  Most young Muslims, moderate or not, are all too anxious to believe any religious leader who calls for Jihad over any perceived insult to Islam.  It should be emphasized that virtually all Islamic institutions of training propagate this kind of thinking and prejudice.  It is either forcefully taught or passively tolerated (with a wink) by the vast majority of religious leaders, pounded in hour after hour, day after day, year after year.  As such the religious leaders (and therefore the religion) are the impetus for the hatreds and its destructive results. It would be wrong to say that Islamic militants have lost their way, as what we witness today -is - their way. Further, the nature of Islam does not nurture men like Gandhi, Lincoln, or Martin Luther King, …they kill them.


            Violence has a mind all its own, and the effect of an individual or people embracing its seductive venom is guaranteed to cause sickening internal malformations and gross external manifestations. Islam amplifies (instead of attenuating) its follower’s feelings of violence towards others. For decades now, Yasser Arafat has brainwashed his people with primitive hatred glorifying all its lethal consequences. Revenge and savagery has become bread and butter to them.  Palestinian TV, newspapers and books (all PA controlled) have prepared the Palestinian people for nothing but murder, revenge and graphic violence.  Arab Media and leaders have stoked Palestinians religious fervor and hatred (jihad) to such a degree, that it has now reached an extreme fervent level sufficient to override normal reasonable human reaction, reason, and feeling. The enemy fighting the US today is similarly depraved.  A spokesman for al-Qaeda cheerfully and proudly promises the murder of millions, as quoted in the Arab Newsletter:

America, with the collaboration of the Jews, is the leader of corruption whether moral, ideological, political or economic corruption.  We have the right to kill 4 million Americans — 2 million of them children — and to exile twice as many, and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands.”


            Before the tide turned in WWII, Germans were united in their support of “Total War” against non-Germanic peoples. The negative consequences of adopting this philosophy against an adversary capable of waging war were demonstrated to Germans when the Allies struck Hamburg. Casualties reached 42,000, exceeding all British civilian losses.  The lesson to the people and culture were painful, but effective.  Japanese Imperialists learned the same lesson about the same time.  For 60 years, as a people, they have refused to create an offensive military, least some politician be tempted and history repeat itself.  To their credit, their love for their own children and aspirations for prosperity and happiness were strong enough for them to both recognize the fallacy of earlier actions and beliefs, and to repent.  It would be tragic for Palestinians to be force-fed a diet of sorrow until they, as a people, come to the same conclusion (the unproven premise being that they love life and their children more than they hate the Jews and crave death in pursuit of murderous acts against them).


            Everyone calls their dead Martyrs, but does the God of us all really welcome anyone into paradise who acts to kill in the name of revenge and hatred?  Doesn’t it occur to anyone that the guarantees of his/her Cleric may not be recognized or respected by God?  From normal human instincts for self-preservation, most reasonable people hope there are no Martyrs in their family, and many for the enemy who seeks our death.  Reasonable people are more than willing to postpone inclinations to prematurely leave this earth, completely content to wait as long as possible to find out who is a Martyr, and who is just some stupid dead guy.  The fact that Palestinians find it easy to convince their impressionable young to seek Death without question is certainly no indication of a superior religion or philosophy, but rather it is evidence of extreme error in both logic and reason.  It speaks volumes that the world has yet to see Arafat, other militant leaders, or the local fire breathing Clerics, strap on an explosive belt, and trod the path they so easily encourage the sons and daughters of their neighbour’s to tread.  The leaders of Islamic Jihad, Hamas, and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades sent their sons overseas at the start of the Intifada, some to study in America and England.  To all those who have apparently lost the ability to think for themselves, here is a clue…  If someone tells your son or daughter to murder themselves and other innocent men, women and children, … they are neither your friend, nor particularly religious or ‘holy’.  Find better friends.  To mothers who encourage their children to murder themselves and others, wake-up!  Do not disgrace the sacred institution and role of motherhood and defile the human family.  Shame!  Neighbours, friends, and governments who encourage and reward such sick degeneracy are not fit to call themselves human, let alone religious.  Such people should be sanctioned, not rewarded.  The whole-civilized world groans, turning away from the utter depravity of any culture and/or religion engaging in innocent murder and violence for the sake of terror.  Islamic militants continually debase themselves as they bask in their hatreds, blood- lust, and thirst for revenge.  The time for fence sitting is over, and it is indeed by their fruits that they should be judged.  Is not the chief export of Palestine terrorism?  Are not the fruits of radical Islam violence, prejudice, poverty, misery, and death?  When they weave pure spin to the world claiming violent murderous tactics are the only option in their pursuit of freedom and prosperity is it not, on its face, a lie?


            The actions and inaction of Islam are making it increasingly difficult to support unconditional religious tolerance.  When the net result of tolerance results in making a people more susceptible to murder, terror, sorrow, and poverty, then a thinking man must replace passive tolerance with active opposition.  Religious tolerance should still be the rule of thumb, unless the religion turns out, in the classical sense of the word, not to be an actual real religion after all.  If Islam has other-worldly political aspirations that in reality disqualify it as an peaceful religious organization (i.e. dedicated to improving her followers and harmless to others), then Islam is not a religion, rather it’s just another political theology similar to Communism, Fascism, Nazism, Imperialism, or any other failed Totalitarian political ideal in the sad reality of human history.  In Berlin in 1939, you would be hard pressed to find a German who did not sincerely believe in the superiority of Arian genetics.  The Japanese similarly all originally truly believed in the divinity of their emperor and superior rights/standings of their native people, as did comrades following Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, and Genghis Khan at the peak of their influence.  The common thread in these theologies was the fundamental belief of the superiority of their system of living -and- their inherited right to impose it on others by any means necessary.  This thread is duplicated perfectly in the fundamental practices and beliefs of all of Islam, moderate and extremist.  Such thinking errors are rampant, and unfortunately at this stage in cultural development, probably completely intractable.  These prejudices corrupt the minds and spirits of her victims, and the dangerous theology has infected almost the whole body of Islam.  The patient is in a very bad state, and there is hardly any reason to hope for any degree of recovery.  The prognosis, …sadly, … is eventual pain and passing, as the world continues to refine her ability to identify the malady and apply the necessary medicine to insure self-preservation, security, and prosperity.


            Against the unthinkable the world is loath to admit, and understanding is digested at a glacial pace.  The problem of political Islam is likely a huge future human tragedy currently in the making.  The solution may be larger in scale than any global social/political upheaval experienced to date.  Islam, as it is known today, will not disband nor experience some sort of spontaneous intellectual and spiritual renaissance.  The seeds of conflict and war were planted a long time ago, have been maturing for centuries, and are now nearly fully ripe.  To date effective corrective activity has been postponed as the weed deliberately deceives the world saying, “I am not a weed, I am a beautiful peaceful branch of humanity, the victim of every conflict and persecuted in all places”.  The facts of history show that Islam always acts in this way, until it achieves a demographic proportion necessary to accomplish a military and/or political conquest of her tenders, afterwards subjugating non-believers to pay tribute and remain second-class citizens, if allowed to survive at all.  But eventually the world will learn that Islam has no intention of living peaceably with either Israel, nor the rest of the world.  All contract and treaties signed with Infidels will continue to be broken, as they have in the past.  In AD 628 – Muhammad’s ongoing military conquests were not going well, and so for tactical purposes he signed a treaty with the Quraish. (The Al-Hudaybiyya agreement in 628 AD, between the Prophet and the Meccan tribe of Quraish, was signed for a period of 10 years, which became, in Islamic tradition, the time limit for any agreement with non-Muslims). The Al-Hudaybiyya agreement was broken after 18 months when Mohammed’s army conquered Mecca.  Arafat’s signatures have all had about the same value.  But there has to be some degree of anonymity for a deceptive entity to successfully operate.  Islam’s size, her successes of the past, and her current efforts, will eventually be the key to her demise, just as Hitler’s overt ambitions finally woke the world up to the dangers of Nazism. The prospects for Islam continuing her propaganda, deceit, and conquests in the information age, where truths are broadcast from rooftops, are near zero.  Time and truth are both arrayed against radical, political Islam. God will still be God, and is not threatened.  There is no God, but God!  God is indeed greatest! He is also a God of Truth and cannot lie, neither do they who truly know and represent Him.


            Terrorist/expansionist Islam grossly underestimates the intelligence and survival instincts of its declared enemies (i.e. the non-Muslim world).  It assumes that, through strategic use of patience and violence, the toad will not notice nor react in time to the rising temperature of the water.  In doing so it insults the intelligence and foolishly ignores the destructive capacity of a peaceful freedom-loving people.  Someday it will find that the toad did indeed jump out in time, and further will find that the toad is not a toad at all, but rather a scorpion with a deadly sting.  Those who survive in the Muslim world will lament the foolishness and arrogance of their former leaders, and abandon Islam in droves.  There will still be isolated pockets of extremists, just as today there are still ‘skin-heads’ who still worship Nazi philosophy, but they will eventually be isolated, marginalized, sanctioned, and censured, … finally recognized by all for who and what they really are.


            An Oct 21, 2002 30-page confidential Interpol report “Global Threat Assessment” was distributed to top law-enforcement officials from 139 nations gathered in the West African nation of Cameroon. It states terror groups may focus on less-deadly acts hoping to wait out the War on Terror.  Terrorists aim to sow large-scale destruction but may eye smaller targets for a while, hoping the world will soon let down its guard. Given the scale of the onslaught prompted by the Sept. 11 attacks, terrorists might, in the short to medium term, go back to basics, choosing symbolic targets with limited casualties in a long-lasting campaign of attrition.  Terrorists think over time the collective will of states to fight terrorism will wane. Al-Qa’ida is likely reconstituting communications and support networks smashed in the U.S.-led war against terror. In the meantime, local groups associated with terror networks – like Jemaah Islamiyah, blamed in the recent nightclub bombing in Bali that killed at least 200 people (or those who carried out the recent Saudi Arabia bombing attacks), will continue. The report draws on information provided by Interpol’s 181 member nations.


            Yet, though the future looks strewn with trial and sacrifice, and until the day the struggle begins on a large scale, opportunities abound to put our arms around clear-thinking good-hearted Muslims to bring them out from the frenzy.  There are many very intelligent families in the Arab/Asian world with good values that can recognize and reject political Islam and racism when presented with the facts and given alternate opportunities to escape and exist peacefully.  They are those who will actually flinch when reading the following publication:


The Importance of Jihad as a Means of Destroying ‘Infidel Countries’ August 24, 2002, www.jehad.net. Article in issue #16 of the online magazine Al-Ansar (affiliated with Al-Qa’ida), a columnist identified as Seif Al-Din Al-Ansari discussed the Koranic verse “Allah Will Torture Them [the Infidels] At Your Hands”:

The Annihilation of the Infidels is a Divine Decree  “Regardless of the norms of ‘humanist’ belief, which sees destroying the infidel countries as a tragedy requiring us to show some conscientious empathy and… an atmosphere of sadness for the loss that is to be caused to human civilization – an approach that does not distinguish between believer and infidel… - I would like to stress that annihilating the infidels is an inarguable fact, as this is the [divine] decree of fate…”

“When the Koran places these tortures [to be inflicted on the infidels] in the solid framework of reward and punishment… it seeks to root this predestined fact in the consciousness of the Muslim group, asserting that the infidels will be annihilated, so as to open a window of hope to the Muslim group…”

“Nevertheless, [this divine decree] has become, for some, a tranquilizing pill… When the enemy launches operations of colonialism and destruction, we find that a few [of the Muslims] refrain from entering the battlefield claiming that the elements of the collapse of Western civilization are proliferating [in any event].”

“Their conclusion is indeed true, but the way in which it is presented is misleading, and it is aimed at removing responsibility [to fight the infidels] from the Muslim, with the claim that Allah has already promised to take care of the infidels’ annihilation.”

Muslims Must Not Wait Passively for the Divine Decree to Just Happen  “…I would like to point out the danger of this analysis, because it… [may] make the Muslims passive and turn [them] into one who does not act to carry out [the commandments] of the religion or to dispel falsehood, but lives always in an atmosphere of passive waiting, that is cloaked – always – by a call to trust in the ability of Allah!!”

“When Allah told us of the certainty of the annihilation of the infidels, He did not do so using ambiguous concepts. He clarified that this would be achieved in one of two ways: by means of a direct act of Allah… or by means of the Muslim group, which would, in accordance with the Islamic commandment, serve as an implement for carrying out [the divine decree], as it is said: ‘…Allah will torture them [the infidels] Himself or at our hands (Koran 9:52).’”

“Yes, perhaps it is predetermined that the infidel country will be annihilated. But [if the believers do not act] this kind of annihilation will never be in favour of the Islamic state. The infidel country will be annihilated in favour of an infidel country like it or even worse than it…”

“Therefore, the belief in ‘annihilating the country of heresy’ [only] opens up for us a window of hope, and sets for us a goal that is in the realm of the possible – but it does not annihilate the infidel country for us, nor does it even affect it!!”

“This is merely a belief, which, if unaccompanied by the words ‘at your hands’ that appear in the Koranic verse [9:14, ‘Fight them and Allah will torture them at your hands’] – it will remain in the wonderful realm of ideas that float in the theoretical universe, and is like beautiful dreams that arouse conscientious emotions – yet, when we awake, we find that the infidel country still exists, falsehood is not destroyed [by itself] in favour of the truth, [except when] the truth goes into action…”

“The importance of the human effort to annihilate the infidels… is what Allah sought to teach the Muslims at the Battle of Uhud [625]. Then, there were [Muslims] who thought that because they were right they would most certainly defeat the enemy. The [Muslims] paid a high price for this…”

By Means of Jihad – Allah Tortures [the Infidels] with Killing  “The question now on the agenda is, how is the torture Allah wants done at our hands to be carried out?… This torture will not, in any way, be carried out by means of preaching [Da’wa], because preaching is activity of exposure, aimed at clarifying the truth in a way that makes it more easily acceptable. Preaching has nothing to do with torture; Jihad is the way of torturing [the infidels] at our hands.”  “By means of Jihad, Allah tortures them with killing; by means of Jihad, Allah tortures them with injury; by means of Jihad, Allah tortures them with loss of property; by means of Jihad, Allah tortures them with loss of ruling. Allah tortures them by means of Jihad – that is, with heated war that draws its fire from the military front…”

The Tortures Will Bring the Infidels to the Path of Righteousness  “Material power is [to be] confronted with material power, and ideological power is [to be] confronted with ideological power… It would be idiocy to rely on the power of the truth in the face of F-16s. Allah is capable of destroying His enemy without anyone’s mediation and without anyone’s help, as His capability is absolute and unsurpassed. In spite of all the characteristics of power at their command, these infidel states are no more than a handful of creatures on the speck of dust called Planet Earth… [But] Jihad serves as a trial by suffering for the Muslims by means of the infidels, and for the infidels by means of the Muslims.”   “The Muslims’ trial by suffering is manifested in Jihad’s being the instrument by which it is possible to differentiate between the believers and the hypocrites… The infidels’ trial by suffering is manifested in Jihad being an exemplary lesson in values, delivered by a group of the pioneers of the Islamic nation, in a practical presentation”

“Many of the infidels will be shocked; their emotional entity will be shaken; and perhaps some of them will repent and learn their lesson. In addition, Jihad is a means of defeating them, and perhaps by means of this victory… the tortures will bring them back to the path of righteousness…”




[1] http://answering-islam.org/Silas/

[2] Mir, Mustansir, "Dictionary of Qur’anic Terms and Concepts", Garland, New York, NY, 1987.

[3] Jeffery, Arthur, "Islam: Muhammad and His Religion", Bobs Merril

[4] "Encyclopaedia of Islam", published by Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands.

[5] http://answering-islam.org/Silas/mo-death.htm

[6] Kassis, Hanna, "Concordance of the Qur’an", University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1983.

[7] "Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam", edited by H.A.R. Gibb, published by Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands.

[8] Ibn Kathir, "Tafsir of Ibn Kathir" published by Al-Firdous, New York, NY, 2000.

[9] "Reliance of the Traveler", (A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law), by Ahmad al-Misri, translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller, published by Amana publications, Beltsville, Maryland, USA 1991

[10] Muslim, Abu’l-Husain, "Sahih Muslim", translated by A. Siddiqi, International Islamic Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1971. [nternet version is available at http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim

[11] al-Tabari, "Ta'rikh al-rusul wa'l-muluk", (The History of al-Tabari), volume 8, State University of New York Press, 1997.

[12] Ibn Ishaq, (d.782), "Sirat Rasulallah", compiled by A. Guillaume as "The Life of Muhammad", Oxford, London, 1955

[13] Sell, Canon, "The Historical Development of the Qur’an", published by People International.

[14] Bukhari, Muhammad, "Sahih Bukhari", Kitab Bhavan, New Delhi, India, 1987, translated by M. Khan [Internet version is available at http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim

[15] "The Nobel Qur’an", translated by Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, published by Maktaba Dar-us-Salam, PO Box 21441, Riyadh 11475, Saudi Arabia, 1994. [Internet version is available at http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil ]

[16] Dawood, N. J., "The Koran", Penguin, London, England, 1995

[17] Watt, W. M., "Muhammad at Mecca", Oxford University Press, London 1952.

[18] Gatje, Helmut, "The Qur’an and its Exegesis", Oneworld, Oxford, England, 1997

[19] Rodwell, J. M., "The Koran", by, published by Everyman, London, England

[20] Ibn Sa'd, (d. 852 A.D.), "Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir", (Book of the Major Classes), translated by S. Moinul Haq, Pakistan Historical Society

[21] Dashti, Ali, "23 Years: A Study in the Prophetic Career of Mohammad", Mazda, Costa Mesa, CA, 1994. Translated by F.R.C. Bagley

[24] Wensinck, A., "Muhammad and the Jews of Medina", pub. by K. S. V.

[25] http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Muir/Life3/chap13.htm

[26] Abu Dawud, Suliman, "Sunan", al-Madina, New Delhi, 1985, translated by A. Hasan. [Internet version is available at http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/abudawud

[27] Ayoub, Mahmoud, "The Qur’an and Its Interpreters" vol. II - The House of Imran, Albany, N.Y.; State University of New York Press, 1992

[28] Ali, Yusef, "The Holy Qur'an", published by Amana, Beltsville, Maryland, USA, 1989 [Internet version is available at http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/]

[29] Asad, Muhammad , "The Message of the Qur’an", Dar Al-Andaulus, Gibraltar, 1980

[32] Payne, Robert, "The History of Islam", Dorset Press, New York, 1990

[33] Fregosi, Paul, "Jihad", Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, 1998

[35] Rehman, Afzal, "Subject Index of the Holy Qur’an", published by Classical Printers, Delhi, India, 1987










Articles Op-ed Authors Debates Leaving Islam FAQ
Comments Library Gallery Video Clips Books Sina's Challenge

  ©  copyright You may translate and publish the articles in this site only if you provide a link to the original page.