Actually it was not necessary even in the early days of Islam to warn the
victims. The forays of the caravans were not announced. In Nakhlah Muhammad left
the instruction to raid the caravan with no warning and in the sacred month when
war was sacrilege. This was one of the early raids. The story of the raid
at the fortress of Khaibar is one more example that is recorded in detail. If you
read Tabari, you become sick of account after account of killing and ransacks
in gory details. I do not wish to overwhelm the readers but allow
me to quote just one hadith.
It has been narrated on
the authority of Salama (b. al-Akwa') who
said: We fought against the Fazara and Abu Bakr was the commander over us. He
had been appointed by the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). When
we were only at an hour's distance from the water of the enemy, Abu Bakr ordered
us to attack. We made a halt during the last part of the night to
rest and then we attacked from all sides and reached their
watering-place where a battle was fought. Some of the
enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners. I
saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children.
I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an
arrow between them and the mountain. When they saw the arrow, they stopped. So I
brought them, driving them along. Among them was a woman from Banu Fazara. She
was wearing a leather coat. With her was her daughter who was one of the
prettiest girls in
. I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl
upon me as a prize. So we arrived in
. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)
met me in the street and said: Give me that girl, O Salama. I said: Messenger of
Allah, she has fascinated me. I had not yet disrobed
her. When on the next day. the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon
him) again met me in the street, he said: O Salama, give me that girl, may God
bless your father. I said: She is for you. Messenger of Allah! By Allah. I have
not yet disrobed her. The Messenger of Allah (may
peace be upon him) sent her to the people of
, and surrendered her as ransom for a number of Muslims who had been
kept as prisoners at
This was a raid at civilians, women and children. It is a mistake to call
these incursions wars. Muhammad himself called them qazwah and terror.
Blaming the Victim:
My opponent quotes Ibn Hisham who wrote:
News reached the Prophet [pbuh] on Sha‘ban 2nd.
to the effect that the chief of Bani Al-Mustaliq, Al-Harith bin Dirar had
mobilised his men, along with some Arabs, to attack Madinah. Buraidah bin Al-Haseeb
Al-Aslami was immediately despatched to verify the reports. He had some words
with Abi Dirar, who confirmed his intention of war. He later sent a
reconnoiterer to explore the positions of the Muslims but he was captured and
killed. The Prophet [pbuh] summoned his men and ordered them to prepare for war.
Before leaving, Zaid bin Haritha was mandated to see to the affairs of Madinah
and dispose them. On hearing the advent of the Muslims, the disbelievers got
frightened and the Arabs going with them defected and ran away to their lives.
Abu Bakr was entrusted with the banner of the Emigrants, and that of the Helpers
went to Sa‘d bin ‘Ubada. The two armies were stationed at a well called
Muraisi. Arrow shooting went on for an hour, and then the Muslims rushed and
engaged with the enemy in a battle that ended in full victory for the Muslims.
Some men were killed, women and children of the disbelievers taken as captives,
and a lot of booty fell to the lot of the Muslims. Only one Muslim was killed by
mistake by a Helper. Amongst the captives was Juwairiyah, daughter of Al-Harith,
chief of the disbelievers. The Prophet [pbuh] married her and, in compensation,
the Muslims had to manumit a hundred others of the enemy prisoners who embraced
Islam, and were then called the Prophet’s in-laws. [Za'd Al-Ma'ad 2/112,113;
Ibn Hisham 2/289,290,294,295]
It is important to note that Muhammad fabricated excuses for his
attacks. In all these excuses he shifted the blame on his victims. For example,
when he attacked the Bani Qaynuqa the excuse was that a couple of them had
disrespected a Muslim woman. When he attacked the Bani Nadir the excuse was that
Angel Gabriel had whispered in his ears that the Bani Nadir were plotting to
kill him. When he attacked the Bani Quraiza his excuse was that they had
confabulated with the Meccans. This is typical mindset of the narcissist.
Narcissists always have excuses for their evil deeds. The claim that Muhammad
pre-empted an attack by the Bani Mustaliq is a fabrication of Muhammad himself.
It is just an excuse based on a lie. The Bani Mustaliq had no reason to attack Medina. It was always Muhammad who initiated the wars and hostilities. The Bani
Mustaliq were not interested in Islam and religious wars in
did not exist prior to Islam. They were Jews. They were an educated and cultured
people. They were artisans, herdsmen and farmers. They had made their wealth in commerce
and in industry, not through marauding. What reason had they to attack Medina, a
city impoverish by Muhammad whose citizens had all become thieves and
highway robbers? These are lies concocted by Muhammad to convince his foolish followers
that his forays were justified. Despite their savagery, the early believers were
still humans and must have felt raiding, massacring and pillaging innocent people
with no justification is not right. Muhammad had to give them an excuse. When
you attack someone, you must have an excuse. Even Hitler had reasons for his
attacks. His reason was "to bring civilization to the less evolved people
of the world". The reasons Muhammad gave for his raids were just excuses.
With these lies his foolhardy followers placated their conscience willingly and descended
to new depths of barbarity.
Here is what my opponent wrote as the pretext for raiding the Khaibar:
|The Jews of Khaybar were responsible
for the uprising of armies against the Muslims in the
of the Trench (or ditch). They would go to Makkah and encourage them to
wage war against the Muslims. Theses Jews would hide in their fortresses
in Khaybar. So obviously they needed to be dealt
with. So Muhammad invaded
Khaybar. If the Prophet was able to individually punish these people he
would have. But they would lock them selves up so the Prophet had no
choice. He even tried burning down their trees to scare them so that he
would not resort to going inside the fortress to get them.
But they left
him no choice. Yes, the Prophet Muhammad was a man of mercy, but he was
also a man of justice. Does Ali Sina expect Muhammad to forgive all those
who fight him? If he did that, then everyone would try attacking Muhammad
and would not worry about getting punished if they lost. So Muhammad
needed to make an example out of anyone who dared to fight or harm him.
This is self defense. This is a universal principle.
The above give you a glimpse into the mind of a psychopathic
narcissist. Narcissists always blame their victims and have justification for
their evil deeds. The followers of Muhammad have entered into his narcissistic
bubble universe and all of them, to the degree that they emulate him, evince his
psychopathology. They deny the evil deeds of their prophet and justify his
crimes and their own. See the parts that I highlighted with red and blue!
He is saying that Muhammad had no choice but to attack, kill, torture,
rape, and enslave his victims. The way he has worded it one might as well
think that Muhammad was the victim. .
Don't just assume that Mr. al Zawadi is talking nonsense. On the contrary,
this is how narcissists think. The psychopath narcissist always blames his
victims. "he made me do it", is his alibi. The psychopath feels
justified to punish you if you resist his demands.
These are all lies, excuses to assail and mug an entire population of innocent
civilians, loot their wealth and take them as slaves and sex slaves.
For the sake of argument, let us say the leaders of Khaibar were responsible
for the "uprising of armies against the Muslims in the
of the Trench" (This is of course a lie. Muhammad already massacred all
the men of Bani Quraiza and enslaved all their wives and children with the
same excuse. Khaibar had nothing to do with the battle of the Trench. The Jews never raised against the
Muslims in Medina or anywhere in Arabia and they tried to stay neutral at all
times. That was of course a grave error that cost them their lives.) Does this
justify to invade a city and massacre its citizens? Does it justify taking their
women as sex slaves and forcing the elderly and the unwanted women to till their
own confiscated land and and give half of the produce to their conqueror?
1 | 2
| 3 | 4
| 5 next