Date: 2/14/2004




by: Vernon Richards (Feb 6th 2004)

An Introduction to Real Islam and Jihad

Foreword 4

The View from Outside 4

Chapter 1 7

The Issues at Hand 7

The Emperors Raiment 8

The Enemy at the Gates 9

Chapter 2 13

Real Islam and the Religious Texts 13

The Doctrine of Abrogation 14

Definitions of "JIHAD" 16

Chapter 3 23

Chronology and Abrogation in the QUR’AN 23

The QUR’AN and JIHAD: Offensive and Defensive Verses 25

Chapter 4 31

Muhammad’s Actions, Speaking Louder than Words 31

Chapter 5 47

Yet more Actions which Speak Louder than Words 47

Chapter 6 54

More Jihadic Passages from the QUR’AN 54

Chapter 7 66

Actions of the four "Rightly Guided" Caliphs 66

Chapter 8 73

Early History of Peaceful Islam 73

Chronology of early Islam 75

Non-Muslim Christian Violence 76

Chapter 9 78

The Qur’an on Relations with Non-Muslims 78

Muslims who Leave Islam 80

Islamic Dissent 82

Suspected Collaborators 83

Chapter 10 85

The American Muslim 85

Chapter 11 90

Worldwide Islam Today 90

Chapter 12 96

More News from Peaceful Islam 96

Chapter 13 117

Real Islam; a Case Study 117

Chapter 14 121

The Psychology of Jihad 121

Chapter 15 129

Political/Economic Islam 129

The Muslim Catch-22 134

The Women of Islam 135

Chapter 16 138

The Final Analysis on Real Islam 138

Chapter 17 143

The Question of Aid (Jizya) 143

Chapter 18 147

Spin …The Art of Ignoring the Obvious 147

Chapter 19 150

The Gathering Storm 150

Chapter 20 158

Seeds of Armageddon 158

Chapter 21 165

Roots of Today’s Campaign 165

Chapter 22 168

Liberty Threatened 168

Chapter 23 175

Hard Options in Israel 175

Chapter 24 180

The Path Ahead 180

Epilog 188

Dark Premonitions 188

References 192

About the Author 193


The View from Outside There are always many different ways to view any event, any individual life, or any movement in history. Though various perspectives may yield very different conclusions, all can be correct from the vantage point of different observers. For example, the world looks very stark and hostile from the viewpoint of a rabbit in the pot just placed over the fire, but hungry children looking at the simmering stew are likely to see a brighter day ahead. Both viewpoints are perfectly reasonable and sound. Viewing Muhammad from 'inside' the benefits and social structures of Islam yields a very appealing magnanimous character whose company his friends sought and relished. On the other hand, the viewpoint of those looking in from 'outside' Islam has always been very different. Muhammad had two very different faces that he showed to others, with the difference between the countenances, to put it mildly, quite profound. Which face Muhammad revealed to you depended on whether you were a believer … or not. It must first be noted that this work will concentrate on the life and personality of Muhammad from the outside-looking-in perspective, essentially from someone who does not believe that the man was a representative of God. As such, this view of the man is bound to be unpalatable to 'insiders' who justify his every word and act as infallible, divine, and unimpeachable. For any Muslim reading this, consider that this study is made strictly from facts extracted from Islamic texts, but without the usual Islamic excuse-making or divine-justifications. The evaluation will make an attempt to be complete, logical, fair, with any judgment compared only to universal standards of human civil behavior now considered acceptable to modern societies. So essentially what will be done is to hold up a looking-glass to Islam, so that it can see the face that has (and is) being shown to Westerners. Since all data to be evaluated is sourced from inside sacred Islamic works and well-known irrefutable historical facts, I hope to present an image that is accurate and undistorted. Of course it would be patently unfair to blame the holder of the mirror for the clear reflected image. If Islam is concerned about this objectification, and the growing number of other works documenting the face which Islam shows infidels, then this particular mirror-holder suggests that Islam work to change that projection, instead of issuing ever more fatwas, which only serve to deepen the distrust of outsiders. There is an abundance of work generated from 'within' Islam that characterizes who Muhammad was and what his relationship was to fellow Muslims, which will not be repeated in great detail here. That being said, we will do a quick review of Muhammad from the 'inside' Muslim perspective, for the sole purpose of illustrating the dramatic difference in viewpoints between insiders and outsiders.

The following favorible summary of the chief character traits of Muhammad comes from 'THE LIFE OF MAHOMET', by WILLIAM MUIR Vol. II. p.28. [Smith, Elder, & Co., London, 1861]

Personal appearance

Though advancing age may have somewhat relaxed the outlines of his countenance and affected the vigor of his carriage, yet his form, although little above the ordinary height, was stately and commanding. The depth of feeling in his dark black eye, and the winning expression of a face otherwise attractive, gained the confidence and love even of a stranger. His features often unbended into a smile full of grace and condescension. "He was," says an admiring follower, "the handsomest and bravest, the brightest-faced and most generous of men. It was as though the sun-light beamed in his countenance." Yet when anger kindled in his piercing glance, the object of his displeasure might well quail before it: his stern frown was the certain augury of death to many a trembling captive. Simplicity of his life A patriarchal simplicity pervaded his life. Custom was to do every thing for himself. If he gave alms he would place it with his own hand in that of the petitioner. He aided his wives in their household duties; he mended his own clothes; he tied up the goats; he even cobbled his sandals. His ordinary dress consisted of plain white cotton stuff; but on high and festive occasions, he wore garments of fine linen, striped or dyed in red. Mahomet, with his wives, lived in a row of low and homely cottages built of unbaked bricks … The Prophet must be addressed in subdued accents and in a reverential style. His word was absolute. His bidding was law. Urbanity and kindness of disposition A remarkable feature was the urbanity and consideration with which Mahomet treated even the most insignificant of his followers. Modesty and kindness, patience, self-denial, and generosity, pervaded his conduct, and rivetted the affections of all around him. He disliked to say No; if unable to reply to a petitioner in the affirmative, he preferred to remain silent. "He was more bashful," says Ayesha, "than a veiled virgin; and if anything displeased him, it was rather from his face, than by his words, that we discovered it; he never smote any one but in the service of the Lord, not even a woman or a servant." … He possessed the rare faculty of making each individual in a company think that he was the most favoured guest. When he met any one rejoicing he would seize him eagerly and cordially by the hand. With the bereaved and afflicted he sympathized tenderly. Gentle and unbending towards little children ... He shared his food, even in times of scarcity, with others; and was sedulously solicitous for the personal comfort of every one about him. A kindly and benevolent disposition pervades all these illustrations of his character. Mahomet was also a faithful friend. …his affections were in no instance misplaced; they were ever reciprocated by a warm and self-sacrificing love. Moderation and magnanimity In the exercise at home of a power absolutely dictatorial, Mahomet was just and temperate. Nor was he wanting in moderation towards his enemies, when once they had cheerfully submitted to his claims… Earnestness and honesty of Mahomet at Mecca As he was himself the subject of convictions so deep and powerful, it will readily be conceived that the exhortations of Mahomet were distinguished by a corresponding strength and urgency. Being also a master in eloquence, his language was cast in the purest and most persuasive style of Arabian oratory. His fine poetical genius exhausted the imagery of nature in the illustration of spiritual truths; and a vivid imagination enabled him to bring before his auditory the Resurrection and the Day of Judgment, the joys of believers in Paradise, and the agonies of lost spirits in hell, as close and impending realities. In ordinary address, his speech was slow, distinct, and emphatic; but when he preached, "his eye would redden, his voice rise high and loud, and his whole frame become agitated with passion, even as if he were warning the people of an enemy about to fall on them the next morning or that very night." In this thorough earnestness lay the secret of his success. … His inspiration was essentially oracular. His mind and his lips were no more than a passive organ which received and transmitted the heavenly message. Benefits of Mahometanism And what have been the effects of the system which, established by such instrumentality, Mahomet has left behind him? We may freely concede that it banished for ever many of the darker elements of superstition which had for ages shrouded the Peninsula. Idolatry vanished before the battle-cry of Islam; the doctrine of the unity and infinite perfections of God, and of a special all-pervading Providence, became a living principle in the hearts and lives of the followers of Mahomet, even as it had in his own. An absolute surrender and submission to the divine will (the very name of Islam) was demanded as the first requirement of the religion. Nor are social virtues wanting. Brotherly love is inculcated within the circle of the faith; orphans are to be protected, and slaves treated with consideration; intoxicating drinks are prohibited, and Mahometanism may boast of a degree of temperance unknown to any other creed. (also: Alms are collected and distributed to the needy). This picture and representation of the man, beloved and worshiped by Muslims worldwide, sounds like the kind of person anyone would want as a friend or neighbor. Unfortunately this is the side reserved for believers, and would not be offered to anyone who did not accept his claim of prophethood. But keep this image in mind, as the contrast between this pleasant personality and the face he offered non-believers will be the focus of the remainder of this work.

Comments and suggestions may be directed to Islam_Undressed@yahoo.com


The Issues at Hand

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 thinking to the constraints of the politically-correct 'thought police' seem content to believe that we are not really fighting individuals or nations, but rather some kind of 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, the plague of German Tanks in WWII, or the threat of nuclear weapons in the Cold War. Though such vague, loose nomenclature may be reassuring in our society obsessed as it is with political correctness, it is unnecessarily nebulous. Such poor precision is deception and prevents rational evaluation of the true threat behind the terrorist weapon deployed against us. In wartime, machine guns, kamikaze zeros, tanks, and bombs don’t kill people; … actual real people acting on some nationalistic, political, or religious ideology pull the trigger. Ultimately it is the ideology itself, along with the leadership and foot soldiers pushing it that are responsible for all acts of war committed in its name by whatever weapon. The gentle reader should be forewarned that this work delves much deeper into the cultural, spiritual, and religious roots of the current conflict than 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, as is the context in which it is presented. It seems inevitable these days that perspectives based on traditional values are quickly tagged as politically 'incorrect', and often 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 a political and social philosophy centered 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 even 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 acknowledgement of negative consequences resulting from their permissive agenda, 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 moral 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 are destined to 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. Most Americans have a benignly positive attitude toward religion, but civic piety allied with political correctness is blinding us, keeping us from asking reasonable questions about Islam, questions upon which the survival of our civilization may depend. Does our culture, 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 and potentially lethal mix. This work will explain why the West waits in vain for Islam to take full responsibility for the bad fruit being produced in her name. Hopes will remain unfulfilled that majority peaceful Islam, out of a sense of principal and humanity, will actually doing something to reform itself, without having to be pressured by others. Until that day we must be realistic and realize that what we can expect is 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 take off the blinders and begin to live with both eyes wide open. From knowledge comes wisdom, from wisdom comes power, and from power comes safety. The only thing that springs from ignorance is error, weakness, and sometimes, …mortal peril. This is one of those times. The Emperors Raiment The grand Emperor, Muhammad, enjoyed grand clothing and fine robes as ornate and decorated as any great leader of vast kingdoms, but sought ever finer raiment so that others might see outwardly the greatness and power of his office and influence. He had the finest clothes and trappings commensurate with his desires, but a great tailor and wizard from another land whispered in his ear that he could create an adornment so beautiful, grand, and powerful that all who saw it would naturally worship the wearer as the greatest of all leaders. The material to be used possessed the unique quality of being visible only to the truly enlightened and intelligent, but would be invisible to stupid infidels. Work commenced and soon the great one was on proud display with his new robe for all the world to see. ‘The Emperor's New Clothes’ by Hans Christian Andersen should be studied carefully as it seems more applicable today than any other time in history. Today many view plainly the works of Islam yet continue to issue the usual politically correct euphemisms of how beautiful and perfect the new robes appear. The simple innocence and honesty of an unafraid, unsophisticated child is called for to give the rest of us the courage to state the obvious. Who are the modern-day weavers of the emperor’s new clothes today? Islamic apologists, the myopic liberal media, academia elitists, as well as an unusual conflagration of fascists, communists, European socialists, anarchists, and many other far-left and far-right organizations throughout the world. But then even President Bush regularly defends and praises the “great, peaceful world religion”, giving it blanket legitimacy irrespective of the inaction and failure of the worlds ‘best’ religion to put a lid on terrorist acts committed in her name. You can call me stupid, I just don’t see it. The reader is hereby promised that if you study without bias the facts herein in their entirety, the robes will also become invisible to you. The spectacle of ‘Islam Undressed’ is neither benign nor pleasing, and is likely to invoke embarrassment or horror from the on-looker, but should also result in a healthy dose of apprehension and accompanying survivalist thinking. Survival is the first order of the day, once secure we can return to debating the niceties of various political and cultural differences and resurrect more sensitive approaches to handling differences in religion and culture. Difficult social issues relating to our hyper delicate racial, sexual, and gender sensibilities can be debated again later. For now, the sight of this self-described great emperor needs to be dealt with, particularly his intentions with respect to the sword of Jihad in his right hand already dripping in blood. 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 and caused over 100 billion in property damage. They hijacked 4 planes, slit the throats of stewardesses, and destroyed the World Trade Center and part of the Pentagon. Remaining Americans were impacted by the trillion dollars in capital and millions of jobs lost. The victims of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the crashing airliners were not armed and did not fall in pitched battle. Of the three thousand dead, none expected their fate, but were nonetheless combat casualties of self-described religious warriors. Today, many not directly affected seek to forget that day, to push it out of relevance, but the orphans of those causalities, and children of orphans not yet born can never forget. America and other nations responded and went after culpable Muslim terrorist groups in Afghanistan, with a follow-on campaign against a major sponsor of terror in Iraq. Elsewhere in the world, some governments arrested men associated with Islamic extremist groups. Usually those arrested members of organizations found to be participating in terrorism complained, claiming to be only good devout Muslims badly treated and misunderstood. But as it turns out, various terrorist cells, networks, and organizations stretch far and wide. The enemy we pursue has proved to be adept at using false identities and cloaks of privacy to hide. They also make use of our own freedoms of speech, movement, and religion, plus the always available grass-root support from fellow Muslims to conceal themselves, their efforts and their plans. 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. Many others throughout the Islamic world were observed rejoicing and calling for the continuing destruction of America chanting "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 our 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 about 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 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 excess of political correctness. But this overwhelming desire to view the Islamic world through rose-colored glasses has resulted in significant resistance to 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 revered Islamic texts in some detail. A sixty-second sound byte from some "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. These texts form the foundation of Islamic beliefs and philosophy. But quoting verse is not enough, we will 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 the afore mentioned 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 just American lives (and way of life), which may be at risk, but the lives of anyone living in free, democratic societies. 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, and so forth. It is not just Westerners 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 it is understood, accepted and supported by a majority (or a large minority) of Muslims today. If it is accepted as it is practiced by the many militants, 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-defensive and even offensive measures. We are interested in cutting through any fog and spin to ascertain what is genuine, authentic, and indisputable. This investigation will be completely frank with no deference given to any group’s delicate sensibilities. For ourselves, and our future, we need clear understanding and honest answers to the following three questions: 1- What are the scriptural teachings of real Islam with respect to the use of violence to further its cause, and how applicable are such teachings today? 2- Is real Islam behind and does it condone the September 11th attacks, or were those 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?


Real Islam and the Religious Texts

"Real" Islam is the Islam the ‘Messenger of Allah’ (Muhammad) practiced and taught, as it is read and understood by the majority of Muslims today. To understand how Muslims think and what they really believe, we need to look carefully at the material they have been taught from. One can also look at the history of the different sects within Islam, but all real Islamic philosophy is fully contained in its recognized scripture. By Muslim belief and understanding, no prophet can or will follow Muhammad, and so no further scripture will ever be offered to challenge or replace the existing works. 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 are understood to 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, Muhammad’s words and teachings morphed to accommodate them, and so real Islam also 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 (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 surely they truly portray his heart and show us who he was and what he truly believed. We will also briefly review what Muhammad’s closest "companions" understood to be his final wishes, which direction they believed were 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 fulfill 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 we can safely assume that their actions accurately depict their understanding of how Muhammad wanted them to carry on Islam (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 defense, 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 today by a significant number of believers, then it would be 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 terrorist 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 our study of official Islamic doctrine. The Doctrine of Abrogation Statements from Islamic theologians profess that the Qur’an is the immutable and unalterable word of Allah, but such statements should not be taken literally, as what is really meant (and understood by Muslims) is; “passages that have not been Abrogated in the Qur’an are the immutable and unalterable word of Allah”. 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 it 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 canceling or replacement of one Qur’anic passage by another. It seems that as circumstances changed during the 23-year period that Muhammad spoke the Qur’an, the directions and precepts found therein sometimes changed to accommodate the new political realities, sometimes quite dramatically. Thus the Qur’an abrogates or cancels itself in various passages and presents seemingly conflicting statements. Muslims do not view this sort of abrogation as a contradiction, but rather, as improvements to better suit 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 are abrogated, and it is normal that some Islamic doctrine changes over time. As such, rules that once applied 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 commands, especially what his last wishes and instructions were regarding Jihad and violence. We must know which Qur’anic passages are still in force today for 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 must carefully examine the context of the texts to know which Jihadic directions are acceptable and in force today. Definitions of "JIHAD" 'Jehad' (Jihad) is an Arabic word that literally means 'endeavor'. In the literal historical context, this Islamic doctrine clearly implies physically fighting in the way of the Arabic God ‘Allah’ to establish supremacy over unbelievers, until they relinquish their faith and become Muslims, or acknowledge their subordination by paying the ‘Jaziya’ (or Jizya) humiliation tax. As will be shown in subsequent chapters, Jihad historically has been a perpetual war against infidels (Buddhists, Hindus, Deists, Pagans, Atheists, Skeptics, Jews, Christians, etc). In the correct context of the Islamic sacred texts, ‘Jihad’ means literally ‘holy war’, but today there is currently an effort in some quarters to extend or redefine its meaning and scope. To some it essentially means "struggle", and there are two types or divisions in Jihad: greater and lesser. "Greater Jihad," is the struggle within the soul of a person to be better, more righteous -- the fight against the devil within. "Lesser Jihad" is the fight against the devil without: the military struggle against those who subjugate Muslims or frustrate her aims. For those Muslims who ascribe to this differentiation, the struggle against the external oppressor waxes and wanes, but the fight to suppress the evil inclinations within is perpetual. When asked which is more important to Islam, greater Jihad or lesser Jihad, many ‘moderate’ Muslims tell infidels something like; "They don't call it greater Jihad for nothing." But increasingly amongst mullahs from Pakistan and Afghanistan to points across the world, a somewhat different answer is offered; "They are of equal importance, Jihad against the oppressor of Muslims is an absolute duty. Islam is a religion that defends itself." The newer emphasis and message resonating is now; "Both the Jihads have their own importance. In one, we struggle to amend our inner self, and in another we defends our religion. Islam is a religion of limits, except for Jihad, where there is no compromise. Jihad must be fought without limits.” This new emphasis places Jihad against ‘the devil without’ as more applicable today. Jihad against outside devils, in particular against the ‘Great Satan America’, is waxing strong, and is assuming a place of permanent, overriding importance. Once a Jihad has been declared and accepted by the followers of Muhammad, they tend to see it through to the end, even if that effort involves huge sacrifice and spans decades. 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. References to all these terms (fighting, war, attack, Jihad, slay, kill, etc) are almost continuous. From the "Concordance of the Qur’an", by Hanna Kassis, published by University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1983, [6] comes a definition, 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 Encyclopedia 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 Kuran patience under attack is taught; no other attitude was possible. But at Medina 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 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 Traveler, (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", Iman Nawawi, and others. This work was not written with a Western audience in mind. Nawawi wanted to produce a book on Islamic law that was precise, and accurate; one that taught true Islamic values. There are additional statements regarding the rules of Jihad found in "Reliance of the Traveler", 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. 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 report 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." o9.1 OBLIGATORY CHARACTER OF JIHAD: Jihad is communal obligation. When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others. … 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 obligatory for everyone able to perform it, 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 His messenger have forbidden – who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book – until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled." Qur’an 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). According to Muslim doctrine, to deny Allah and Muhammad's exclusive right to be believed in and adored is a terrible crime. Having established the ‘best’ religion which abrogates all others, the Prophet undeniably prescribed the correct course of action against non-believers is to fight them. It is quite clear that since the biggest crime any person or nation can commit is denial of Islam, the true solution to the problem is dictated to be perpetual war (Jihad) against infidels and renegades. Based upon 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 that 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 yourself unto death. That being said, it must be noted that there is a deliberate effort underway by Islamists and their apologists to present the term Jihad differently. Some of these efforts may be genuine attempts to soften the religion and perhaps cause less military Jihad, but it seems most representations are simply propaganda efforts intended to disseminate misinformation for political purposes. The relatively new phraseology and interpretation is offered mainly to westerners, with the real meaning still taught in the vast majority of Islamic institutions around the world as it has always been. Obviously Islam does not want to alarm the intended audience with the truth, especially the Americans who have been acting badly of late. In Jihad: How Academics Have Camouflaged Its Real Meaning (by Daniel Pipes Ph.D. in history and director of the Middle East Forum) Mr. Pipes states there is nearly universal falsification on the meaning of jihad amongst elitists. He cites the intellectual scandal wherein scholars at American universities issue public statements that avoid or whitewash the primary meaning of Jihad in Islamic law and Muslim history. The result is obfuscation as we try to make sense of the Jihad declared on us and discover who the enemy is and what his goals are. Such apologists are dangerous because even people who think they know that jihad means holy war are susceptible to the combined efforts of scholars and Islamists brandishing notions suggesting Jihad means ‘resisting apartheid’ or ‘working for women's rights’. To quote his article: …through an examination of media statements by university-based specialists, they tend to portray the phenomenon of jihad in a remarkably similar fashion—only, the portrait happens to be false. … from the more than two dozen experts I surveyed, only four of them admit that jihad has any military component whatsoever, and even they, with but a single exception, insist that this component is purely defensive in nature. … To another half-dozen scholars in my survey, jihad may likewise include militarily defensive engagements, but this meaning is itself secondary to lofty notions of moral self-improvement. … But an even larger contingent—nine of those surveyed—deny that jihad has any military meaning whatsoever. The trouble with this accumulated wisdom of the scholars is simple to state. It suggests that Osama bin Laden had no idea what he was saying when he declared jihad on the United States several years ago and then repeatedly murdered Americans in Somalia, at the U.S. embassies in East Africa, in the port of Aden, and then on September 11, 2001. It implies that organizations with the word "jihad" in their titles, including Palestinian Islamic Jihad and bin Laden's own "International Islamic Front for the Jihad Against Jews and Crusade[rs]," are grossly misnamed. And what about all the Muslims waging violent and aggressive jihads, under that very name and at this very moment, in Algeria, Egypt, Sudan, Chechnya, Kashmir, Mindanao, Ambon, and other places around the world? Have they not heard that jihad is a matter of controlling one's anger? But of course it is bin Laden, Islamic Jihad, and the jihadists worldwide who define the term, not a covey of academic apologists. More importantly, the way the jihadists understand the term is in keeping with its usage through fourteen centuries of Islamic history. In the pre-20th century years (premodern times), jihad meant mainly one thing among Islamic majority Sunni Muslims. It meant the legal, compulsory, communal effort to expand the territories ruled by Muslims (known in Arabic as dar al-Islam) at the expense of territories ruled by non-Muslims (in Arabic collectively referred to as dar al-harb). In this prevailing premodern view, the purpose of jihad is more political than religious. It aims first to extend sovereign Muslim power, and then by default to promote and spread the Islamic faith to those subjugated. The goal was boldly offensive, with its ultimate intent nothing less than to achieve Muslim dominion over the entire world. By winning territory and diminishing the size of areas ruled by non-Muslims, jihad accomplishes two goals: it manifests Islam's claim to replace other faiths, and it brings about the benefit of an Islamic ‘just’ world order. In 1955 (before political correctness conquered the universities), Majid Khadduri of Johns Hopkins University wrote that jihad is "an instrument for both the universalization of [Islamic] religion and the establishment of an imperial world state." As for the conditions under which jihad might be undertaken—when, by whom, against whom, with what sort of declaration of war, ending how, with what division of spoils, and so on—these are matters that Islamic religious scholars over the centuries worked out in excruciating detail. But about the basic meaning of jihad—warfare against unbelievers to extend Muslim domains—there was perfect consensus in premodern times. For example, the most important collection of hadith (reports about the sayings and actions of Muhammad), called Sahih al-Bukhari, contains 199 references to jihad, and every one of them refers to it in the sense of armed warfare against non-Muslims. To quote the 1885 Dictionary of Islam, jihad is "an incumbent religious duty, established in the Qur'an and in the traditions [hadith] as a divine institution, and enjoined especially for the purpose of advancing Islam and of repelling evil from Muslims." In the vast majority of premodern cases jihad signified one thing only: armed action against non-Muslims justified by both Allah and His messenger (Muhammad) as requisite for the advancement of Islam. That said, jihad also had two variant meanings over the ages, one of them even more radical than the standard meaning and one quite pacific. The first, mainly associated with the thinker Ibn Taymiya (1268-1328), holds that born Muslims who fail to live up to the requirements of their faith are themselves to be considered unbelievers, and so legitimate targets of jihad. This tended to come in handy when (as was often the case) one Muslim ruler made war against another by portraying the enemy as not properly Muslim enough. The second variant, usually associated with Sufis, or Muslim mystics, was the doctrine customarily translated as "greater" or "higher" jihad. This Sufi variant invokes allegorical modes of interpretation to turn jihad's literal meaning of armed conflict upside-down, calling instead for a withdrawal from the world to struggle against one's baser instincts in pursuit of numinous awareness and spiritual depth. But as Rudolph Peters notes in his authoritative Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam (1995), this interpretation was "hardly touched upon" in premodern legal writings on jihad. Jihad is a concept has caused and continues to cause discomfort and untold human suffering. In the words of Bat Ye'or (the Swiss Islamic specialist), Jihad is responsible for "war, dispossession, dhimmitude [subordination], slavery, and death." As Bat Ye'or points out, Muslims "have the right as Muslims to say that jihad is just and spiritual" if they so wish; but by the same token, any truly honest accounting would have to give voice to the countless "infidels who were and are the victims of jihad" and who, no less than the victims of Nazism or Communism, have "their own opinion of the jihad that targets them." Today, as a result of its contact with Western influences, things have become more complicated. Parts of Islam have undergone some contradictory changes. Muslims having to cope with the West have tended to adopt one of three broad approaches: Islamist, reformist, or secularist. Secularists, representing a fringe minority of Muslims, reject jihad in its entirety, though the rest of the world hopes that they might become more numerous. The Islamists and reformists have fastened on variant meanings of jihad to develop and promote interpretations that support their contradicting agendas. Islamists, besides adhering to the primary conception of jihad as armed warfare against infidels, have also adopted as their own Ibn Taymiya's call to target impious Muslims. This approach acquired increased salience through the 20th century as Islamist thinkers like Hasan al-Banna (1906-49), Sayyid Qutb (1906-66), Abu al-A‘la Mawdudi (1903-79), and Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini (1903-89) promoted jihad against putatively Muslim rulers who failed to live up to or apply the laws of Islam. The revolutionaries who overthrew the shah of Iran in 1979 and the assassins who gunned down President Anwar Sadat of Egypt two years later overtly held to this doctrine. So does Osama bin Laden. Reformists, by contrast, are trying to reinterpret Islam to make it compatible with Western ways. It is they—principally through the writings of Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan, a 19th-century reformist leader in India—who have worked to transform the idea of jihad into a purely defensive undertaking compatible with the premises of international law. … some deny that jihad has any martial component whatsoever, instead redefining the idea into a purely spiritual or social activity. But unfortunately for the rest of the world, most Muslims in the world today largely reject these moves away from the old definition and purpose of jihad. Instead, the classic notion of jihad continues to resonate with vast numbers of them, as Alfred Morabia, a foremost French scholar of the topic, noted in 1993: “Offensive, bellicose jihad, the one codified by the specialists and theologians, has not ceased to awaken an echo in the Muslim consciousness, both individual and collective. . . . To be sure, contemporary apologists present a picture of this religious obligation that conforms well to the contemporary norms of human rights, . . . but the people are not convinced by this. . . . The overwhelming majority of Muslims remain under the spiritual sway of a law . . . whose key requirement is the demand, not to speak of the hope, to make the Word of God triumph everywhere in the world.” … For usage of the term in its plain meaning, we have to turn to Islamists not engaging in public relations. Such Islamists speak openly of jihad in its proper, martial sense. Here is Osama bin Laden: Allah "orders us to carry out the holy struggle, jihad, to raise the word of Allah above the words of the unbelievers." And here is Mullah Muhammad Omar, the former head of the Taliban regime, exhorting Muslim youth: "Head for jihad and have your guns ready." Pipes got it right, pointing out that the argument and issue is a moot point. In fact it does not matter what our educated elitists, Pipes, or all Islamic apologists claim Jihad means. What really matters is what millions of self-described devout Muslims think it means today and how they intend to act on their belief. What it has meant in the past (up to and including today) has already been fully defined by all previous actions of Muslim Militants in their conduct toward non-believers, and further debate to clarify or change that reality is just plain silly. Any honest review of Islamic history from 610 to 2004 answers the question of Jihadic definition quite convincingly, a portion of which will be reviewed in subsequent chapters. As far as majority Muslim understanding and use of the Jihad term goes, nothing much has changed through the last 1400 years. The lesser Jihad cannot be separated out from the greater Jihad and ignored; it appears they are both a part of unalterable core Islam. Anyone who suggests otherwise is either being deceitful, or has been deceived. The basic Islamic worldview sees all lands as either as Dar al-Islam (the abode of Islam), or Dar al-Harb (the abode of war). All those countries and societies not currently dominated by Islamic supremacy are by default the abode of war, where Jihad and lying is always fully justified. For further reference, some verses in the QUR’AN that contain the word, or form of the word "JIHAD" follow: 3:136,142; 4:95,97; 5:35,39,54,59; 8:72,74,75; 9:16,19,20,24,41,44, 73,74,81,82,86,87,88; 16:110,111; 22:77,78; 25:52,54; 29:5,6,7,8,69; 31:14,15; 47:31,33; 49:15; 60:1; 61:11; 66:9 QUOTES FROM OTHER AUTHORS ON JIHAD: “Jihad is a religious obligation. It forms part of the duties that the believer must fulfill; it is Islam’s “normal” path to expansion.” – Bat Yeor, The Decline of Eastern Christianity

“Mahomet established a religion by putting his enemies to death; Jesus Christ by commanding his followers to lay down their lives.” – Blaise Pascal, Pensees

“Muhammad, unlike Christ, was a man of violence, he bore arms, was wounded in battle and preached holy war, Jihad, against those who defied the will of God as revealed to him.” – John Keegan, A History of Warfare

“Jihad is a divinely ordained institution in Islam. By many authorities it is counted as one of the pillars of Islam. Theologically, it is an intolerant idea: a tribal god, Allah, trying to be universal through conquest. Historically, it was an imperialist urge masked in religious phraseology.” – Ram Swarup, Understanding Islam through Hadis

“When accusing the West of imperialism, Muslims are obsessed with the Christian Crusades but have forgotten their own, much grander Jihad. In fact, they often denounce the Crusades as the cause and starting point of the antagonism between Christianity and Islam. They are putting the cart before the horse. The Jihad is more than four hundred years older than the Crusades.” – Paul Fregosi, Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries CHAPTER 3 Chronology and Abrogation in the QUR’AN We will next review the general chronology of the Qur’anic listings, with respect to their violent Jihadic passages. As stated earlier, we must explore both the context and chronology of the Qur’anic 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 Muslim, Christian, 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 prophet-hood. 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 previously). 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. 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 extent 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 Encyclopedia 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 Encyclopedia 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-Syuti (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 second to 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. In “Milestones, Ideologue of Fundamentalist Islam in Egypt”, Syed Qutb argues strongly for Jihad from select Qur’anic verses (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). All this being said, to be thorough and fair, we will also review other relevant earlier passages on Islamic violence and Jihad found in the Qur’an. 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 defense. 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 military actions were offered protection if they would submit to the dictates of Islam or pay tribute. 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 in all lands and with all peoples who were not able to withstand Jihad. 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 additional 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-M focus, because as a result of being the last chapter revealed, sura 9 would dominate, or abrogate, conflicting Qur’anic passages from earlier periods. 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, Sura 22:39-41, and 2:193] THE APOSTLE RECEIVES THE ORDER TO FIGHT 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 offense 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-defense. 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 excerpt 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 those who abandon the faith get not only death in this life, but also the classical Hollywood eternal damnation in a lake of fire and brimstone, … pretty severe stuff. 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 drive 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 (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. … 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, so 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 traveling merchants who had goods that were not from the city of Mecca. PASSAGE THREE: SURA 4:94, 95 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 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. They were not reproached for attacking others of the same faith, instead they were reproached for attacking a person who greeted them - as a Muslim would do, but who they thought was not a true Muslim. Had the shepherd not greeted them, Muhammad would have had less difficulty in justifying his murder, and the incident probably would not have merited mention of any kind. One wonders why it took a 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 it to Muhammad earlier to prevent a potential brother from being murdered. Let's now 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. The third from between the 3rd and 5th year of Muhammad's stay in Medina. CHAPTER 4 Muhammad’s Actions, Speaking Louder than 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 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 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 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 many years who probably became alarmed and concerned observing Muhammad and his followers. 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, SALIM B. UMAYR'S EXPEDITION TO KILL ABU AFAK 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 presently 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 Mohammed. 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 b. 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." So 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 they were committing at Muhammad's request. They also intended to keep it 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 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 women named Asma b. Marwan. (Quoting from Guillaume, op cit, pages 675, 676) UMAYR B. ADIYY'S JOURNEY TO KILL ASMA B. MARWAN "She was of B. Umayyya 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 now lets look at another quote, this time from Ibn Sa'd's, "Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir" [op cit] volume 2, page 31: "SARIYYAH OF UMAYR IBN ADI" 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 b. 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 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 do away with 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 that expose and speak out against their murderous activities. So let's look deeper at the event and examine the context of Asma's views, relationship to her tribe, and the threat she posed to Muhammad; 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 summary of these three points is this: 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 Abu Afak murdered, and they didn't care about that either. In that light, it seems unlikely anyone would take her seriously enough to 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 b. Marwan was not a legitimate threat to Muhammad. She was not a leader of her tribe and had little or no influence. As such she was neither a physical threat nor wielded power to command followers. She was little more than a nuisance, yet Muhammad had her murdered in premeditated cold blood anyway. It appears that both Asma and Abu Afak were killed simply because they rejected Muhammad, and their deaths chronicled to serve as examples in order to dissuade other would be critics. In our day, how would a society based on law and individual rights react to an organized group who murder sleeping civilians for the reasons and purposes just outlined, and what would happen to the leadership of that group? INCIDENT # 3 – Muhammad’s Attack upon the Jews of Banu Qaynuqa Shortly after Muhammad arrived in 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 to the man they 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. To quote 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 in and of itself is 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, Guillaume, page 260, 364, 365, Ibn Sa’d, volume 2, page 32 The summary of the incident is as follows: 1) 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 a false, ridiculous, egotistical man who claimed greatness and prophethood. Naturally, Muhammad could not long tolerate them. 2) 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. 3) 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. 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, and then the Qaynuqa surrendered. Another key piece of additional 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 5:56] "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, one of the more questionable and ugly actions committed by Muhammad against the Jews then occurred. 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 defenseless, Muhammad tied them up in preparation for wholesale slaughter. Then, an interesting exchange takes place, which seems a further blot on Muhammad's record. A pagan 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: 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 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 Ubayy and Ubada Samit. From Sir William Muir's work "The Life of Muhammad", [25], chapter 13, 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 further addressed. 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 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. Many nations and movements throughout history have suffered opposition from other nations without going straight 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 so terribly meager? 2) Was it really necessary to eradicate an entire tribe of people over an incident in which one Muslim was victimized after killing another? Is it reasonable that the most prominent members of a ‘peaceful’ religion destroyed an entire tribe of people? INCIDENT #4 – The Murder of Kab Ashraf Muhammad continued to have problems with various people around Medina who refused to acknowledge his claim to prophethood. Kab 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 in the night. Tabari states that this murder took place in 3 A.H. The following is from Bukhari, op cit, volume 5 #369: [Note, this is a very long Hadith, the actual killer is named Muhammad bin Maslama, but 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." Now to repeat the story, this time 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 may 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 Median who did not fear for his life. Further note: On page 442 there is a descriptive poem part of which deals with Kab’s murder. A Muslim composes the poem, which in 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 kill Ka'b, they behead him and bring the head to Muhammad. When Muhammad sees his head, Muhammad praises God 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 lawful to dispatch men to commit the murder of one of their leaders under cover of night using deceit and cunning, or is no other law binding against the cause of Islam? If Kab were a real criminal, couldn't Muhammad have dealt with him according to the local law or agreements he had with the Jews? 2) What are the implications for societies today? In effect, do Muslims believe they can ignore local law and still murder in the night those who oppose them or Islam? 3) 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. They had rejected him, which he could not tolerate. His animosity towards them seemed to be ever increasing. Just after the murder of Kab 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’s ‘revelation’ and directions are clear and unambiguous, ordering all his followers to wantonly murder any and all Jewish people they may encounter. 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 his 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.” Whether this is a display of the elastic conscience of a loving, merciful, and forgiving God, or simply a display of the elasticity of Muhammad’s conscience is certainly debatable. Without question though, there is indeed something unique about Muhammad’s conscience, as was the case with so many other leaders in history who engaged in wholesale killings to advance a cause. This incident shows that Muhammad had unsuspecting people, even those who 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 had chosen not to be Muhammad's followers. Undeniably the actions in this incident were the work of Muhammad's executioner committing murder at his explicit instruction. INCIDENT # 6 – The Attack against the Banu Nadir Jews Similar to the attack on the Qaynuqa, the attack on the Banu Nadir Jews arose from Muhammad's desire for an opportunity to move against those that rejected his authority. Tabari states the attack 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, # 4324, 4347; Sunan of Abu Dawud, # 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 Nadir to ask them to pay bloodwit - i.e. financial compensation, for a man who was murdered by one of their tribe. The 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", that they were going to try to kill him so he quickly left the 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 Qur’an 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 Qur’an and Its Interpreters", [17], 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. There will be 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 Qur’anic 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 Qur’ans 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 in 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 businessmen, handicapped shepherds, critics, all fell to his sword. 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 community in the war on terror is not likely to be realized. The sad fact is that many ‘moderate’ true believers are content to support others to sacrifice themselves in Jihad and hope that their tactic support is sufficient to earn themselves a ticket to paradise riding the coattails of the martyrs. To oppose Jihadist warriors is to guarantee a very unpleasant ticket to a fiery Muslim Hell. CHAPTER 5 Yet more Actions which Speak Louder than Words We continue our review of the actions that Muhammad took. Talk is very inexpensive. What else did Muhammad actually do as he came into power? INCIDENT #8 - Muhammad's Massacre of the Qurayza Jews Muhammad lived among various Jewish tribes. He had issued an injunction or edict towards them where he expected them to fulfill 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 and 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 point in time the Muslims were aware that the Qurayza 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 Muadh, one of Muhammad's top lieutenants, who was severely wounded during the Battle of the Trench, 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 Qurayza told them that Muhammad intended to massacre the Jews. 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 Muadh, who had made the previously mentioned death declaration, of which undoubtedly Muhammad was aware. Sa'd proclaimed that the adult males (any teenage boy who had started puberty) were to be beheaded, and, the woman and children enslaved. Thus Muhammad massacred 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 800 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 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 (pg. 166, 175), written in the 10th century clearly outlines 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 Khaibar 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 Khaibar are detailed. This event occurred about 3 years before Muhammad's death due to poisoning. Khaibar was a large Jewish settlement about 95 miles north of Medina. The Jews there were primarily farmers. Khaibar 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 Khaibar, the Meccans had just stopped him 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 Khaibar. Six weeks later he marched on Khaibar with the intent to conquer and plunder. page 515 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 organized crime figures beating some one or torturing them to make them 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 murder, for the sole purpose to obtain money. Think about Muhammad's statement, "Torture him until you extract what he has". This is the prophet of Islam in action when he now has 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, but 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 [6]. 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 of any non-Muslim abuses the Prophet he will be killed. This is held by al-Laith, al-Shafi'i, Ahmad, and Ishaq." We see that Muhammad allowed people to murder others simply for insulting him. Here, a slave woman, 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 long tolerate any personal criticism. His ego could not allow his credibility undermined by anyone, no matter how insignificant and powerless, 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 The incident involves the actions of Muslims who were sent out by Muhammad on a raid against the Fazara tribe. The Muslims were initially defeated in their first encounter with the Fazara. 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 woman, 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 Muhammad himself did or explicitly ordered, sanctioned, and justified. Muhammad and his followers seemed every bit as brutal as the worst humanity has ever produced. INCIDENT #12 - The Murder of Abdullah Khatal and his Daughter The 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 pause and examine this paragraph. Muhammad ordered that an apostate man and his two slave girls to be killed. Khatal was ordered killed, not because he killed his Muslim male slave, 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 simple slave girls. They were ordered executed only because they sang a 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, many, violent incidents that could be drawn from. 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 the Romans were going to attack him. He marshaled 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 aforementioned options: convert, pay the Jizya extortion tax, 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 ibn Rabah read like a script strait from The Godfather. Summary of these 13 acts (incidents) by Muhammad: We see how Muhammad's attack 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, 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 the 9 individual murders committed upon Muhammad's requests or efforts just outlined. 1) Abu Afak, a 120-year-old man, murdered while he slept. 2) Asma Marwan, mother of five, murdered while she slept. 3) A slave women and mother of two, murdered while she slept. 4) A one-eyed shepherd, murdered while he slept. 5) A very old women, ripped in half by Muslims who captured her on a raid. 6) A slave girl, who was murdered because she poked fun at Muhammad. 7) Murder of Kab Ashraf, a prominent local who did not believe in Muhammad. 8) Murder of Ibn Sunayna (Jewish merchant on good social/business terms with Muslims). 9) The torture and death of Kinana, to extract money. If these descriptions shock the reader, consider that we can present these stories from 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 of these incidents is simply not available, so the full story can never be known. 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 very much. No one knows what other factors were at play beyond the data presented by those who wrote such history, but if we had the power to interview the victims and get their perspective on the events, they could easily turn out to be even more deplorable, gross, and inhumane. Even so, to most reasonable people, no further information is needed to deplore the actions of Muhammad and his followers in relation to these events. One is also left wondering how many completely undocumented events may have not quite made it into the official record for reasons unknown. The question naturally arises, did all war-like and murderous actions of Muhammad and his close lieutenants get chronicled in the sacred works? Certainly we do not have an hour by hour accounting of the all Jihadic actions of the man and his people, and considering the ‘inspirational’ events that were chronicled, one can only imagine how many and what manner of horrific events occurred but were never documented. A study of more recent Islamic Jihadic relationships with her neighbors may help fill in the holes left by the Islamic writers. History is written from the vantage point of the dominant victorious culture, and revisionist history seems a favorite pastime of Islamic scholars. Am sure that most Muslims would be terribly offended at the suggestion that Islamic history may be slanted, but before you dismiss the possibility out of hand, consider Muslim revisionist history being written today. Amongst Muslims today there is a widespread belief that a worldwide Jewish conspiracy exists whose goal is to dominate the world, the outgoing Malaysian prime minister just stated that and received the applause of Muslim leaders worldwide. A book long since exposed plainly as pure fiction, Protocols of the Elders of Zion was initially spread by the intelligence services of the Russian czar in 1895. Leaders and lay alike in the Muslim world believe the work contains the actual minutes of conspiratorial meetings among Jewish leaders, who were plotting to take over the world. The book is gospel truth to these people, and no amount of logic or rational argument can steer those who believe this type of nonsense away from it. Even a full year after 9/11, most in the Muslim Middle East, including the most educated and most intelligent, actually believe that Mossad (Israel's intelligence service) carried out the September 11 attacks on America. Then there is Monsieur Meysson who wrote a bestseller in France that claims no airplane crashed into the Pentagon, because no debris from the crash was ever found. To his mind, it was all a plot by the CIA and the U.S. military, who used an U.S. Air Force cruise missile to murder Americans to justify a new Middle East war. Arab countries also regularly host conferences where Holocaust deniers masquerading as historians claim to be able to "prove" there was no massacre of Jews by the Nazis during World War II. To many Muslims worldwide, either Hitler is praised for his services, or the Holocaust is denied as "a big illusion of the Jews". Spin and violence seem the chief export of Islam, and simple reverse extrapolation using this kind of empirical data supports the suggestion there was much more murder and mayhem committed by Muhammad and his followers than Islamic scripture outlines. Thus far information has been presented in a chronological sequence. The following chapter presents a small and limited selection of Qur’anic verses relating to this books theme. CHAPTER 6 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 4: 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 (V.9:36). 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 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", [22], page 77, 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", [23], 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 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 (Mujammi) 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: The (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 Khaibar. Let us emphasize two points about the Treaty of Hudaybiyya made with the Meccans (and supported by the Qur’an). 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, 3.891: 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 polytheistic tribes living nearer Muhammad. The treaty allowed Muhammad to attack the non-aligned polytheists, without having to worry about interference from the Meccans. So, aggressive Jihad continued against 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 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 so 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 fulfill 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). Ali's commentary in his Qur’an, op cit, page 435, states that verses 1 - 29 were revealed during the month of Shawwal, A.H. 9, and read by Ali out loud to the various pilgrims in Mecca two months later to give Muhammad's new policy a wide hearing. 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 fulfill 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 had peaceful and accommodating relationships 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 complete, 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 to make war upon the pagans thereby. Muhammad's circumstances changed - Allah changed, and Islam’s entire future direction changed thereby. 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 in 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 any more treaty or promise of safety ever since Surah Bara'ah was revealed. This passage is one that is primarily offensive. It does allow for defense 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 attempted to exercise freedom of religion and to 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. PASSAGE 6: SURA 9:29 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 first 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 (Jizya) tax. 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…. Then on 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 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 from the classic manual of Islamic sacred law (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 His messenger have forbidden - who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given 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 evident: the order to fight and kill Christians and Jews seems forever justified by verse 9:29. It is also 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 options are limited and crystal-clear: convert, …pay in a state of humiliated submission, …or die.

Here again is the historical background for this as 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. In this case the tax was given to the Muslims to make up for revenues they lost from a 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 God need to take the money from Christians and Jews to give it to the Muslims? If God 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 will? 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 available to 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." PASSAGE 8: SURA 9:123 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 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 reach 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 now we ask, what about the "NO COMPULSION IN RELIGION VERSE" so often cited today as proof Islam is a tolerant and accommodating religious movement? Lets look at this verse ‘in context’. 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 opens his heart to Islam and 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. Now, for the record, …just who exactly was and is compelled to accept Islam? Since Muslim spokesman in the West frequently claim that Islam forbids compulsion of conversion to Islam, 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 archenemy, 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. 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 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, obviously made under compulsion (the very real threat of death). 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? In Muhammad’s day, converts were gained to Christian Faith by witnessing the constancy with which its confessors cared for others and suffered martyrdom; they were gained to Islam by the spectacle of the readiness with which its adherents inflicted death. In the one case conversion often imperiled the believer's life; in the other, it was the only means of saving it. As Arab dominance gripped foreign nations, many undoubtedly embraced Islam not only to survive, but to avoid payment of Poll Tax (Jaziya) and escape the humiliation reserved for the Zimmies (non-Muslims living under their Arab rulers). Probably few Muslims today understand that that many of their recent or distant ancestors entered Islam at sword point. Except for a few who joined for personal gain, probably most people were forced to join, accepting Islam solely for the purpose of survival for themselves and their children. Undoubtedly nearly all of those so forced hoped and longed for the opportunity to escape the grip of Islam at the time of their induction, but the grip of Islam on families, neighborhoods, and nations is very tight. Dreams of freedom became sad resignation, and after a generation or two none remember or recite the old hopes and dreams. It’s interesting to take note that much of 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 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 of the root causes and circumstances of their ancestral parents forced conversions. 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.


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 detail all their military actions here, as they are much too numerous. This information is drawn from various volumes of the History of Tabari, op cit, the "History of Islam", by Robert Payne, [5], and "Jihad", by Paul Fregosi, [1]. These books will provide a more complete account of the Caliphs 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 conquest 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 men are correctly 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 as guided by Muhammad’s final clear teachings and example. A review of history reveals conclusively that they followed their prophets’ instructions to the letter in advancing Islam through military conquest …through Jihad. ABU BAKR’S REIGN A.H. 11 (622, 623) Abu Bakr makes war upon the people of Yamana who wish to leave Islam. A.H. 12 Muslim armies attack the Christians in Palestine. UMAR’S REIGN A.H. 13 Conquest of Damascus, Syria. A.H. 14 & 15 Syria and Palestine conquered. A.H. 15 – 21 Iraq, Southern Persia, and Egypt conquered. UTHMAN’S REIGN A.H. 24 Conquest in Northern Persia and Armenia. A.H. 28 Attack on Cyprus. ALI’S REIGN 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 afterwards, Ali was murdered by Muslims, as was Uthman, and also Umar killed by a slave. Muwawiyya then assumed power as Caliph. As you can tell from the brief chronology, the Caliphs made war as aggressively as any conquering nation or people in human history. They went on conquest after conquest. The message imposed with the sword was the same as Muhammad’s: convert, pay extortion taxes, or die. Islam, real Islam, their Islam, was a religion of war, oppression, and conquest. Below are Hadith dealing with the conquests and subjections of the Caliphs. Bukhari 4.386: 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. A Banquet of Hadith (which deals with Jihad and aggressive Islamic violence). We’ve examined many verses from the Qur’an, and associated context from Sira and Hadith, along with commentary 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. [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 7, 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, 4.175: 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…." The following deals with the permissibility of killing women and children in the night raids (provided it is not deliberate): 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 4.256: 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 (pbuh) 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 (pbuh) 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. 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 (pbuh) 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 (pbuh) 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, 4.266A: 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 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 Islam) you should (readily) do so. Bukhari 4. 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 4.177: 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 4.180: 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 4.355: 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 4. 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 4.792: 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 1.387: 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 5.568: Narrated Usama bin Zaid: Allah's Apostle sent us towards Al-Huruqa, and in the morning we attacked them and defeated them. Bukhari 5.641: 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 5.716: 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." … 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”. 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 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. AbdurRahman 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. … 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 8 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 in Muslim history: Joseph HaNagid, the Jewish vizier of Granada, Spain, was crucified on December 30, 1066 by an Arab mob who then proceeded to raze the Jewish quarter of the city and slaughter its 5,000 inhabitants. Apparently, Muslim preachers objecting angrily to what they saw was inordinate Jewish political power incited the riot. 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 preeminent 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… Jihad was a key aspect of pre-modern (pre 20th century) Muslim life. According to one calculation, Muhammad himself engaged in 78 battles, of which just one (the Battle of the Ditch) was defensive. Within a century after the prophet's death, Muslim armies had reached as far as India in the east and Spain in the west. Though such a dramatic single expansion was never again to be repeated, important victories in subsequent centuries included the seventeen Indian campaigns of Mahmud of Ghazna (998-1030), the battle of Manzikert opening Anatolia (1071), the conquest of Constantinople (1453), and the triumphs of Uthman dan Fodio in West Africa (1804-1817). In brief, jihad as a doctrine and practice was fully integrated into premodern Muslim life. The decisive turning point in the Western Europe’s long struggle against premodern Islamic conquerors came on the afternoon of Sept. 12, 1683, during the last Turkish siege of Vienna. The ever-heroic Poles marched to save Vienna while the French (surprise!) and other Europeans looked away. Louis XIV and his Frenchmen had cut a deal with the sultan, because in their view humbling the rival Habsburgs trumped the fate of Western civilization (sound familiar?). But led by the valiant King Jan Sobieski, severely outnumbered Polish hussars - the finest cavalry Europe ever produced - charged into the massed Ottoman ranks with lowered lances and a wild battle cry. On that fateful afternoon, the Polish cavalry struck the Turkish lines with such force that 2,000 lances shattered. The charge stunned the Ottoman army, and a hundred thousand Turks ran for the Danube. No massed army from the Islamic world has since posed such an organized threat to the West. 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 Quraish · 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 Nudair · 625 – Battle of Dhatur-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 Quraiza · 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 Hunsin · 630 – Battle of Tabuk · 632 – Muhammad 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 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 becomes 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

Those who expect Muslims to drop their belligerence toward the West, which has existed since Islam’s founding in the 7th century, 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. 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, driven out, killed, or forced to convert and call themselves Muslims. Non-Muslim Christian Violence Undeniably, Christians have in the past also committed despicable acts in the name of their religion, 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 its scriptural teaching (the words and example of Christ), not in fulfillment of it, as in Muhammad’s Islam. The third dissimilarity is that people from Christian cultures who perform terrorist acts against others are recognized as criminals, not worshiped as heroes. Detractors will continue to try to deflect criticism by pointing out such hatred and violence conducted in the name of Christianity. Though it is true that there has been many atrocities committed by misguided Christians (Spanish Inquisition, the Salam witch hunts, and others), do not lose focus on the problem at hand today. Remember all those atrocities are diametrically opposed with Christian scripture and philosophy where the greatest commandment was affirmed by Christ to be: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets" [Matt. 22:37-40]. So the basic tenet of the Christian faith is that people are the children of God, created in His image, and are all of value to Him. The basic tenet of Islam is that some people are chosen by God to be Muslim, but the rest are -not- the people of God, and that a Muslims duty is to expedite Allah’s plan for non-believers to be converted, or dispatched to hell. CHAPTER 9 The Qur’an on Relations with Non-Muslims The Qur’an’s View Toward Christians and Jews: Muhammad’s actions against the Jews of Banu Qaynuqa, the Banu Nadir Jews, the Qurayza Jews, and several individuals identified as Jewish in the Qur’an have been previously chronicled and will not be repeated here. An important principal in the Qur’an holds that humanity is divided according to a strict hierarchy of worth and value. The "People of the Book" (Jews and Christians) come in behind all other Muslims, including Women and slaves, but they do come in slightly ahead of Pagans Buddhists, Hindus, agnostics, atheists and others who are regarded as worthless and having no soul. In fact Muslims are forbidden to even have Jewish or Christian friends, which will be further studied in the chapter “The Psychology of Jihad”. 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). With quotes referencing Christians and Jews from the Qur’an like: – "Worst of Creatures, Perverse, and Friends of Satan", it seems impossible to characterize Islam as tolerant and harmless. By one widely accepted definition of a ‘Religion’ (“An organization dedicated to raising the spiritual awareness, the moral standards, the civil conduct and actions of its members, and in improving peaceful relationships with all others”), Islam seems to fall well short of qualifying. Clearly early Islam was neither harmless nor tolerant of non-believers. Intolerance seems the cruel norm in Islamic societies throughout history, while tolerance, charity and kindness towards different cultures and religions is glaringly absent. The fruits of orthodox Islam are bitter indeed, and it is by their fruits that they can and should be judged. 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 be ruthless in the continued destruction of all their enemies. 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. 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. The final words reported from the mouth of the dying Muhammad were a curse on the favored ‘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.” His appetite to do violence to non-Muslims remained unquenchable his whole life, the final words coming from his mouth a curse on those he had spent his life destroying. Despite his victories and the multitudes he had murdered, he left this world bitter he could not have done more, with instructions to his followers to carry on in that effort. 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. With revenge a glorified mandate for Muslims, it seems unlikely they will ever collectively ‘get over it’. In its attitudes toward Jews today, the Muslim world resembles Germany in the 1930s. That was a time when state-sponsored insults, cartoons, conspiracy theories, revisionist history, and sporadic violence prepared Germans for the wholesale mass murder that was to follow. Outside Israel, violence against Jews is also persistent: Jewish buildings blown up in Argentina and elsewhere, Daniel Pearl's murder in Pakistan, Jews targeted for stabbings worldwide. The essential training of their young to vilify Jews and Westerners continues to serve as the psychological preparation for this kind of murder and mayhem against Jews, now against Americans, and tomorrow against Japanese, Chinese, Australians, New Zealanders, Vietnamese, etc etc etc, …and on and on, …until the vision of the whole world as Islamic is achieved. The Qur’an 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 relatives if they reject Muhammad’s rule. The principals (and purpose) governing Muslim conduct with non-believing relatives will be further studied in the chapter “The Psychology of Jihad”. Muslim Honesty: In “Incident #4 – The Murder of Kab Ashraf” we learned that Muhammad sanctioned the use of deceit and lies to kill an adversary. When the volunteers (Kab Ashraf’s assassins) sought permission to speak falsely to gain the trust of their victim, Muhammad replied: "Yes. … You may say it." Ibn Ishaq quoted Him as answering, "Say what you like, for you are free in the matter." As Muslims are instructed by Imam Abu Hammid Ghazali (Al-Ghazali), one of the most famous and respected Muslim theologians of all time: "Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible." (The Reliance of the Traveler, sec r8.2, pg 745 [9]) By this logic, the praiseworthy, permissible goal of “making the whole world Islamic by Jihad” sanctifies any dishonest statement made to any non-Muslim opposing that effort. And as Muhammad said and demonstrated in his numerous Jihadic campaigns; “War is deception”. In a book of Arabic maxims, novelist Ayako Sono cites proverbs and truisms describing commonly understood principals of the Arabic culture [28]. The innate principals reduced to familiar sayings are hard for non-Muslims to comprehend, but are simply common sense for Arab Muslims. For instance, one popular saying goes, ''A man lacking in cunning is like an empty matchbox.'' Another says, ''A well-told lie is better than an unbelievable truth.'' Such guidelines and advice flow easily from a culture illuminated only by the Qur’an. This convenient morality is why few Muslims blink when they hear a spokesman deceiving ignorant infidels claiming Islam is peaceful and tolerant. Westerners, accustomed to religious leaders and spokespersons who strive for accuracy and honesty, are inclined to assume pious Muslim representatives are similarly predisposed. Muslim spokesmen are aware of this inclination and delighted their task of verbally twisting Islam into a form acceptable to Americans is so easy. Although quite willing to take advantage of liberal sensibilities, behind our backs they are amused at the ignorance and arrogance of our awareness of Islam’s mainstream designs and methods. Muslims who Leave Islam Sharia (Islamic law) is based on the Qur’an, the example of Muhammad (sunna) and the consensus (idjmaa). Under this law, 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. There is a logical reason why Muhammad dictated that apostasy rank so high an offence as to be worthy of the death penalty. Muhammads Islam was largely a military movement in the 7th, 8th and 9th centuries, so he saw apostasy as a defection to the enemy. Traitors in military campaigns were always executed by military organizations of that region and others, and Islam was and is a warrior’s faith designed to support military campaigns. 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 such religious texts whose interpretation 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 Qur’an. 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 just happened to be recorded, whereas thousands of other incidents have occurred with no record (there are many such dark secrets to for Islam to hide). November 1989 - St. Louis, Missouri - 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. Islamic Dissent The problem with attempting any real political reform in Muslim lands or with Muslim law is that anyone desiring change must first find fault with the ‘perfect’ Islamic government and judicial system. This usually leads to charges of blasphemy, which quickly puts the ‘quash’ on dissenters and their supporters. To document this dilemma, we look to our partner in the War on Terror. Those accused of blasphemy under Article 295/C of the Pakistan Penal Code may not obtain bail and are held until trial. If pronounced guilty, they face a mandatory death sentence. For those acquitted, the temptation to kill them anyway and obtain the promised reward promised by Muhammad seems too great for the ‘innocent’ to safely remain in the country, so survival dictates they escape to Europe. Many victims of the Pakistani blasphemy laws have failed to survive prison, and a number of those tried and acquitted have been murdered following their release. As recently as July 2002, Mohammed Yousaf was shot dead inside the Central Gaol in Lahore while awaiting his appeal. On 7th February 2003, Mushtaq Zafar, a 55 year-old accused of blasphemy was shot dead on his way home from the High Court. And in June 2003, Naseem Bibi, a victim of a gang rape by police, was charged with blasphemy and murdered in prison before her trial could begin. Defense lawyers have also been intimidated by fundamentalists and even a High Court judge was murdered after acquitting an accused man. 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 4x6 foot cell. He also faces the death penalty with well over 100 others similarly accused as of this writing. Pakistan’s infamous blasphemy laws are widely abused with devastating effectiveness to make false accusations against Christians and Ahmadis, as well as business rivals and political opponents. And Pakistan is a US ally with a relatively moderate government; one can only imagine the abuses that are occurring in more fundamental lands. 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. This should help explain the realities faced by good Muslims wanting reforms, justice, democracy, and other freedoms we take for granted. It should also help us understand that, although there are no real reform movements in staunchly Islamic lands, this does not mean that the people are content with their system of governance, or even with their Religion (which is the same thing). The lack of visible opposition is a reflection of the simple fact that the totalitarian control system in play is very very effective. 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, withering 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. The Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, linked to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement, carried out the summary execution 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 — Muslim separatist guerrillas in Indian Kashmir beheaded two people, one of them a teacher, 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. "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.


The American Muslim

In the face of sure outcry, we now must ask the question: ‘What about all 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 without the essential political dimensions 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 the 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 kind of statement, of course, is in direct opposition to the basic principles and articles of Islam, which hold that humanity is divided according to the strict hierarchy of worth mentioned earlier. Additionally, Ebadi is a woman, and as such is regarded by Iran’s Khatami and other mullahs as, at best, half of a human being. There are many moderates like Ebadi who say they are Muslims, but in fact the Qur’an condemns them all as Muslim-wanna-bes, hypocrites, and pretenders who do not obey the commands of their god and his messenger. The Qur’an commands Muslims to kill infidels if they wish to join the faithful in Paradise: 47:4-6, "When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made a great slaughter among them, . . . And whoso fight for the cause of God . . . he will bring them into the Paradise". The fundamental, orthodox, true Muslims will continue to teach and pressure nominal Muslims like Ebadi towards obeying Muhammad’s commands to establish the rule of Islam, if necessary through the use of violence. Nominal Muslims in America and elsewhere 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 more and more that they are awakening, as evidenced by the fact that their violence is increasing along with the number of Muslims involved in violent activities. The hope that a peaceful form of Islam might take permanent root in this country is wishful thinking. The gravitational pull of the Qur’an towards fundamentalism is like the force from a ‘black-hole’ and will eventually swallow-up every effort to reform her. Remember the Qur’an is ‘perfect’ and cannot be re-interpreted, re-written, nor reformed. As far as the Qur’an is concerned, literalists are Muslims and all Muslims are literalists. Even minor deviation from the Qur’an would in fact invalidate the entire faith. As such, any local or regional successes at ignoring Islamic fundamentals are destined to be temporary. Although the vast majority of Muslims in America are not terrorists, and many even 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, and more recently in Turkey… 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). There are very few Muslims in the Syracuse, NY area compared to many cities in the country, only about 5000. Yet since 9/11 several negative incidents have occurred including an arson case at a Jewish Synagogue involving two Muslim men, raids centering on Muslim-owned stores selling counterfeit DVDs, and a high profile case involving an Iraqi doctor accused of illegally funneling funds to Iraq thru his charity. The latter two in particular resulted in claims of profiling and bigotry from the Muslim populace. Rather than working to foster an atmosphere of trust, this tiny Muslim community acts in such a way as to only cause further mistrust. Then there is an organization called the Syracuse Peace Council. These left-wing activists attempt to cover their anti-American agenda by claiming to be advocates for world peace. However they have rightfully earned the nickname "The Syracuse Hate Council" by witnesses of their demonstrations against the American government several times this year. This angry organization of social malcontents calling for radical Socialist change within America happens to draw support from the likes of Magda Bayoumi of the Islamic Society of CNY. Ms. Bayoumi is not a strong supporter of the war on terror, but since she is against the destruction of terrorists, then is it unreasonable to expect her to be nice enough to persuade her fellow Muslims to stop trying to kill us instead of trying to bring down our government? Just recently Magda Bayoumi penned a letter to the editor of the Syracuse Post Standard to complain about what she perceived as discriminatory and bigoted reporting concerning a Post Standard article. The article discussed an investigation on whether Islamic Society of CNY may be illegally channeling funds to Iraq for other than the claimed Bam Iranian earthquake relief, possibly to support terrorism. This defensive attitude, crying foul and pretending to be a victim over every perceived injustice and slight, does not help the Muslim cause in America today. As we face new terror alerts American citizens continue to wonder whether Muslims in America are with us or against us. After reading this book one must accept the fact that within their very secretive society radical elements exist that wish to cause America great harm. It's not Christians or Jews who are releasing audiotapes weekly calling for Jihad; it's the radical followers of Islam. The American Muslim community could choose to be a great asset in this fight, as surely they would be able to easily identify the radicals living amongst them. But alas, to the degree that they have assimilated the Qur’an is the degree to which they will continue to support Jihad against infidels. Although virtually all terrorists working to destroy Americans are in their own minds devout Muslims, it needs to be re-emphasized that hopefully not many Muslims in America are terrorists. Most of them are undoubtedly 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 analyze and scrutinize (for terror-related activities) the procedures used by the military and prison system to recruit Muslims 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”. Muslim groups in America such as the Muslim Public Affairs Council, CAIR and the AMC have let it be known that they intend to vote as a bloc for any Democrat in order to defeat President Bush. They are fawning over Dennis Kucinich because he is the only Democrat to call for the immediate abandonment of Iraq by U.S. troops. This attitude speaks volumes concerning the Muslim population in America and its laissez-faire attitude towards terrorism. Instead of stepping up to the plate and doing more to help us protect the country that has welcomed them with open arms they whine about being profiled. Said Omar Ahmed, chairman of the Board of CAIR in a speech to California Muslims; ”Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Qur'an should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth” [27] 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 it 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 is 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 that is 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 to 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! MSNBC Oct 23, 2003 — On Wednesday, NBC News reported on a man who helped the Pentagon develop the Islamic chaplains program for the U.S. armed forces, a man who was later stopped with hundreds of thousands of dollars in his possession — and some serious questions about his background. Now there is more, and if federal prosecutors are right, this is a man who moved from the shadowy world of terrorism to the centers of power in Washington and back again. Federal Prosecutors have indicted the founder of the Islamic chaplain program on charges he illegally dealt with Libya and laundered money. But there are even more serious allegations about him in some new documents. Abdurahman Alamoudi, a consultant to the Pentagon on the chaplain program for more than a decade, is now accused of helping Osama bin Laden and Hamas. Court documents filed late Wednesday night claim Alamoudi has provided “financial support to Hamas” and “financial support to fronts for al-Qaeda.” One of the groups allegedly tied to Alamoudi is a charity that gave a Virginia post office as its address. Alamoudi was the charity’s vice president. Who founded it? Abdullah bin Laden, Osama bin Laden’s nephew. Also ringing alarms: Alamoudi’s Palm Pilot, which the government claims included the names and numbers of six designated global terrorists. Terrorism expert and NBC News analyst Steve Emerson said, “The public face of Mr. Alamoudi was 180 degrees different from the private face. And the private face clearly showed that he was involved or directed fund-raising for Hamas, fund-raising for other terrorist groups.” The government also alleges Alamoudi had a Swiss bank account and $2.2 million in unreported income, on which he failed to pay taxes. …in an audiotape of a conversation obtained by NBC News, Alamoudi seems to embrace violence and suggests al-Qaida should choose better targets: (Translated) “I prefer to hit a Zionist target in America or Europe or elsewhere.” Alamoudi’s lawyer said her client doesn’t remember saying such a thing and questioned the tape’s authenticity. Over the years, Alamoudi has been a familiar face in Washington. · The Pentagon chose him to help select Muslim chaplains. · He met with President Clinton. · Made six trips to Muslim nations as a goodwill ambassador for the State Department. · Met with presidential candidate George W. Bush. · Last year, FBI Director Robert Mueller even spoke to an organization founded by Alamoudi, over the objections of some agents. “Alamoudi himself was able not only to insinuate himself, but he put other people in place,” according to Steve Emerson. These new allegations are contained in court documents arguing that Alamoudi should be held without bond until he goes on trial. There are already at least three investigations of the chaplain program Alamoudi helped develop that are under way. Some individual Muslim chaplains also are under scrutiny…


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. It is no accident that from its inception, Islam has always had bloody borders, as 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. The Abu-Hafs al-Masri Brigades, a group linked to al Qaeda, took credit for the Nov 2003 Istanbul, Turkey synagogue attacks stating: "The remaining operations are coming, God willing, and by God, Jews around the world will regret that their ancestors even thought about occupying the land of Muslims." Does the God of Islam urge his people to kill other people who are gathered to worship? If not, we would hear Muslims speaking out clearly stating that the God of Islam does not urge the children of Ishmael to murder the children of Isaac, and not just Islamic politicians issuing statements to westerners, but clerics, imams, teachers, ayatollahs, and common lay members who regularly drop to their prayer rugs and fill mosques for worship. That terrorists claim to kill people in the name of God, while vast numbers tolerate such actions, surely is the greatest sacrilege and affront to God possible. Many Muslims might be peace loving and thoroughly disgusted with 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 reasons when waging war is justified and allowed. From "The Qur’anic 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 very 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. Note that this Muslim writer basically agrees with "Western Scholars" observations 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 terrorist began bombing innocent French civilians. Here is one article: TERROR Campaign widens; Bomb in Paris Subway - 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 8 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.

BLIDA, Algeria - Islamic guerrillas hold captive brides hostage to terror by Martin Regg Cohn Toronto Star Middle East Bureau. 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 to have 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 Satan 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 razed 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. EGYPT 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, Muslims have murdered hundreds of Coptic Christians. Muslims welding automatic weapons have even sprayed worshippers in church with bullets. 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. 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. NIGERIA 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 Qur’an 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 Qur’an.]


It is a curiosity to repeatedly hear of incidents when Muslims go on violent murderous rampages immediately after religious services on their Sabbath. They stream out of Mosques, and young Muslims go strait to their work taking vengeance against some perceived slight. It is a stark contrast to western religions, where the norm is for people to go quietly home from their services more docile and reflective and much less inclined to do mischief. 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 malevolent spirit that appeared to Muhammad which caused him to attempt suicide, then talked him out of it, and started him on a path of violence. The same spirit that had him massacre 800 Jewish men and adolescent boys, then enslave their women and children (those Jews had never clashed swords with Muhammad or his followers until he attacked them). The purpose that drove Muhammad and his followers had a thirst for conquest, and during Muhammad's last 10 years the blood flowed freely. Not only have Muslims attacked non-Muslims in Pakistan, but also the religious strife between Sunni and Shia Muslims 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. It is probably safe to assume that even if Islam succeeded in conquered the whole world, the bloody peace of Muhammad would continue unabated between nations and tribes. Islam seems capable of justifying violence and war against anyone, anywhere, anytime, for almost any reason. Though the devout continue to kill to bring about a day when the entire world is under the thumb of Islam, it is certain that wars and conflict would not end if that day were to ever arrive. Since the Islamic prescription for any hearsay, sacrilege, or misstep is violence, a world full of Muslims would undoubtedly be a world of continual tribal, regional, or economic war. Interactions between various Islamic peoples and sects today have demonstrated that conclusively. All Islamic visions of peace and utopia are unrealistic, nothing more than the unrealizable inventions of infantile magical thinking.


More News from Peaceful Islam

Matthew 7:16 “By their fruits ye shall know them”

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, and resulted in tens of thousands more sold into slavery. 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 and make Africa an all Muslim Continent. In 2003 armed Islamists, some from Pakistan, have been infiltrating the Indonesian isle of Sulawesi. Coinciding with the anniversary of the 2002 Bali bombing, they have attacked five villages, burning churches and homes. The Muslim regional chief of police, brigadier general Taufik Ridha, claims that he does not know the motive of these crimes, even though the attackers separated out Christians (including a six year old girl) and then shot them in the head or hacked them to death; and despite the fact that many of the weapons used were the same as those used by the Laskar Jihad group, responsible for the massacres of Christians in 2000. The Laskar Jihad, under pressure from the Islamic government responding to American demands, claims to have disbanded, which really now seems to be a new Islamic euphemism for ‘reorganizing under a new Jihadic banner’. This culture of hate has multiple heads from Algeria to Afghanistan, to Indonesia, via Gaza and the West Bank, Damascus, Cairo, Khartoum, Teheran, Turkey, and Karachi. It scatters the seeds of terrorism from one end of the earth to the other. Muslims in Indonesia slaughtered at least 200,000 Christians in East Timor (a former Portuguese colony annexed by Indonesia in 1975) and another 100,000 Christians have been killed in Indonesia proper. Moslem fighters returning from fighting the Russians in Afghanistan murdered over 100,000 in Algeria in the ‘90s. 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 (native Egyptians) 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 Jihadic terror resulted in the slaughter of 3,000 innocent civilians of multiple faiths and nationalities in New York, on September 11. 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: History - Jun 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 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) – Dec 10, 1998 Algiers, Algeria – 45 Killed in Algeria’s Latest Massacre An armed band killed 45 people in a pre-dawn attack 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 – Mar 17, 2002 Islamabad, Pakistan – A grenade attack on a Protestant church packed with Sunday worshippers killed five people including the wife and daughter of an American diplomat, in an assault clearly aimed at Pakistan’s foreign community. No group claimed responsibility for the attack, in which at least 1-2 young men in black 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 2ND 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. Associated Press- Jul 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 – Aug 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 – Aug 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. 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. 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 Cario, 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 fiancée, 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 bloodstains 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.” 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 very 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, 2002 – 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 demolishes armor-plated jeep in Gaza Strip convoy carrying U.S. diplomats (3 dead, 1 wounded). 111. Dec 25, 2003 – Homicide bomber at a bus stop outside Tel-Aviv kills 4. 112. Jan 14, 2004 – Homicide bomber, mother of 2, at Gaza Strip Erez crossing kills 4, wounds 15. 113. Jan 29, 2004 – Homicide bomber in a Jerusalem bus kills 10, seriously maims 50, including several children. 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: ; Jun 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. ; MaR 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. ; Apr 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. ; Mar 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, India – Islamic 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 – 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. The Associated Press – Oct 17, 2002 Kuwait – Kuwaiti authorities arrested a 17-year-old male 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, near the Alia and Ghalia towers in Fintas. 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 – Oct 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 had been targeted for conversion while serving in Iraq in 1991 after divorcing his first wife 17 years ago. He 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.] 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 saying Muhammad and Malvo had been known to speak sympathetically about the hijackers who attacked the World Trade Center and 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 – Tarek Abu Safaka 22, a Palestinian gunman, crawled under a fence and opened fire at about 10:30 p.m. and killed two teenage girls as they were walking and a woman at home with her husband in the Hermesh Jewish settlement in the West Bank before being shot dead in a firefight with soldiers and residents. The Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade claimed responsibility. 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 were 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. … 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.” 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. 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. 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. Associated Press – Dec 26, 2002 Lahore, Pakistan – Mourners buried three girls – aged 6, 10 and 15 – 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. The detained 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. 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. Reuters – Mar 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. Associated Press – Apr 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 in a downtown Moscow street killed a bomb disposal expert, authorities said a woman from Chechnya planted the device. 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. 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. Fox News - Nov 15, 2003 Istanbul, Turkey – Two nearly simultaneous homicide car bombs rocked two of downtown Istanbul's Jewish synagogues on Saturday, killing at least 23 people and wounding at least 303 of Turkey's 25,000-member Jewish community. One of the attacks blasted the city's largest synagogue, Neve Shalom, while hundreds convened to celebrate a bar mitzvah, the coming of age ceremony for a young man. Three miles away in an affluent neighborhood, the other blast hit the Beth Israel synagogue, where some 300 people were marking the completion of a remodeled religious school. Fourteen Muslims were also killed -- including two security guards at Beth Israel and one at Neve Shalom. A huge crater and the twisted wreckage of a car was left in front of the Neve Shalom, as medical teams carried away bloodied and burned victims. "There was huge panic, glass exploding and metal pieces all over the place," said Enver Eker, who witnessed that blast. "We saw someone put a head in a cardboard box." Security has been tight at Neve Shalom since a 1986 attack when gunmen killed 22 worshippers and wounded six during a Sabbath service. That attack was blamed on the radical Palestinian militant Abu Nidal (search). The Iranian-backed Shiite Muslim group Hezbollah (search) carried out a bomb attack against the synagogue in 1992, but no one was injured. In April 2002, a vehicle bombing struck a historic synagogue on the Tunisian resort island of Djerba, killing 21 people, mostly foreign tourists, in an attack blamed on Al Qaeda. Reuters – Nov 20, 2003 Lagos, Nigeria – Muslim Rioters Burn 13 Churches Islamic militants burned to the ground thirteen churches and several houses in a remote northern Nigerian town after a Christian student was accused of blasphemy, police said on Thursday. Irate youths torched churches, houses and shops late on Tuesday in Kazaure, some 50 miles north of Kano, a northern provincial capital where hundreds have died in religious clashes in the past three years. The dispute began when a Christian student was accused of insulting the Prophet Mohammad and a group of Muslims were not satisfied with the response of school authorities. Abubakar Sale, police commissioner in the northern Jigawa state, told Reuters that the rioters attempted to invade the school but were repelled by police. "The hoodlums then mobilized and went into town where they started looting and burning people's property," Sale said by phone from Dutse, the state capital. "Thirteen churches were burned, several houses and shops were torched, but there were no deaths," said Keirian Dudari, assistant inspector general of police in Kano. The violence came after three students were killed and more than 30 injured in fighting between Muslims and Christians at a university in northeastern city of Maiduguri earlier this month. More than 5,000 people have been killed in religious violence in northern Nigeria in the past four years since the introduction of Islamic sharia law in 12 states. Associated Press – Dec 5, 2003 Yessentuki, Russia – A shrapnel-filled bomb believed to have been strapped to a suicide attacker ripped apart a commuter train yesterday near Chechnya, killing 42 personsand injuring 200. The blast was the latest in a series of suicide bombings and other attacks that have killed about 250 people in and around the rebellious region of Chechnya and in Moscow in the past year. The remains of the suspected bomber were found with grenades still attached to his legs, Federal Security Service chief Nikolai Patrushev said. Three women also were involved in the attack — two jumped from the train just before the blast, and one was gravely injured and unlikely to survive, he said. Authorities suspect other accomplices may have been watching from cars near the site of the blast, which threw passengers from the train and sent its second car crashing onto its side, trapping victims beneath the buckled wreckage. The explosion tore through the train around 8 a.m., a rush-hour attack that seemed calculated to kill and injure as many people as possible. Officials said many passengers were students from local schools and universities. A suicide truck-bomb attack last December destroyed the headquarters of Chechnya's Moscow-backed government and killed 72 persons, and another killed 60 at a government compound in the region in May. Later that month, a woman blew herself up at a religious ceremony, killing at least 18 persons. In June, a female suicide attacker detonated a bomb near a bus carrying soldiers and civilians to a military airfield in Mozdok, a major staging point for Russian troops in Chechnya, killing at least 16 persons. A truck bomb in August, also in Mozdok, killed 50 persons at a military hospital. In Moscow, a double suicide bombing at a rock concert in July killed the female attackers and 15 other persons. ABC News – Jan 15, 2004 - Karachi, Pakistan – A car bomb exploded outside of a Christian Bible society in southern Pakistan on Thursday, leaving 15 people injured and damaging the wall of a nearby church, officials said. The attack in the port city of Karachi occurred after police received an anonymous phone warning that the Pakistan Bible Society would be targeted, police said. Shortly after the officers arrived, assailants in a car drove up and lobbed a small explosive device at them. Fifteen minutes later, a bomb hidden in a nearby parked car exploded, police siad. Twelve people were injured, among them six police and paramilitary officers, said Seemi Jamali, a doctor at Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Center where many of the victims were taken. Police have meanwhile arrested "more than a dozen" suspected Islamic militants for investigation into a failed Dec. 25 bid to assassinate President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, a government spokesman said Thursday. "The men belong to various militant groups… They are being questioned about the attack," Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed told The Associated Press. Karachi, Pakistan's largest city and its industrial and manufacturing heart, has been the site of several terrorist attacks in recent years, as well as bouts of sectarian and political violence. In June 2002, a suicide bomber blew up a truck in front of the U.S. Consulate, killing 14 Pakistanis. The attack came a month after another suicide attack outside a hotel that killed 11 French engineers. Associated Press – Jan 15, 2004 Gaza City, Gaza Strip – Palestinians Give Suicide Bomber a Hero's Funeral; Israel Seals Gaza Strip The first female Hamas suicide bomber was given a hero's funeral, a day after killing four Israeli border guards. The bombing was carried out by Reem al-Raiyshi, 22, a mother with two young children. Raiyshi was escorted into a room for a security search and then blew herself up in an attack jointly claimed by Hamas and the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, a group linked to Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement. Palestinian workers, among the few with jobs in the impoverished region, worried life would only become harder - but few were willing to openly blame militants for their new hardship. In a society where consensus is valued, criticizing armed groups openly is seen by many as a betrayal. "She's passed away and she's going to go to heaven," said one of Riyashi's sisters-in-law. "It was always my wish to turn my body into deadly shrapnel against the Zionists and to knock on the doors of heaven with the skulls of Zionists," al-Riyashi said in a farewell video. Al-Riyashi, who wore combat fatigues with a green Hamas sash across her chest in her video, urged her husband to enroll their two children in (Islamic) religious schools. The Islamic militant group Hamas group threatened more violence. "She is not going to be the last (attacker) because the march of resistance will continue until the Islamic flag is raised, not only over the minarets of Jerusalem, but over the whole universe," Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar said. Israel returned Raiyshi's body to the Palestinians. Israel usually keeps the bodies of suicide bombers, burying them in unmarked graves, to prevent the celebratory funerals often held for the attackers. The military did not say why it decided to return Raiyshi's body. Thousands marched through Gaza City during her funeral. Masked gunmen from Hamas and Al Aqsa carried her coffin, draped in the Hamas green flag. "It is not enough to call her a hero. Calling her hero does not give the whole truth. This woman abandoned her husband and children to win paradise," Zahar said in the eulogy. Hamas spiritual leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin said the use of a woman bomber was unique for the Islamic group, but holy war "is an obligation of all Muslims, men and women." Also Thursday, the Palestinian parliament approved a $1.69 billion budget for the year - more than twice projected revenues - in hopes foreign aid will make up the difference. Palestinian Finance Minister Salam Fayad said he hopes to get $650 million from donor countries to pay 125,000 government employees. Donor countries have propped up the Palestinian budget during more than three years of Mideast fighting. Fox News – Jan 29, 2004 Jerusalem, Israel – A homicide bomber blew up a bus in Jerusalem, killing 10 people and wounding at least 50 just 15 yards from Ariel Sharon's residence. Ali Jarrah, the bomber, was a 25-year-old Palestinian policeman. The blast peeled back the roof of the bus and catapulted passengers through the windows and down the street. Body parts could be found strewn along rooftops. Eli Beer, a paramedic, said victims had been scattered over a wide area. "There were a lot of heavy injuries, a lot of the people who were injured were in bad condition, a lot of people had missing limbs," he said. The attack occurred as schools were opening, and police told Fox News children were likely among the casualties. ABC News – Jan 30, 2004 Mecca, Saudi Arabia – Annual Hajj Pilgrimage Gathers Momentum The hajj pilgrimage began in earnest Friday as Muslims from around the world converged on their holy land. Police forces were on alert following yesterday’s death of six Saudi security agents in a shootout with terror suspects in the Saudi capital, Riyadh. In Mecca, the Grand Mosque, Islam's holiest site, overflowed with the faithful, who heard a sermon by Sheik Saleh al-Taleb who later led them in prayer. More than 460,000 crammed inside and tens of thousands more prayed in the streets. "Oh God, give victory to the mujahedeen everywhere, give them victory in Palestine. Oh God, make the Muslims triumphant and destroy their enemies and make this country and other Muslim countries safe. Oh God, inflict your wrath on the criminal Zionists," Sheik al-Taleb said. Fox News - Feb 06, 2004 Moscow, Russia - An explosion rocked a Moscow subway train during rush hour Friday morning, killing 39 people and wounding more than 120. Citing police sources, the Interfax news agency reported that the attack was carried out by a female homicide bomber. President Vladimir Putin blamed the explosion on Chechen rebels and said it was aimed at sowing chaos before next month's presidential election. "Russia doesn't conduct negotiations with terrorists -- it destroys them," Putin said. Moscow has been on alert following a series of suicide bombings that officials have blamed on Chechen rebels. The latest was in December, when a suicide bomber blew herself up outside a hotel across from Moscow's Red Square, killing at least five bystanders. Moscow's subway system - the worlds busiest with an average 8.5 million passengers a day - has long been seen as especially vulnerable to terrorism. Police routinely stop people in the stations who have Chechen or North Caucasus appearance, but cheek-by-jowl crowds during much of the day make thorough surveillance impossible. Friday's blast struck the second car of a train after it pulled away from the Avtozavodskaya station. Most Russians are dependent on public transportation, and the spacious train wagons are usually packed tight during rush hour traffic. The Russian capital has been on alert for terrorist attacks following a series of homicide bombings that officials have blamed on Chechen rebels. Two homicide bombers blew themselves up at a Moscow rock concert in July, killing themselves and 14 other people. That was followed five days later by an aborted homicide bomb attack at a central Moscow restaurant that killed the sapper trying to defuse the bomb.


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 forever altered or snuffed-out as a result of Islamic Jihadic 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/her self 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 pain, trauma, confusion, terror, and sorrow felt by this victim is representative of all victims of zealous Islamic militants acting 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 perpetrators carry out their acts feeling absolutely no empathy towards their victims. Joel-News-International: 21 June, 1998 Jakarta, Indonesia – ‘CHINESE GIRLS RAPED’ (reported by a missionary to Indonesia, Bill Hekman: “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 hurted 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 bother 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 is burned down. 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 neighbors. 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. 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 well-wishers, 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.


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, even electing a pacifist President and locking the door will not protect our children from the designs Islam has upon this people. Buddhism, a peaceful and pacifist religion and way of life was once the dominate religion and culture in Afghanistan and Indonesia, but today it is near impossible to find even artifacts of the culture now completely conquered by Islam. Pacifism operates on the assumption that non-threatening postures will eventually be recognized and not be attacked or destroyed. Such assumptions will not work against Islamic militants who throughout history have demonstrated little empathy and less tolerance towards others. Whether the perceived opponents are pacifist or openly oppositional makes no difference, Islamic Jihad has shown little or no difference in its actions, conduct, and options presented to all types of peoples and cultures. Islamists prefer pacifists, they are much less trouble to kill, enslave, and/or convert. If you want to help the Islamist cause, then by all means, be a pacifist.


The Psychology of Jihad

The appeal of Islam has many roots, some are even noble, but those mandating violence against non-brothers are not, or at least not by the standards of non-Muslims. When Islamic is judged against universally accepted standards of morality, this Arabian religion fails to qualify as the friend and guide of humanity it claims to be. Muslims will protest against this point of view, and as usual will produce weak tidbits or far-fetched evidence to prove that Islam advocates love and brotherhood of mankind, ignoring the larger realities of Jihad and 1400 years of history. This type of sorcery has worked wonders for Islamists and their apologists in the past, but with modern dissemination of knowledge, one hopes it will become more difficult to cloud the truth with the magic of misinterpretation and spin. 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 female 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. Quotes referencing Christians and Jews from the Qur’an include: – "Worst of Creatures, Perverse, and Friends of Satan". The clear direction from Muhammad appears to be that Muslims are not allowed to even be friends or take favors from Jews and Christians, unless that devotion/tax is extracted by force or threat of force. Christians and Jews then and now hold a special place in Islamic theology, and are presented in a hateful manner in the Qur’an and in modern Islamic theology today. In the end they were regarded with contempt by Muhammad, the final words reported from the mouth of the dying Prophet were a curse on them "Allah's damnation be on the Jews and the Christians …." 98:6 Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Qur’an 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). Many who have known devout pious followers of Allah have felt the distance between themselves and their associates. This anti-social philosophy also goes a long way to explain the experiences of many women who have married Muslims, only to be turned into slaves and treated harshly. 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 Allah 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.” It is the Qur’an itself that directs Muslims to break friendship and business ties and other allegiances. The Qur’an even takes this a step further. 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. This shows that even family blood ties are to be broken in the cause of Islam, sometimes causing orthodox Muslims to fight and kill their own 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. Here are some more supporting Muslim opinion on the subject: "O believers, do not treat your fathers and brothers as your friends, if they prefer unbelief to belief, whosoever of you takes them for friends, they are evil-doers." (Repentance: 20) "Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends.... whoso does that belongs not to God." (The House of Imram: 60) "O believers, do not make friends with the Jews and Christians; whoso of you makes them his friend is one of them." (The Table: 55) When one takes into consideration all that Muhammad asks 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 or treachery on another. Normal feelings of affection, respect, and trust toward a friend would get in the way of a Jihadic action that might require the killing of that same friend. When Muhammad specifically tells followers not to develop personal relationships others it serves to dehumanize all non-Muslims. 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). Objects of disdain are much easier to kill than real live, feeling human beings. Not exactly in line with their oft repeated claim that ‘Allah is most merciful, most forgiving, most loving and charitable’, but for some reason 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 fellow Muslims and is not proffered to infidels, except perhaps to survivors who agree to pay the eternal ‘survivor tax’ (assuming you can wrap your mind around the concept of enslavement or indentured-servitude as being merciful). From the perspective of non-brothers however, the Muslims personification of Allah seems awfully cruel, unforgiving, unmerciful, and unfeeling. The principals governing Muslim relationships with others is vital to militant Islam because in all genocidal activities to date, grooming killers to first dehumanize victims in their minds is an important prerequisite. The indoctrination creates the erroneous belief that Americans, Jews, Hindus, and other non-Muslims are not human beings in the same sense as Muslims, and can and should be slaughtered with impunity. Other important factors that induce a devout Muslim to sacrifice in the cause of Jihad will be further identified in this chapter. Various mental malformations are usually at play when an individual goes ‘Postal’ and kills randomly, but those kinds of disorders do not represent the Islamic character. With one fifth of the world’s population Muslim, it is impossible to characterize the appeal of Jihad to hundreds of millions as a psychological disorder. On the other hand, mental and emotional forces at play leading to large groups being brainwashed to a single cause have been characterized in other gang, tribal, nationalistic, and religious cult events, and extrapolations of that ‘cause and effect’ relationship certainly appear to apply to Islam. The first step in any process wherein an individual surrenders personal will over to any cause is full immersion into the alternate doctrine and philosophy, and separation from competing realities. In keeping with this rule, the secrets of Islamic extremist group’s successes are in the effectiveness of Islamic schools worldwide. The secret is embodied in millions of poor and impressionable boys kept entirely ignorant of the world and, for that matter, largely ignorant of all but one interpretation of Islam. These schools often manufacture young men who are the perfect Jihad machines. With support from governments and family, such schools continue to serve as Islam’s primary method of indoctrination. The Qur’an is recited, memorized, and then recited again. It is a simple, natural act for those so brainwashed to step out of such schools, pick up a weapon, and start killing infidels. We all know (because it’s true and because it has been repeated so many times) that ‘repetition is the best teacher’. Repetition and consistency are indeed the best teachers, of which Islamic students receive heavy doses along with further reminders five times a day when called to prayer. For Muslims, daily prayers are not personal supplications where questions are asked or answers expected. The Islamic God is unapproachable and unknowable, and certainly above considering anything as mundane as individual needs or personal revelation. All instructions and answers are already contained in the scripture, word, and example of Muhammad, and it is the duty of Muslims to accept the Cleric or Imams explanation of how these unalterable revelations apply to their life issues today. As such daily prayer represent more declarations of agreement and worship than typical supplications seeking help on a personal level. These personal devotionals, repeated five times a day, seem designed to be more chants to reinforce commitment to all Islamic principals and aims. In many other Muslim group settings (Friday sermons, funerals, protests), the rapture of large gatherings raising arms and chanting ‘Allah Akbar’ have the same socio-emotional effect as the huge crowds in the early 1900’s raising arms, clicking heals and proclaiming ‘Heil Hitler!’ Man is born with internal mechanisms intended to further both the individual and the species. Some of those mechanisms are emotional, including the natural tendency for empathy towards others. Empathy is the ability to see and feel things from the viewpoint of another. Empathy plays a critical role in persuading individuals to conduct their activities so as not to cause undo harm or pain in others. A person who has not lost the ability to feel empathy and compassion actually “feels” a portion of the anguish and pain experienced by a victim. A person so in tune with others responds by seeking relief for the victim, and in doing so also consoles his own empathetic suffering. Empathetic feelings are quite natural in children, increase with cognitive development, and are further sharpened when children are born and natural parental instincts become more active. A person who has lost the ability to feel empathy feels nothing at the sight and sound of fellow beings in anguish, and those who take pleasure at the suffering of others have deteriorated further into depravity and are said to suffer a dangerous form of mental and/or emotional illness (narcissism is a dangerous personality disorder characterized by the lack of empathy and self-deceit, which malady most of the worst despots in the history of man have suffered). Other innate internal tendencies are also programmed in the human spirit, including longing for freedom, and our conscience. Conscience is defined as that internal moral sense which enables us to differentiate between right and wrong, and which lights the way for moral conduct. It is the gut feeling of rightness or wrongness, which grips ones heart as we act on the varied daily impulses that drive us. Normal empathy certainly plays a part in this internal compass, but conscience is cognitively and spiritually more significant than simple empathy. All these codes are ingrained in our minds and hearts and serve us individually and as a species, for without subjecting behavior to a common standard of vice and virtue, social evolution is not possible. This is the reason that even primitive societies have always had words denoting a differentiation between good and bad. Although societies do not all practiced universal standards of vice and virtue, yet it is well known that almost all communities have always had codes to acknowledge what was good and bad. Codes, for example, respecting others and their property, mutual fidelity, speaking the truth, keeping promises, respecting family ties, helping the poor, weak, and handicapped. These codes come into being in response to our innate conscience, and are generally considered signs of good morality. Since every one desires security of person and property, liberty to worship, fair trial, freedom of speech etc., these facts, over a period of time, rose to become what is called Human Rights. He who violates these rights is considered by developed nations to be an enemy of humankind. For a person to abandon internal standards guiding proper behavior towards others, forces or factors must first be applied to break down those natural internal clocks. There are many ways this can be accomplished in individuals and societies, and proven methodologies continue to be applied today with predictable results, as has indeed been the case with every political, national, or religious sect, which has ever behaved badly toward non-members or the non-privileged (including Islam). Islamic fundamentals preach social segregation, hatred of non-Muslims and elimination of dissenters through dominance, death and destruction. We turn to more quotes from the Qur’an to decide if such a conclusion is true: 1. "Do not let non-Muslims enter mosques. They will go to hell." (Repentance: 17) 2. "O ye who believe! The non-Muslims are unclean. So let them not come near the Inviolable Place of Worship." (Repentance: 28) 3. "O ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers ...and let them find harshness in you." (Repentance: 123) 4. "Humiliate the non-Muslims to such an extent that they surrender and pay tribute." (Repentance: 29) 5. "Certainly, God is an enemy to the unbelievers." (The Cow: 90) 6. "God has cursed the unbelievers, and prepared for them a blazing hell." (The Confederates 60) 7. "Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends.... whoso does that belongs not to God." (The House of Imram: 60) 8. "Moslems are hard against the unbelievers, merciful to one another." (Victory: 25) 9. "Muslims are the best of all nations." (House of Imram: 110) 10. The Prophet Muhammad has been sent by God with "the religion of Truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religions..." (Private Apartments: 28) A Muslim naturally believes in all such Qur’anic verses, pounded into his mind and spirit from childhood, which then warps his social outlook as he quickly becomes a narrow-minded sectarian. This psychological approach is the fountain of all fundamentalisms. It is a myth to say that Islam advocates good relationship with People of the Book (Jews and Christians). If this were not enough, one could refer the matter to HADITH, the sayings of the Prophet: Chapter LXXI of SAHIH MUSLIM clearly states that Islam is the religion for all humanity and abrogates (overrides, replaces) all others. Simply stated it means that Muslims are superior to non-Muslims and have the birthright to dominate them. This is why Islam calls itself Din-e-Ghalib, the religion of dominance. Obviously, believers from the best religion are superior to other people, and Muslim fundamentalists must fully assimilate this sense of superiority before they can act without natural conscience against inferior beings or objects. As previously mentioned, step one for any murderer is to first dehumanize the victim in his or her own mind. This fundamental Islamic sense of superiority, then, becomes the foundation of Islamic morality, over time supplanting or abrogating all superior natural or built-in instincts. As every student of psychology knows, the purpose of any fundamentalism is to secure blind following from its adherents. This is possible when one is conditioned to a certain object or goal which begins to rank as the sole purpose of their lives. As a result, the purpose begins to overrule the method of acquisition; whatever secures it is good and whatever obstructs it is bad. In a nutshell, people must stop thinking for themselves, especially in terms of morality. As the Marxists brainwashed people in the name of proletarianism and what it stood for, Muslims have been conditioned to the person of the Prophet Muhammad, who is projected as the savior of his followers, having complete power to find them permanent residence in paradise (the abode of luxury, love making and lasciviousness). For total obedience, they are at liberty to indulge in the most convenient morality such as dishonesty, rape, murder, theft, and treason without losing their chance of entering a paradise that has been absolutely guaranteed by their faith in the Prophet. For those properly conditioned, the use of violence for securing territorial and political advantage over non-Muslims becomes the standard of Islamic morality against which all acts can be judged (which explains the Palestinian prison systems ‘revolving-door’ concept for fellow Muslims caught committing crimes against Israelis). Islam declares Muhammad as the final and greatest of all prophets, and reverence for him and his methods has become an article of faith. A Muslim unwilling to force Islam on others is considered deficient in belief. As a result, every Muslim looks for an opportunity to demonstrate the magnitude of his faith by molesting non-Muslims, and even attacking fellow-brothers who express less bigotry. More Qur’anic verses clearly states that Jihad is a definite exchange proposition for Muslims (i.e. paradise for killing non-Muslims or getting killed in the process of Jihad). "Allah has bought from the faithful theirselves and their belongings against the gift of paradise; they fight in the way of Allah; they kill and are killed." (Repentance: 110) A HADITH (the saying of the Prophet Muhammad) declares: "Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords." (Sahih Bokhari, Ch. 22: 73) For the entire history of mankind, pirates, bandits, and armies have attracted young men to their ranks implicitly or explicitly advertising opportunities for rape and plunder, but Islam adds a twist to this base attraction. To succeed in Jihad is not only to gain honor, booty, and privilege in this life, but also in the next. To further illuminate the powerful force that is driving young men to Jihad we must ask …what is this hoped for paradise? Muslim scholars are usually embarrassed by this question and some even pretend that it is not physical but a condition of the mind. In truth ‘Islamic Paradise’ is the chief temptation for enjoining active participation in Jihad, especially for young men. The reason that the Qur’an explains it so well and in such detail is that it was (and is) intended as a recruitment tool. The ‘revelations’ came at the beginning of Muhammad’s prophetic journeys, as he was starting the process of gathering young men into armies to do his bidding. Descriptions of Paradise describe luxurious surroundings dwelt in by Houris and also Ghilman. Houris are the most beautiful ever-young virgins with wide, flexing eyes and swelling bosoms. Ghilman are the immortal young boys, pretty like pearls, clothed in green silk and brocade an embellished with bracelets of silver (apparently to satisfy those preferring the 'alternate' lifestyle). Allah guarantees every believing man no fewer than seventy Houris and many Ghilmans. To make sure that the lucky fellow can cope with them, Allah will increase his virility a hundred-fold! Individual lust and desire to dwell in such surroundings is a driving force justifying Islamic morality, and why Muslims (usually depressed and deprived as a result of Islam), are ready to practice a twisted morality based on violence. Those who surrender their psyches to the seduction of Jihadic violence fully expect to eat celestial food, drink pure wine, and enjoy the carnal company of divine consorts. Their staunch belief in the intercessory powers of the Prophet Muhammad (his authority to accommodate his followers in paradise irrespective of what they may have done), inspire them to follow his example into the ranks of Jihadic warriors. It’s a win-win proposition … succeed and enjoy the carnal benefits of power, rape and plunder in both this life and the next, …or fail and enjoy all you lust after in the next life. Either way your reward is sure and guaranteed. Allah has promised all sorts of rewards, gluttony, and unlimited sex to Muslim men who kill unbelievers in his name. He promises that in the fight for His cause whether a man kills or is killed he will return to the garden of Paradise, where Allah will "wed us with Houris (celestial virgins) pure beautiful ones", and unite us with large-eyed beautiful ones while we recline on our thrones set in lines. In that glorious place Jihadists are promised to eat and drink pleasantly for what they did, and have sex with "boys like hidden pearls", and "youth never altering in age like scattered pearls". (See Qur’an 9:111, 56:54, 56:20, 56:19, 56:24, 76:19). The only way to miss out on all this great stuff (and end up in fiery hell) is to fail to engage in Muslim violence against non-Muslims. Allah warned that: "Unless we go forth, (for Jihad) He will punish us with a grievous penalty, and put others in our place" (Qur'an 9:39). In these ways, through fear, false faith, greed, and lust, Islam is driven and inspired into the conscience of individuals, manifesting itself in gross crimes against humanity worldwide. This Islamic exploitation of the believers has led to the moral bankruptcy of many, well demonstrated by an incident in Pakistan the middle of April 1994: Hafiz Sajjad Tariq of Gujranwala in Pakistan accidentally dropped a copy of the Qur’an in a fireplace. As it caught fire, people of the locality became aflame with rage. Not caring that Sajjad was a pious Muslim devoted to exalt holiness of the Scripture (Qur’an), they alleged that he had desecrated the Word of God. As mullahs of the area heard of it, they instantly issued Fatwas of apostasy against Sajjad. Like hawks, the fundamentalists swooped down on him, each hoping that his blow would dispatch the victim to hell assuring him (the assailant) a seat in paradise. As they were hitting him, someone shouted that he was being dished out an un-Islamic punishment because he must be stoned to death. By then, they had broken his ribs and he was not able to walk. A gallant police officer intervened and locked him up with a view to saving him from mob-violence. As the news spread, a large crowd of frenzied Muslims appeared before the local police- station demanding his immediate release. The Police Inspector, instead of enforcing the law, fell for the temptation of establishing himself as the champion of Islam and handed Sajjad to the attackers. They started stoning him mercilessly and thereafter set his body on fire. If this were not enough, they tied his corpse to a powerful motorcycle and dragged it through the streets for two hours! After this pious show of Islamic morality, they felt that they had done enough to avenge the honor of the Prophet to whom the Qur’an had been revealed. History teaches us that groups of people, or sometimes even an entire nation, can suffer from dangerous delusions. One need only cast a look back at the last century when millions of Germans believed they were the “Master Race” and the Japanese believed their emperor was a living god and the conquest of Asia was their destiny. For several decades, Russians believed that Communism was the ideal social/economic system oblivious or ambivalent of the millions who died in Soviet gulags. Now, despite an even longer history of defeat and despotism, fundamentalist Muslims around the world are experiencing pretty much the same kind of mass delusion, believing that it is Islam’s destiny is to dominate and rule the entire world. CHAPTER 15 Political/Economic Islam Until -all- Muslims abandon the philosophy of violent Islamic Jihad, survival dictates that we must protect ourselves from militants committed to, and engaged in, such vile activities. To do so we must seek and apply the rule of law, but it would also be wise to present alternate social, religious, economic and political options to the many good, kind-hearted Muslims living among us 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. The Politics of Islam: A comprehensive review of the Qur’an and history shows that Muhammad 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 yesterday and today justify anything to make the entire world bow to Islam. Today Turkey is the only Muslim country that could reasonably be called democratic, but that’s probably a stretch. The example of Turkey is comparatively laudable, but sadly it has also shown that secularist values can only be imposed on Islamic societies by force, and so will always remain tenuous. This will ever be so because orthodox Muslims must oppose any system that is not perfectly aligned with Orthodox Islamic doctrine and governance. Also, 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, and any system of governance based on it must always be oppressive by Western standards (no principles of tolerance, no religious freedom, and no laws protecting equality of individual rights). It would be too pessimistic to say that there are no peaceful strains of Islam, but it would also 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. The Islamic way of merging all aspects of personal, religious, and political life has resulted only in several Soviet-style state autocracies imposed on unenlightened tribal societies in the Arab world. It is simply indisputable that Islamist fundamentalism shares with other totalitarian movements a commitment to centralization of political power and economic control. In the tragic, broken societies of the Islamic world free markets have gained little foothold. Democracy is a foreign concept, or a sham. In these lands radical hostility continues to fester and grow on a large scale, pushed from behind by the fundamentals of Islamic theology. It has given rise to a multi-millennial movement with a distinctive totalitarian mantra and credo similar to several purely secular ideologies more easily identified. The form it takes appears as a harmless religion to the uninformed, but in reality the faith is contaminated with all the perversions, lusts, and control mechanisms of its secular cousins. Like Communist and fascist practices – Islamic totalitarianism seeks redemption through politics. It is animated by the pursuit of temporal power: the destruction of the “decadent” (liberal) West and creation of a pan-Islamic utopian state featuring unrestrained centralization of authority. Whether the utopian blueprint calls for Kings, Caliphs, Mullahs, or Commissars to wield the Islamic sword of power is of secondary importance: It is the utopian idea itself – the fantasy of one seamless totalitarian state – that unites all radical movements of all ages. Islam shares that fantasy, yet it also pre-dates and has survived all relatively more modern political experiments, which have since largely failed, long since dumped into the trash bin of human arrogance. The secret of Islam’s survival and longevity lies in both the deceptive cloak it wears in the form of a religion, and in the fact that economic weakness is always inherited by states based on its tenants. Up until the age of oil this has made Islamic countries appear relatively unthreatening compared to more modern industrialized countries with more powerful economies and the armies that can be built thereby. In addition, any superior economic system or government is violently prevented from taking permanent foothold in Islamic lands. Beirut Lebanon was briefly a shining example of co-existence between Muslims and other ethnic groups, and a showcase of prosperity, until the fundamentalists took control and turned it into a nightmarish quagmire of terror and oppression. As the people slid backward in every way imaginable, the affluent educated Lebanese seemed powerless to prevent the calamity, as few Muslims resisted the pull of fundamentalists. The following point deserves special emphasis. Radical Islamist fundamentalism does not content itself with mere rejection of the West’s alleged vices. If that were all there was to it, its program might be simply to stage a retreat from wickedness, or in other words to do what the Amish have done. Islamist totalitarianism, though it claims inspiration and direction from an otherworldly source, is obsessed with worldly power and influence. It does not merely reject the West; it wants to beat the West at its own game of worldly success. Osama bin Laden is constantly claiming that the United States is weak and can be defeated; he and his colleagues’ lust for power and believe they can attain it. And so, although it attempts to appropriate a particular religious tradition and garb, Islamist totalitarianism is not, at bottom, a religious movement. It is a political movement – a quest for political power for the express purpose of using it to subjugate all people everywhere. 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 for most truly Islamic regimes. Women have few rights, even against their husbands, who may legally beat their wives and concubines. Enslaving infidels and raping infidel women are justified under Qur’anic law (and still occur in some Muslim lands). Grotesque punishments for crimes (beheadings and such) 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 Word of Allah. The fruits of Islam also demonstrate that much of fundamentalist (orthodox) Islam is an imperialist religion, indeed more so than Christianity or Judaism has ever been. Easily used to support extremists views, the Qur’an, Sura 5, verse 85, describes enmity between Muslims and non-Muslims: “Strongest among men in enmity to the Believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans.” Sura 9, verse 5 adds: “Then fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them. And seize them, beleaguer them and lie in wait for them, in every stratagem [of war].” It is not a difficult task for extremists to extract appropriate language found throughout all Islamic sacred texts and sell the concept that the Qur’an insists that all nations, however mighty, must be fought until they embrace Islam. Such canonical commands cannot be explained away or softened by modern methods of religious theological interpretation. The most violent passages have not been abrogated by more recent doctrine from Muhammad, and the Qur’an is the immutable and unalterable word of God. Casting the movement into the cement of an unalterable religion has given it unusual longevity. What is unique about Islam is that whereas all other imperialist movements have waned with the demise, decay or death of individuals or royal families, Islam’s imperialist movement has survived 1400 years and still thrives today. By any historical definition, bin Laden, the Taliban, and all other Islamic militants can also be accurately described as 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. Non-Muslims of any religion, women, homosexuals, are all dehumanized as their innate and natural inferiors. Despite the trappings of religious fervor, 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.” Islam as a whole, then, represents just another political theology similar to 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 Iosif 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 inherit 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. Cleverly masked by religious trappings, in democracies Islamic totalitarianism has been able to more easily hide behind the extended civil liberties and protections offered to actual religions. In this setting it has found fertile ground and has had a free hand to continue its mischief, since criticizing a ‘religion’ is considered ‘bad form’ and unacceptable in all societies. But as its worldwide members continue in unison to act in treasonous and warlike ways, the movement is likely to eventually be reclassified as the dangerous political movement it actually is. When that reclassification is finally made, it will signal the beginning of the end to Islamic deception and expansion. As their prophet Muhammad correctly observed, “War is deception”, and removing an opponent’s ability to succeed at deceit renders it much less potent and successful in warlike activities. The biggest deception of all being played out on the West is the claim that Islam represents a benevolent religion deserving of the usual respect and protections. There is much more evidence than is cited herein to indict Islam as culpable in innumerable acts of violence and terrorism. President Bush announced that we would prosecute this war on terrorism against the terrorists and make no distinction between them and the nation states that harbor and protect them, but what about the religious infrastructure that created them, is it immune from attack because it calls itself a religion? If Adolph Hitler had called Nazism a religion, would we have been similarly disposed and speaking German today? Note that in earlier epic conflicts on this scale we did not support or excuse ‘moderate’ Nazis, Fascists, Imperialists, or Communists …all followers and supporters of the dangerous philosophies were brought low in total war. Once taking power through the sword or by demographic means, the grip of Islamic politics is iron tight. Instead of clicking heals and proclaiming “Heil Hitler”, Muslims must bow and recite requisite prayers five times a day and proclaim “Allahu Akbar” on demand (the prayers are not supplications, simply recitations designed to reinforce complete devotion to Islam and all her ways). The first things to go in conquered lands are certain freedoms of speech, writ, and religion. German Nazism, Italian fascism, Japanese militarism, Stalinist Communism, and now Islamic fundamentalism have always been and will always be enemies of free speech and religious tolerance, because those concepts represent a direct threat to the indoctrination and control of the masses. Control and power are what’s at stake, and evil knows very well that Truth and Knowledge are the antithesis and antidote of totalitarianism. Another point that needs to be made is that Islam is not initially opposed to democratic processes in non-Islamic countries. To orthodox Muslims in non-Muslim lands, democracy represents a convenient tool, not an enemy. Through democratic means Islam seeks opportunity through discontent, deception, conversions, and/or demographics to seize control of government institutions, and then gradually to introduce ‘reforms’ until the region is subject to every form of Islamic manipulation and governance. Non-Muslims in democracies are not initially mistreated, but as the power of Muslim traditionalists’ increases, freedoms and protections erode and persecution begins. This modus operandi is the template Muhammad taught by example in conquering the indigenous people in Medina and Mecca. This is peaceful Islam. Those countries that prove resistant to such methods are subject to more violent forms of Jihad to weaken them to the point that they accept and submit to the dictates of Muslim political ambitions. Islamic Economics 101: It is common knowledge and no citations are required to establish that the economic performances of Islamic lands are pathetic compared to Western industrialized nations. Numerous human social experiments in communism and pure socialism have shown convincingly that when you remove freedom and economic incentive, productivity and innovation languish. If it were not for the oil in the ground, the productive output of Arab lands would be less than most undeveloped third-world countries. The reasons for this go beyond the lack of free-market opportunities and mechanisms. With Islamic education focused (as a political necessary) on indoctrination, and with other Islamic control mechanisms in society, the kind of education which might lead to significant economic reform is not offered. Then there is the fact that half the population (women) are prevented from getting an education, entering the workforce, and contributing to industry. Instead women are regulated to being nothing more than servants to their husbands and baby factories for Islam. Paying large percentages in alms is also a heavy burden, as is the personal and social burdens associated with caring for large numbers of minors. Contributing to support local and distant Jihads is also expected. In fact the opportunity to donate sons and money is irresistible to many Muslims, the following reveals why; The Prophet said: "Whatever one spends to facilitate Jehad, Allah shall give him a reward which will exceed his contribution 700 times." (Tirmzi, Vol.1, p.697) The Prophet said: "He who reared a horse for the sole intention of using it in a Jehad, then he will be rewarded one virtue for each grain he gave the horse as a feed." (Ibn-E-Majah, Vol. 2, p. 172) The Prophet said: "A martyr (in Jehad) is dressed in radiant robes of faith: he is married to houries and is allowed by Allah to intercede for seventy men (i.e. he is authorized by God to recommend seventy men for entry into paradise, and his intercession is sure to be granted.) (Ibn-E-Majah, Vol. 2, p. 174) Consider the productivity effects of a limited workforce who are interrupted 5 times a day for compulsory prayer, and who fast all day for weeks on end. Then for merchants, there is undoubtedly fear of providing services or products not in complete conformity with rigid, canonical Islamic restrictions. Such realities are not exactly conducive to market expansion and employment. Then there is the Islamic morality that glorifies dishonesty and cunning to get gain. It is a fact that when you remove trust from business relationships, nothing much can happen. Things like long-term-investment, shared-vision, common-goals, cooperative-projects, and group-achievement become impossible. The net result of Islamic cultural effects on markets and industry make economies based on it much less than competitive in a world economy based on open markets and freedom. Lands hamstrung by Islamic principals and culture seem guaranteed to fail competitively, producing only the kind of desperate uneducated, unenlightened core material required to produce ever more Jihadic foot soldiers. Another consequence of the Muslim model is that the trappings of superior economic models in adjoining non-Muslim lands are thereby guaranteed to be superior, which more often than not produces jealousy and bitter animosity, if not fodder inspiring conquest and plunder. It is a bitter pill for Muslims to see inferior ‘Infidels’ enjoying bountiful fruits of their industry while large numbers of the ‘brothers’ and their families flounder in poverty. Such feelings of jealousy and outrage also further stoke the flames of angry, expansionist Islam. The restricted, repressive economic model of Islam is the root cause of poverty and economic stagnation in societies based on it. So Islam itself seems designed to perpetrate both the root neediness, and the goals and methods which the political movement must employ to satisfy those needs …how terribly convenient. The Muslim Catch-22 As has been seen in this and previous chapters, there exists within the economic and political structures, practices, and also the ensuing inescapable consequences that must follow, along with the psychological forces at play, a certain system of interdependency which guarantees the perpetuation of the order, as well as forcing continued individual participation in a society so organized. To put it another way, the entire social, political, psychological, economic, and religious structures and practices exert significant force to insure participation of its members, and to perpetuate its existence. It is literally a trap; in any way you view it, with options for escape nearly impossible. For poor Muslims who know no other way, it seems the only way to escape the kind of despair guaranteed to exist in Islamic societies is by and through the sword. Consider the following points collectively: · Hate is taught from birth, and Muslims are mandated to expand Islam, so the borders of Islamic lands are guaranteed to be bloody forever. · If not Muslim and you encounter Muslims on Jihad your only choices are to join, die, or pay a high tribute guaranteed to be harder to raise if you live in an Islamic economy. · Once Muslim, you live in continual fear because someone might accuse you of collaborating, or dropping your Qur’an in the fire with the ensuing riot destroying you and your family. · You must support and fund your cleric and his causes, because not supporting the organization will certainly mean your family being economically/socially cut off, if not brutally dealt with. · You can't leave the organization and ‘best’ social order to join another; such treason is punishable by death. Any act or expression of dissent is at risk of being tagged as an insult to Muslims, or otherwise blasphemous with perilous repercussions. · Fear destroys faith, without faith nothing permanent is begun or built and everyone is guaranteed to live in a miserable impoverished scared condition. · Their miserable condition is blamed on successful people living without fear practicing human rights who have faith in themselves and others to work, build, and accomplish. · Killing (bad Muslims or non-Muslims) or being killed in the process is the only offer that guaranties paradise as it pleases Allah, so the only way out of a miserable existence is to kill. · The only way to remain safe, or to gain any advantage in Islamic lands, is to support and/or participate in the process of Islam’s often-violent methods of expansion. So it is that with personal free agency surrendered, Muslims in Islamic lands find themselves between a rock and a hard place. In reality they can escape the spiral of despair, but they do not know it. They are held to their limited and perverse options by a combination of fear and ignorance. Did the one God of the universe create this social order that removes both personal choice and culpability for killing others, and which perpetuates misery and despair forever? Is this the final, best, and greatest religion Muslims claim it is? If not God, then who created his perfect secret society where you must kill or be killed? Can this organization's practices be compared favorably against the freedoms and relative prosperity of tolerant societies organized by "People of the Book"? 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 Muslim terrorists are and were wrong, then why continue to follow Muhammad. A person who chooses to follow Muhammad and trust his eternal future to Muhammad’s word, by extension approves of Muhammad’s brutal teachings …including all his brutal acts. The same will surely reap the same reward, but it will not be the 72 virgins, thrones, 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, but the dead cannot change anything. The Women of Islam We have seen clearly into the mind and heart of male Islamic terrorists and the ‘moderate’ Muslims who actively or passively support them, but what about the women of Islam. What could possibly drive them to continue their allegiance to the causes of Muhammad? There are many women who have escaped Islamic bondage who have written quite eloquently about the ordeals of women in the Muslim world. The author must defer to those numerous testaments and will not explore the details of living as a Muslim woman in Muslim lands. This work is dedicated to understanding the motivations of Muslims on Jihad, and so Muslim men in particular. The author admits that his insights into the feminine Muslim culture is very limited, and that he is not qualified to say what makes Muslim women become or remain devoted followers of Muhammad. I will, however, express an opinion without the usual evidentiary backing. A former Muslim woman has provided care for my young children, and her good nature and strong sense of family values are beyond reproach. She sacrifices and works for her children and family, and genuinely cares for others in general. Her work ethic and dedication to family seems to exceed the maternal instincts of many Christian women I have known. My suspicion is that Muslim women participate in Islam out of necessity, because there are no alternate options, and because they have a strong natural maternal instinct and have great love for their children. Beyond that, I can’t imagine why they practice the religion, as it seems to this author that Islam has little to offer women. It’s a mystery wrapped in an enigma, but I hope to understand it one day. Islamic paradise, that very carnal place envisioned by Islamic Jihadists, does not seem to apply to Muslim women. Indeed, it would seem that even if their husbands virility were increased a hundred fold, that the 70 virgins, the pretty boys, the other wives, and the slave-concubines, might leave a Muslim girl wondering if she will be the beneficiary of any attention at all from an adoring (if not exhausted) husband. When you speak of paradise to Muslim women, they seem at a loss to characterize their afterlife in any but very nebulous abstract terms. What is very carnal, visual, and well defined for men is much less than clear for poor Muslim women. Muhammad’s revelations were obviously intended more to help in his recruitment efforts aimed at men he sought to participate in his exploits. Another potential problem in the logic of Islamic paradise is this; as Muslim men practice their new found virility on the Houris (celestial virgins) there would seem to be a constant need in Muslim heaven for replacement untouched young girls to replenish the somewhat more soiled originals, but in any case most Muslim women would certainly not qualify for that particular position as described. Once you scratch the words ‘untouched, unspoiled virgin’ off your resume, my understanding is that it is near impossible to put them back. Burquas symbolize to westerners the outwardly manifestation of repression for tens of Millions of Muslim Women living in what amounts to Islamic bondage. This all-encompassing garment separates women from all but close relations. They may not speak to others, travel alone or in the company of non-relations, hold leadership positions, vote, drive, attend school, or speak freely. Their lives consist of servitude to their masters, at deadly peril. Some societies are less limiting, with women only confined to wearing a hair covering and veil with other restrictions less pronounced, but even in these societies’ women’s rights and opportunities cannot be compared to western standards. All women in Islamic lands subject to Sharia are subject to horrific punishments for promiscuity or adultery. Even in Saudi Arabia, one of the more advanced, wealthy, and educated Arab Islamic lands, it is a common ploy for men to end arguments with their wives by raising their finger and proclaiming “I divorce you, ...I divorce you, ...I .…” Usually at about the second invoking of the official ‘three strikes and your out’ Islamic method of divorce, women are on their knees begging the angry man for forgiveness and imploring them not to repeat the fateful third ‘I divorce you’. These poor women degrade themselves because they know full well how utterly alone they are in Islamic society without the benefits of property, rights, and substance that they enjoy only through their continued association with their husband. Are there women who join Islam without being born into the cult, forced into the organization, or deceived into believing it is something entirely different? What inspires women to join? I really can’t imagine. As for women, the book of Allah says that they are inferior to men and their husbands who have the right to scourge them if they are found disobedient (Qur’an 4:34). It advises men to take a green branch and beat their wives (because a green branch is more flexible and inflicts greater pain). (Qur’an 38:44). It teaches that women will go to hell if they are disobedient to their husbands (66:10). It maintains that men have an advantage over the women (Qur’an 2:228). It not only denies women equal rights, it decrees that their witness is not admissible in courts of law (Qur’an. 2:282). This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness. The Holy Prophet allows men to marry up to four wives, and is licensed to sleep with slave maids and as many 'captive' women as he can acquire (Qur’an 4:3) even if those women are already married (as He himself did). Furthermore, by the example of Muhammad, a man may take a pre-pubescent wife as young as 9 years old to his marriage bed. Although most countries limit such children marriages to 11-13 years old, the practice of bedding younger girls is not unknown in some regions. Further, the insane practice of genitalia mutilation and honor killings continues today in many Islamic lands and families. [A word of warning for those who find their version of the Qur’an translated differently than the verses quoted herein. Almost all English translators of the Qur’an have deliberately tried to soften many harsh verses. Yusufali in particular goes out of his way to twist words to hide the harshness of the real Qur’an. For example he translates the verse (Qur’an 38:44) that says plainly in Arabic "take a green branch and beat your wife" to "take a little green grass and strike therewith". He translates a different verse (Qur’an 4:34) that states "beat your wife" correctly, but he cannot help but add the word (lightly) in parenthesis.] CHAPTER 16 The Final Analysis on Real Islam 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 twisted individuals in small radical groups. We hope that by pounding the al-Qaida network the threat of Islamic terrorism will cease. We can then put it out of our minds and hope that it will no longer affect us, returning to more pleasant pursuits centered around 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 is finally over. Yet, those planning our destruction are still living among us saying that their Islam is a religion of peace. All the while, just as Maslama deceived his good friend Kab in order to murder him, militant Muslims are prudently, patiently planning their next acts of terrorism, with tactic support from ‘faithful’ Muslims world wide, including here in the US. There is a reason why all those Madrassah educated Talibans, Mullahs and Maulanas of Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and other Muslim countries unanimously support Bin-Laden, ...Osama bin Laden and his followers are pure Muslims per the Qur’an and Sunnah. Now the inescapable inferences must be stated. Near the beginning of this work we asked the reader to keep three questions in mind during this course of study. 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 and modern 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 its 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, or worse. These teachings are valid, applicable, and still required for Muslims today. 2) Is real Islam behind and does it condone the murder of 3000 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, Islam and the rest of the world? 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 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. Remove all the religious trappings surrounding that great religion/nation of Islam, take down all the tapestries and linens, remove the robes of honor and power, strip away the false claims of accomplishment and achievement, unwind all the spin and guile, and you are left with the simple naked truth, Islam undressed, …and it is not a pretty sight. Terror and violence continues to twist and distort the soul and body of Islam into ever more unrecognizable shapes, so that it hardly seems human. The image of Islam undressed is as frightening as the image of its never ending Jihadic crusades, bathed as they are in carnage, blood, pain, and sorrow of millions of men and women, young and old. A few brave souls struggle against its core teachings to move Islam toward civility, but Islam’s response to terrorism is largely rhetoric, platitudes and disingenuous ‘lip-service’, in continuing contrast to her actions. Actions like running training camps of hatred and war in Islamic schools where the chief teaching tool is the Qur’an, a book that reads like a terrorist manifesto. It is wise to be wary of a people that embrace a religion based on texts filled with bigotry, hatred, and graphic violence. Islam proclaims peace as it persecutes, tolerance as it murders, and freedom as it enslaves the rest of humanity. The truth is that Islam’s religious tenants and philosophy are full of vile hatred and that it is driving terrorist acts. Yet followers of this cult are being deceived at an astonishing pace to join in Jihad, a Jihad directed towards each of us individually, our families, our neighbors, our friends, our Constitution, our government, our nation, and our religious beliefs (or lack thereof). So, why is it that so many Muslims want to see America broken or destroyed? The answer is simple, America is a powerful superpower; indeed some say the last superpower. Its military strength and pervasive 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 much 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, and attacks against the WTC and Pentagon were strikes at America’s financial strength, government, and military command and control center, 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 to, these Muslims have struck at our financial strength and leadership. Consider 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 diminish as it is spread thin. Calculate the results of 9/11/01 with its billions of dollars lost and tens of thousands of Americans out of work. The stock market crashed, taking two years to partially recover, and it may still be somewhat tenuous. The economy fell deeper into recession. Looking further down the road, the militants probably hope that once America is broken or destroyed, then the rest of Europe, Australia, or other regions can next be targeted with impunity. 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 utter domination and complete control of the entire human race! The spiritual power behind terrorism is bigger, and more perverse, than all failed political theologies propagated to date. It does not know human bounds. Militant Muslims serving their terror masters will not care about millions of American deaths, 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 or herself; 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 others 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 they know it isn’t over yet, not by a long shot. In truth the world is chock-full of 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 had gone to Afghanistan to fight fellow British and American soldiers. This type of Islamic terrorism is a worldwide movement; it is not the work of a few hot head 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, we can conclude that 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 Islam which 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 toward those who spoke out against him. Today, fatwas continue to be issued demanding the 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 inherit 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. Jihad still forms an integral part of the Islamic morality, an open behest of Allah to murder, pillage, rape and create widows and orphans for imposing Allah's will on enemies guilty of the "sin" of unbelief. Indeed, whereas war is the least desirable state of affairs for most men, vile/violent Jihad is considered holy by Muslims, and Allah guarantees paradise for all who embrace it. 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 and kill non-Muslims. Today's Muslim terrorists are following his actions literally … like prophet, like followers. They commit their acts will full understanding and belief that they are based upon what Muhammad said and did, and what he expects of them. So, soundly based in pure Islamic doctrine, large parts of Islam continue to practice, justify, support, finance, or tolerate terrorism against non-Muslims today. It appears the life of Muhammad 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. In 1861 Sir William Muir Esq. studied Islam in great depth and detail and in his work ‘The Life of Mahomet’ issued the following warning, still applicable today: [Two] chief radical evils flow from the faith, in all ages and in every country, and must continue to flow so long as the Koran in the standard of belief. FIRST: Polygamy, Divorce, and Slavery, are maintained and perpetuated; - striking as they do at the root of public morals, poisoning domestic life, and disorganizing society. SECOND: freedom of judgment in religion is crushed and annihilated. The sword is the inevitable penalty for the denial of Islam. Toleration is unknown. …Many a flourishing land in Africa and in Asia, which once rejoiced in the light and liberty of Christianity, is now overspread by gross darkness and a stubborn barbarism. … The swords of Mahomet, and the Koran, are the most fatal enemies of Civilization, Liberty, and Truth, which the world has yet known.


The Question of Aid (Jizya)

Paying subsidies to suspend global Jihad terrorism is tantamount to paying ransom to terrorist states, in effect buying one’s own peace and security as temporarily ransomed privileges. Societies that pay such 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. We give nearly $2 billion a year in aid to Egypt, second only to Israel, while its media openly spews anti-American hatred, and which is in fact the epicenter of such media pollution. For our investment we have purchased not gratitude, but disrespect. Americans diplomats were targeted and murdered in the West Bank trying to deliver scholarships to needy Palestinians, then their would-be rescuers were stoned by the locals. Perhaps it’s time to collectively confess that governments that either cannot or will not stop such hatred of Americans are not our allies, are not even neutral, but are in fact belligerents whose enmity should be accepted rather than ignored. State department coddling and financial/humanitarian-aid notwithstanding, nothing we can ever do will make fascist fanatics love us, we can only make them fear and respect us. 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, … do we bury them in charity, sympathy, goodwill, and understanding? At issue is whether we should we 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 force of arms. Although collateral damage and innocent blood are regrettable and should be avoided, an enemy cannot be allowed to cower behind the protection offered by 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 in the period between Pearl Harbor and Japans unconditional surrender, nor to Germany and Hitler. On Dec 7th 1941 a beleaguered West realized that pacifism meant suicide, and the Sermon on the Mount was temporarily suspended in pursuit of War. On Sept 11th enemies we neither provoked nor sought bring death to us, eating the bread we gave them. Many misguided activists 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 feel grateful and perhaps start to love us instead of hating us, but such hopes are wishful ‘magical’ thinking. Studying empirical evidence 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, or that it can be reversed by handing out food and money and encouraging democracy and free market reforms. That lack of gratitude we see today from Islamic recipients of significant aid is likely because the recipients view the donations as a Jizya tax, which Muhammad instructs they are fully entitled to. Free market reforms, or freedom of anything, are alien concepts in orthodox Islam. Widespread prosperity does not put the Jihad genie back in the bottle, as has been demonstrated in Saudi Arabia, it simply better funds it. Let’s not forget that nations paying tribute are neither respected nor left unmolested, and historically 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. Israeli officials … 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. As we struggle to make sense of September 11 and decide how best to fight Jihadists, it would be instructive to remember the 1801-1805 war that first brought the United States into conflict with Muslim terrorists from countries in the Middle East. The example of the fledgling US government dealings with Muslim terrorist pirates in the late 1700’s operating in North Africa's Barbary Coast (and protected by Muslim nations) demonstrated clearly that paying tribute never works anyway, rather it simply emboldens them to take further action. In the late 1700’s it seemed impossible for Muslim states along the Barbary Coast to ignore awkward American merchant vessels, match for the speedy Muslim corsairs, traveling through the Mediterranean. After the War of Independence, the Royal Navy no longer protected shipping from the rebellious American colonies, and piracy became intolerable. After seizing their cargo and scuttling the vessels, the pirates would ransom the ill-fated seamen, or sell them into slavery. It was a lucrative for the pirates, and the Muslim states also dependant on the plunder. The US responded and sent missions to the Barbary states of Tripoli, Algiers, Morocco and Tunis proposing to pay an annual sum to each of the local Muslim warlords for American vessels protection. The amounts paid were equivalent to the billions paid to Muslim states today. By 1801 it became clear that the policy of appeasement had failed. The Pasha of Tripoli along with other Barbary States demanded larger sums, and when they were not offered piracy resumed. America learned its policy of accommodation only encouraged the Barbary brigands to seize more ships and take more captives. Things were to change with the election of Thomas Jefferson, principal architect of the Declaration of Independence, and an outspoken opponent of the practice of tribute. He argued that any policy of appeasement would fail because, “in conveying weakness, it encouraged further treachery”. Jefferson's response to the renewed piracy was to dispatch naval forces. Tripoli responded by declaring war on the United States. For the next two years the U.S. Navy conducted running operations against the Barbary pirates. The American battle cry was "millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute". The fighting during those days saw many acts of heroism that established the U.S. Navy as a force to be reckoned with. In an 1805 action (now immortalized in the Marine Corps hymn) the USS Constitution supported the landing of Marines on "the shores of Tripoli". The Americans and their allies destroyed the harbor citadel serving as the headquarters for the pirates. For much of the next decade, American merchant shipping passed unmolested through the Mediterranean. Good policy supported by firm action replaced the foolishness of appeasement, and brought success in America's first war with Middle Eastern terrorism.


Spin …The Art of Ignoring the Obvious

As in all wars, this one is also fought with words. Waged for minds and hearts, propaganda is employed by all sides. It is the age-old struggle for converts to adopt a cause. The stakes are very high, as it the rhetoric and passion of the opposing ideals. In any debate, to confuse an opponent, the classical approach is by and through obfuscation, tangential diatribes, and/or classic political spin. The desired effect is to create confusion, 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 otherwise 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 fog. 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. 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, our armies would be given 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- 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 giving 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. State department coddling and financial / humanitarian-aid notwithstanding, nothing we can ever do will make fascist fanatics love us. We can only make them fear and respect us. 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, complete control of their future and far superior options to choose from, but have chosen to surrender that future by engaging in illegal and immoral activities. They have spent their entire allowance 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, even a whole people from normal inherent 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. Conveniently ignoring the vast majority of official violent passages and verse, promoters acting in the cause of Islam will continue to quote the same oft-repeated minuscule 'goodies' from the Qur’an to tell us the 9-11 episode is not ‘real Islam’. From President George Bush to brother Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens) every 'lover' of Islam is using a huge loudspeaker to announce to the world that 'Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance. Islam does not preach violence, terrorism, murder, killing, raping, burning, and looting... etc. The terrorists have hijacked peaceful Islam. How very nice those words are. …Islam is the light of the world. The world would surely plunge into a new dark age without the light of Islam... One can’t help wondering why they feel inclined to praise Islam and its works quite so often. Self-praise is no recommendation, and the barrage seems aimed to both reassure themselves and to deceive the uneducated. The world asks, why does Islam feel compelled to constantly remind the billions of 'ignorant Kafirs’ that it is a virtuous religion. 'Islam is peaceful' ad infinitum, as if repeating it often enough can alter reality, or perhaps even create truth out of thin air. No other religious organization needs such a huge advertising campaign to deflect criticism. Could it be there is something fundamental amiss with the religion and her followers? Of course not, everything is perfect and glorious with Islam. That great cry form the dust of tens of millions of dead and persecuted is simply the wind. If anything seems amiss with Islam, it is not the fault of the 'best religion' of Allah, but is by sinister design from the evil Jews, the satanic West (Christians), the vile Indians (Hindus) and the repugnant secularists/ freethinkers. In the classical strategy of transference, when challenged they parlay and deflect criticism by accusing the accusers of being guilty of what Islam is itself most guilty of; persecution, misinformation, intolerance, prejudice, and bigotry. Violence and spin, the chief exports of Islam, grows louder daily, yet somewhere in the fog, truth still stands silently and solidly in opposition to the din. CHAPTER 19 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 intelligent, educated, and basically good men said and did nothing, thus failing to slow down or stop the Nazi juggernaught. 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 principals, 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. 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”. 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 total and irreversible dedication of the faithful. The ferocity and the depths of their hatreds are insurmountable. As mentioned my family spent ten years living in Saudi Arabia and traveling to most Arab countries in the region. Most of the younger Muslims my family came in contact with seemed irrationally resentful of the West and seemed all too anxious to believe any religious leader calling 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. Ask yourself, aside from rare carefully crafted rebukes spoken only in English to Western news organizations, 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. Even many American Muslims have not shown any real revulsion at what is done in Islam’s name, instead they seem unnaturally quiet. Surely this vast quiet is the silence of fear, guilt, or …reverence. 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. Neither are they blind, uneducated, nor 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 is based in the fact that most do not interpret the violent acts of their extremist ‘brothers’ as too terribly serious of a problem since the victims are, after all, only infidels. The superiority many Muslims feel over non-brothers is enshrined in the Qur’an, embedded in Islamic Law, and unquestionably enforced by principalities and governments. 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. 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 also 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 is very much like Gang mentality in that once you’re in …you can’t get out. 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. 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). Every religious movement 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 neighbors to tread. The leaders of Islamic Jihad, Hamas, and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades sent their sons overseas at the start of the Infada, 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! Neighbors, 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. A thinking man must replace passive tolerance with active opposition when the net result of tolerance results in making a people more susceptible to murder, terror, sorrow, and poverty. 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 otherworldly political aspirations that in reality disqualify it as a peaceful religious organization (i.e. dedicated to improving her followers and harmless to others), then Islam is not simply another religion. Islamic theology prejudices and corrupts the minds and spirits of her victims, and the dangerous doctrine 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 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 nightclub bombing in Bali that killed 186 (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. To date the predictions in that report have been fulfilled. 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 Qur’anic 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 Qur’an 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 (Qur’an 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 favor of the Islamic state. The infidel country will be annihilated in favor 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 Qur’anic 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 favor 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…” CHAPTER 20 Seeds of Armageddon As events continue to unfold, and despite the political leanings of mainstream media, the heart of terrorists and all their supporters and sympathizers continue to be exposed. Special attention should be given to the plight faced by Israelis today at the hands of Muslims. Many Christians are very concerned about the events occurring in Israel for all the usual humanitarian reasons, but also for reasons not always understood by either Muslims or Jews. In accordance with prophecies in John’s ‘Book of Revelations’, some fear that what we are witnessing is the groundwork for the prophecies relating to the last days and Armageddon, and others think that Islam may be that ‘Great and Terrible Church’ referenced therein. Whatever the future may hold, the present condition on the ground is untenable. The root of the problem for Palestinians is they do not see the extremists amongst them acting badly as a great problem as the victims are, after all, only infidels. For the West, it is easy to diagnose such incorrect perceptions and attitudes as thinking errors, and so the solution becomes obvious. It would be prudent at this point to embark on a worldwide education program to teach all Muslims nations and peoples to think independently and critically. Unfortunately, the problem is not quite so easily solved, because within their own culture they do not see thirsting for blood and revenge as a character flaw, but rather they worship and reward the concepts when it is directed toward infidels. Additionally, all institutions of training and schooling are the very religious institutions that led to their current state of self-defeatist thinking. In Pakistani religious schools called the Haqqania madrasa, Osama bin Laden is a hero, Taliban's leaders are famous alumnus, terrorist suicide bombers are worshiped and eulogized as martyrs, and follow-on generations of mujahedeen are being conditioned and militantly groomed. The curriculum centers on the memorization and interpretation of the Qur’an (Koran) and the Hadith. Similar curriculums are taught in Palestine, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere. It should be emphasized that virtually all Islamic schools propagate this prejudice. The superiority Muslims feel over non-brothers is enshrined in the Qur’an, embedded in Islamic Law, and unquestionably enforced by principalities and governments. Any effort to teach their youth non-Muslim concepts would be violently opposed. Conversion to any other doctrine or religion will remain punishable by death, just like Mafia or Gang mentality. Once you’re in you can’t get out …your own family is sometimes required hunt you down and apply punishment. June 23rd, 2003 marked 1000 days of conflict, with over 100 homicide bombings. In the current Infada, Palestinians have also carried out hundreds of other attacks aimed at ordinary civilians, killing over 870 and wounding thousands in a nation of 6.3 million people. Yet it was recently reported again that the Israeli West Bank offensive (and re-occupation), which caused and fueled Arab rage. For some strange reason, Palestinians and their supporters do not seem to be able to associate the incursions with the earlier string of suicide attacks coming from elements within the occupied territories. To the Palestinian media and people, all subsequent Israeli Military and Police actions have been undeserved and completely unprovoked. This is the literal state of mind to these people. A clearer picture of what is happening inside the mind of Palestinians goes something like this; ‘The terrorist bombings and killings have no bearing on the matter, because after all, they are only Jews, and any act against them is warranted by divine decree. As such they really don’t matter, any more than the daily killings of cows and chickens at the slaughterhouse matter. On the other hand there is no such thing as justifiable acts against brothers by Infidels.’ Meanwhile, back in reality, the unwritten commentaries and absence of rage toward those carrying out the suicide murder missions -prior- to the offensive, or for that matter toward Bin-laden or Sept 11, confuse Westerners. The image of jubilant celebration after 9/11 by so many Palestinian revelers in the West Bank and Gaza are forever burned into the minds of cognizant Americans. So before we judge the responses of Israel to repeated gross attacks against her people, we should consider they have seen these sorts of celebrations after every terrorist act for decades, which are also engraved in the memories of the people and policy makers in Israel. Lynch mob mentality has now completely taken over the hearts and minds of these poorly led people. There is also the correct perception amongst themselves that dissent is even less tolerated, evidenced by the murder of dozens of their own perceived to have collaborated with the enemy (about five dozen known as of this writing). So it is that on the Palestinian side, hatred, thirst for revenge, or outright fear of vigilantes is what is driving the conflict. What is not spoken of in our supposedly balanced media, is the fact that the evidence of collaboration of their own citizens could be as harmless as a personal phone call or communiqué with a previous non-Arab friend or associate, or any expression of sympathy toward Israelis or opposition to violent groups, the same groups who in the end murdered them for being different. The extremists ensure the lessons are not being lost on average Palestinian families, as they execute the ‘collaborator’ in the most public way possible for maximum effect. Do not expect to see anyone with a ‘Gandhi’ or ‘Martin Luther King’ type message stumping to replace Arafat anytime soon, as even a suggestion of non-support of the policies and practices of their leaders can be in itself a death sentence. Debate is confined as to where and how to strike Israeli interests next, and whether, when, and where to attack American interests. So how should Israel respond to the scourge of terrorist bombers? Empirical evidence abounds that all responses to date have been ineffective in stopping the threat and deployment of terrorist bombing strategies On Oct 5th, 2003 a female homicide bomber detonated a bomb in a popular Haifa Café killing 19, including several children, and wounded over 60. Israel responded by sending in warplanes to attack an empty Syrian camp used to train the Hezbollah. Syria’s immediate response was to complain that the action was an escalation and act of war, which ‘broke the rules of the game’. In case you missed it, these are the rules of the game, which Syria and other terrorist sponsors want Israel to play by: Rule #1: Israel can employ all the security measures it wants and play cat and mouse to try to catch the minions we send against you, have fun! Rule #2: Israel may try to catch the terrorists and factories in military incursions and raids into the west bank or Gaza, but if you do we have the right to deploy Rule #3. Rule #3: If Israelis respond by going into Arab territories, we may shoot at you from behind women and children, from simple homes, mosques and schools, and you may not respond. We also have the right to lay claim to such actions as full justification, providing blanket political coverage for both our initial and all subsequent terrorist envoys we send against you. Rule #4: Israel is not allowed to strike at the ‘elected’ ‘democratic’ popular individuals or governments who hide, support, fund, supply, train, outfit, or transport terrorists. Rule #5: Since Israel (like nearly every nation) is demographically at a huge disadvantage in a war of attrition, Israel must continue the debate of ‘how to respond’ forever, thus allowing causalities at approximately current or better ratios. The principal of ‘proportionate response’ must be strictly adhered to. First, we need to demystify suicide terrorism and see it for what it is. Its not about the beliefs or personality of the fanatic carrying the bomb, rather its all about the people behind him, the true terrorists. Therefore suicide terrorists are not some other breed of men, unsusceptible to the usual tools of war and statecraft. Those responsible are still alive, reachable, and perhaps even teachable. The first thing that needs to change is that all democracies, including Israel, need to strictly institute policies to deny the handlers their hoped for political prizes and concessions. If we make sure that suicide terrorism does not pay, it will surely begin to lose much of its luster. Offering autonomy or eventual statehood in response to terrorism is a huge mistake and feeds grass roots support of terrorist methods. But to simply deny the true terrorists, the handlers and supporters their spoils, does not go nearly far enough. Indeed it would require withstanding a number of years of attacks without the previous rewards to educate the instigators and convince them to choose another path. That is not a politically survivable option for endangered democracies (i.e. to only change our response to terrorist acts by hanging tough and waiting long enough for these people to get a clue). Political prize or no, handlers and their leaders would love to be allowed to continue their practices unmolested, thereby weakening and attriting their enemies peoples, economies, cultures and governments. In any contest, the first rule of victory is to fight on your own terms and not your opponents. Israel has too long been fighting a serious political and military conflict constrained by an international thought police more adept at narcissistic judgment than rational thinking. Israel has been fighting the battle on the terms directed and dictated by the propaganda machines of many Islamic countries that have, to put it mildly, an agenda unfriendly towards Israel. At this moment in history, the notion to reward the Palestinian Authority with a ‘State’ is catastrophically stupid. It would prove that it works to blow up bus riders and Bat Mitzvah girls, and would place all peace loving peoples and democratic cultures hostage to such tactics. The normal reaction by victims after experiencing death and destruction from a terrorist suicide/homicide bomber is rage toward the individual(s) perpetrating the attack. Those feelings are mixed with frustration upon realization that immediate justice and closure is not attainable because the vile person who carried out the evil act is already dead! Then to add to that frustration and anxiety, we are told by that deterrence is impossible against the kind of religious wackos intent on suicide attacks. How inexplicable are their behaviors and astonishing their commitment! That is true when speaking of brainwashed and/or sick carriers and detonators of bombs aimed at innocents, but one must remember that those carrying out the acts have neither the brains nor the means to conceive and carry out their acts alone. These are not the brightest and best from the world of Islam, they are simple pawns in a much larger game. They are murderous, inhumane, and despicable for sure, … but the ideas, suggestions, tactics, goals, and plans originate from someone else. As such the vast majority of suicide attacks are not really primarily the work of psychos, nor are they the random and unpredictable acts of fanatics. Its an absolute fact that free societies, if they are to remain free and open, will never be able to stop all deranged zealots loaded with explosives or other weapons from carrying out their heinous crimes against innocents. On the other hand it seems likely we may find success deterring the handlers, financers, and supporters of the maniacs, because they are people who don’t intend to die for their cause. The handlers and state sponsors are not interested in sending their own children or sacrificing themselves to advance their agenda, they are only interested in exploiting other people’s sons and daughters to serve the specific political/religious cause they ascribe to. It is certainly an act of wanton cruelty, but carried out for reasons known and understood more by the handlers than the hapless bombers themselves. Those sending the young bombers have so far been successful in hiding behind them to escape responsibility and consequences, but the bombers are simply the witless tools of the individuals sending them (as are the silly deceptive arguments offered by bleeding heart liberals who claim that they are individual acts of desperation by the dispossessed). The psychology of the individual suicide terrorist is indeed incomprehensible, but this is not the case of those who recruit, train, outfit, and send them to their deeds. Suicide terrorist handlers are not so eager to die, and there is reason to hope that effective deterrence is possible if it were consistently and forcefully applied against the true source of the suicide threat. It is notable that the response most hated by the handlers is the targeted operations against their leadership. The other response by the Israelis, which is producing shrill complaints, is the activity surrounding the security fence construction. Do these actions, combined with a continuation of previously applied consequences and pressures, have potential to convince the Palestinian people to stop their terror culture? By the level of complaining and crying, it seems that to take the war to the leaders of terror organizations may have more effect than all closures, incursions, and home demolitions ever did. But unfortunately both actions are still unlikely to produce a level of pain likely to make the opposition cry ‘uncle’ and change its tactics. This is because of three reasons: 1) there seems to be an unlimited supply of zealots (a zeal inspired by pure hate) anxious to push a button killing themselves along with scores of Israelis; 2) It will be too easy for handlers and supporters to hide from effective military targeting, and; 3) The fence can not fully protect Israelis against a determined enemy. It seems safe to say that amongst Palestinians in power there has been no serious debate concerning abolishing terrorism as a tactic. Before the handlers will even consider terminating their practices, there must be the threat of personal consequences that have hitherto been largely absent. It’s time to take off the kid gloves, and start going after all those responsible and culpable. Its time we stop allowing the truly evil men and women to continue their murderous ways as they hide behind their own neighbors, their young children, their women, and their religion. As brutal as it may sound, all those used as cover to shield them or hide them also need to be held accountable for not recognizing and eradicating the depravity from amongst them. These policies and practices do not happen in a vacuum, scores are involved. The acts perpetrated against innocents by terrorists are certainly acts of ‘total war’ by one people against all people, institutions, and governments they target. Its past time that each and every terrorist attack or bombing is recognized and considered for what it is, … an individual act of “total war”. As much or more than a barrage of artillery or a bombing run by uniformed hostile forces. In total war, victory goes to the party most effective in convincing the opposing party that surrender is preferable to a continuation of hostilities. Given their history, it may now be time for Palestinians to be force-fed a diet of sorrow until they, come to the same conclusion the German and Japanese did in WWII. Survivalists will only force the end to the terrorist activities springing up from amongst them when made to pay a terrible price. The continuation of the current war of attrition and international propaganda will eventually culminate in the end of Israel, as she cannot compete with Palestinians demographically. War is terrible, horrible, and evil, but in fact it would not be that much worse than the current standard of fear and living of ordinary Israelis. Only a foolish nation would refuse to recognize and respond to war declared and instigated against them. To avoid war in the first place is preferable. But once started, for any war to actually end, full engagement must start. Both parties must risk all and throw their futures and fortunes into the conflict. To refuse to fight a people and culture who are mobilized and intent on destroying you is to guarantee your own eventual extinction. The Jews of Europe were marched into the ovens unarmed and helpless in the previous century, it remains to be seen if they will, out of aversion to war and fear of international opinion, continue to march into the ovens in this century fully armed. Personally I would not march peacefully into the ovens, any more than 9/11 United Flight 93 Passenger Todd Beamer and his associates did. As the bombing victims continue to mount, am left wondering how the people of Israel can possibly continue to live with such neighbors. You have to admire the Israeli people for their patience, faith, hope, and restraint up to a point. But as history continues to repeat it self over and over again, one can’t help but think that wisdom has now left their leadership. It is the true mark of national insanity to continue to repeat policies and actions yet expect different results to suddenly, spontaneously appear. The prospect of sudden enlightenment leading to a spontaneous renaissance resulting in termination of terrorist activities by the Palestinians themselves is at or near zero. Israel still faces a growing terrorist threat, primarily because they ascribe to policies of measured response and increased security measures. The only thing these limited responses have proven to date is that weakness emboldens the handlers and supporters of terrorists. Most Palestinians truly believe that there are no innocents amongst the Jews, and feel little sympathy for the women and children killed and maimed to date. The Jews need to realize that (aside from the very young not yet brainwashed) there are few amongst the residents of the West Bank and Gaza who do not have murderous thoughts towards their neighbor. Every terrorist is still worshiped as a martyr and saint, and has been for decades. This enemy the US faces today has the same face, heart, mind, and intent as the one Israel faces. Any notion that the U.S. response to the daily suicide/murders in Israel should be to reward the Palestinian Authority with a state … is catastrophically stupid. As a recent poll showed, the majority of Palestinian people are fighting not to establish the state of ‘Palestine’, but to “eliminate Israel”. There may have been a time when most Palestinians truly wanted a separate state and to live in peace with their Israeli neighbors, … but time has proven that Mr. Arafat never, ever did. While accepting aid, Nobel peace prizes, and red carpets from governments around the world, he has remade the Palestinians in his own terrorist image. The Oslo Accords, crafted by naïve well-meaning State Department officials in 1993, have proven to be a complete failure (18,000 terrorist attacks including 270 suicide bombings since then). The State Department, unable to reconcile fact with Oslo fantasy, continues to churn out variants of the same thinking. But the Palestinians continue to choose conflict and despair over autonomy or statehood as fatah (the violent conquest of Israel) continues to be the chosen path, despite mounting evidence of its inherit hopelessness and failure. It has been a long intellectual and moral path to finally arrive at an inescapable and very distasteful conclusion; that before it can possibly all end, the poorly led Palestinian people with their murderous intents will likely need to be forced at bayonet point to abandon their despicable actions and to kick out or jail the murders from amongst them. The same is true for all Islamic militants practicing terrorism for political gain. Osama and his ilk (read: sympathetic governments, cultures, societies, friends, financiers, enablers and, yes, even families) will never voluntarily change their tactics; they can only be beaten into submission or swept away. To criticize Israeli responses to attacks on her, including threats to expel Arafat, is to join Arafat and his deranged supporters against all that we value the most. Most thinking Americans are disgusted with shortsighted criticism by Arab and some European countries to actions the US has taken against terrorists and their enablers in Afghanistan and Iraq. We should not adopt that same pose against Israel when she does the same thing, for the same reasons, against the same kind of people. Note: In a recent article for The American Political Science Review, Robert Pape rigorously researched every suicide-terrorist attack in the world from 1980 to 2001 from Lebanon, the West Bank, Sri Lanka, Chechnya, India, Turkey and points between. He shows how suicide terrorism operates, and why it became a growth industry over the last several decades. His work dispels the widespread notion that suicide terrorism is incomprehensible and without possible remedy. One of Pape’s most important finding is that suicide terrorism is guided by clearly identifiable strategic goals. Suicide terrorism occurs in clusters, and it is nearly always deployed as part of a larger political-military campaign, carefully calibrated to accomplish the political goals of nationalists groups. Of suicide-terrorist strikes from 1980 to 2001, a whopping 95 percent were undertaken as part of an organized political campaign, and interestingly every suicide attack in the period under study was launched against a democracy. Hezbollah used this weapon to force the United States and France from Lebanon in 1983; Hezbollah and Hamas have used it repeatedly to force concessions from Israel; Tamil terrorists have used it against the Sri Lankan government; the Kurds against Turkey; the Chechen rebels against Russia; the Kashmir rebels against India. This is an extraordinarily important finding. Clearly, the terrorists have reached certain conclusions about democratic regimes. They think we are “soft,” and they surmise that democracies in particular are vulnerable to nihilistic coercion. Sadly in this regard terrorists are not entirely wrong, for another pattern Pape unearths is that suicide terrorism against democracies is largely effective. It is also more destructive than regular terrorism –from 1980 to 2001 suicide attacks made up 3 percent of total terrorist attacks but produced 45 percent of all casualties (and that’s not counting the carnage of September 11). Moreover, of the eleven separate major suicide campaigns from 1980 to 2001, six produced significant policy changes by the target state toward the terrorists’ major political goals. So suicide terrorism more often than not achieves its strategic goals, which bodes ill for the future of democracy and free western societies in general.


Roots of Today’s Campaign

The 7th-century “breakout” of Islam from Arabia was followed by the rapid conquest of North Africa, the invasion and virtual conquest of Spain, and a thrust into France that carried the crescent to the gates of Paris. It took half a millennium of re-conquest to expel the Muslims from Western Europe with the Crusades. The Crusades, as it happened, fatally weakened the Greek Orthodox Byzantine Empire, the main barrier to the spread of Islam into southeast and central Europe. As a result of the fall of Constantinople to the ultra-militant Ottoman Sultans, Islam took over the entire Balkans, and was threatening to capture Vienna and move into the heart of Europe as recently as the 1680s. This multi-millennial struggle continues today in a variety of ways. The recent conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo were largely a savage reaction by the Orthodox Christians of Serbia to the spread of Islam in their historic heartland, chiefly by virtue of a higher birthrate. Indeed, in the West, the battle is largely demographic, though it is likely to take a more militant turn at any moment. Muslims from the Balkans and North Africa are surging over established frontiers on a huge scale, rather as the pressure of the eastern tribes brought about the collapse of the Roman Empire of the West in the 4th and 5th centuries A.D. The number of Muslims penetrating and settling in Europe is now beyond computation (because many if not most of them are illegal). They are getting into Spain and Italy in such numbers that, should present trends continue, both these traditionally Catholic countries will become majority Moslem during the 21st century. As they begin to dominate those democracies and control the levers of government, peoples there will at some point be facing the same choices endured by so many, … flight, fight, or convert. As has been outlined carefully herein, what we call the ‘War on Terror’ is simply a continuance …a modern extension of Islamic practices in play since Muhammad began his initial military conquests. But the active targeting of the Americas is a relatively new phenomenon for the people of this country. Today we seem to be ignoring other countries that sponsored and support terrorism as we focus mainly on Iraq. But since the demise of the Taliban and Saddam, Iran has emerged as the main keystone of the terror network. The widespread terrorism and political demonstrations in Iraq since Saddam’s capture have less to do with the shattered Baathist regime than terrorist elements from abroad. American officials on the ground in Iraq have seen abundant evidence of Iranian support for terrorist operations. The war against us in Iraq and Afghanistan is now guided, funded, and armed by tyrannical regimes in Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Our forces in Iraq will remain under attack so long as the tyrannical regimes in Damascus, Riyadh, and Tehran are left free to kill embattled Iraqis, our allies, and us. Prior to the liberation of Iraq, Syrian President Bashar Assad made no secret of his intentions when he publicly called for a "Lebanon strategy to be implemented." In August, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah (head of Hezbollah) called for the entire Muslim world to join in Jihad against Americans in Iraq. Iranian leaders and Saudi clerics have also denounced the American actions in Iraq and joined the call for Jihad. The terror masters will not limit their Jihad to Iraq. Late last month, the Iranian newspaper Jomhuri-ye Eslami published an open call to the Egyptian people to assassinate President Hosni Mubarak. Pakistan’s Musharraf has been repeatedly targeted for assassination. Turkish authorities captured one of the organizers of the suicide bombings in Istanbul last December as he was trying to cross the border into Iran, and it is now generally acknowledged that top al Qaeda figures (including bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Zarkawi) have long stayed in and operated from Iranian territory. While Iraq is the current front-line, the real war extends far beyond its borders. Policy makers and the general public still seem reluctant to connect the dots and face the fact that this war is an existential struggle against worldwide Militant Islam. By becoming overly obsessed with the re-election and Iraq, the ‘War on Terror’ is being unnecessarily extended and our forces and citizens are needlessly put at risk, whereas our enemies self-impose no such constraints. For some time now, at least the last century, there has been a struggle for the soul of Islam between the preachers of hate and the preachers of peace. Unfortunately, the preachers of hate are currently winning decisively. In fact the war of ideas occurring within Islamic cultures has already been won in the most populous Islamic lands, and cleaning up loose ends like Nobel laureate Shirin Ebadi will take place in due time. State-appointed clerics throughout the Middle East are preaching to the faithful that it is their "duty" to murder Jews, because Jews are "rejected" by God, who turned them into "monkeys and pigs". There is no hope for people like Ebadi re-creating Islam or convincing large numbers to divorce itself from dependencies on violence and Jihad. Their scripture is considered final and immutable, but if it were edited to remove sections supporting or calling for violent or forceful methods of conversion and conquest, there would be little left. In large parts of the world Ebadi represents more a fringe minority than a majority, and she and others so inclined continue to face mortal danger for such heretic views which are indeed in opposition to true Islam and the example of their esteemed prophet. While perhaps most Muslims here 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, and so offers only mortal peril to any so inclined. Most people think that the ‘War on Terror’ began Sept 11th, and as far as our active participation in the conflict they are partially right, but in the larger view such thinking is naive. 1979 is when the shah of Iran fell, and the Saudi royal family, out of greed and fear, capitulated to pressures and started financing the worldwide expansion of militant Wahhabi Islam. These two key events represent the foundation and beginning of the current Jihadic movement launched against the West by militant Islam. Not long afterwards, Islam fired the first volley to initiate a new campaign against the West in Lebanon, which is in reality just the latest in its ongoing multi-millennial campaigns to spread its ideas through the sword of Jihad. Lebanon was once the most progressive, free, and most democratic state in the Arab world, but quickly thereafter fell into civil war, with conflicts arising out of ideological differences, pushed from behind by newly empowered Islamists inspired by Wahhabi preaching and funding from Syria and Iran. In Syrian-occupied Lebanon Hezbollah Islamists were battling moderate Arab Muslims, Arab Christians, and internationalists who had once found Lebanon to be a safe and congenial place. Unfortunately, if not predictably, the Hezbollah Shiite terrorist group had no interest in compromise or peace. Hezbollah was determined and eventually successful in seizing control of Lebanon and subjugating all local Arabs who opposed them. When challenged they drove the Americans out in a brutal attack on marines asleep in their barracks, massacring 241 of them. As we collected our dead and went home, none realized how that retreat would embolden the terrorists. But Islamic terrorists everywhere remember it well, and still celebrate it as a great first victory for their side against America and proof that their God is behind them. Our retreat reaffirmed their faith and reassured them that eventual victory is assured even against the better-equipped American military. Their belief that America is a paper tiger was reinforced again and again in subsequent years, most dramatically in Somalia. Still most Americans did not connect the dots, failing to grasp the fact that we were already in a low-grade war; until al Qaeda Sunni copycat terrorists mounted its attack on September 11. Afterwards, most of us understood that war was indeed upon us, but many still struggle to connect all the dots, failing to recognize the source of the true threat and the more recent origins of the current Jihad declared against us. Fewer still understand how their own failures of the past have encouraged and animated terrorists worldwide. We have tended to focus exclusively on the threat from al Qaeda and its offshoots, forgetting Hezbollah altogether or seeing it as a menace only to Israel. In Afghanistan, we deposed al Qaeda and its Taliban allies, scattering terrorist forces. All along the terrorists who ruined Lebanon, murdered our sons, and drove us out still strut about free and unafraid, ruling openly. Hezbollah has big, secure bases in Lebanon and Syria, is hurting our efforts to stabilize Iraq, and is expanding its global reach to places like the tri-border region of Paraguay, Argentina, and Brazil. It's past time to make Hezbollah and all its admirers and supporters understand that there are no exceptions to the new rule stated so eloquently by George Bush: If you attack Americans, America will bring you to justice, or bring justice to you.


Liberty Threatened

America has appreciated and duly noted the official moderate Muslim perspective, but in addition to well thought-out official releases … what action will Islam now take to manage its own? What are Muslims going to do to reign-in and punish clerics inciting hatred, violence, and constantly calling for the most popular interpretation of Jihad? Are moderate Muslims strong and powerful enough to actually do something about the fire-breathing clerics and militants amongst them? Can they wrest control from the militants and take control of defining and administering the central tenants and teachings of Islam? Will effective action ever be taken against the supposedly holy clerics inciting and celebrating hatreds and violence?

Responsible members of the human race hope that among the first things Islam would do is to officially condemn the racist use of the word INFIDEL, and to recognize in both its teachings and law the equality of all races, religions, and sexes. It should also apologize for all past prejudicial teachings and practices. But a fundamental weakness of Islam is that it does not have a central administration and self-regulatory mechanisms. This weakness leaves the door wide open for the hijacking of individuals, families, clans, mosques, sects, regions, or countries, by any despot with a personal agenda. Anyone can claim to represent Islam and rise to be a holy man without any appointment, education, or actual calling. The first and only requirement appears to be a strong aspiration to the position, or in other words, greed for power and influence. Islam needs to correct this mistake, or it will continue to be used as it has in the past, to inspire and express hatred, for violence, and as a lever used to gain personal power.

Some think, and it seems reasonable, that Islam herself was the most injured by the attacks on 9/11. Could it be that those four airliners inflicted a wound on Islam that will result in untold turmoil and sorrow amongst her own? God is not subject to interpretation by mere mortals, nor is He the personal property of any group or individual. Certainly, if there is only one God, then the question begs asking; are these extremist Muslim leaders actually affiliated with Him? Whether they represent the majority or minority in their cultures, angry hateful Muslims could not possibly be acquainted with a kind, benevolent, and loving God of us all. Further, as long as their minds are so clouded with Hate, the probability of spiritual enlightenment or an intellectual epiphany is at absolute zero. However, one might deduce that the most intelligent, talented, logical, peaceful, and reasonable individuals and families within their own societies might well recognize the inherent failings of Islamic culture and seek enlightenment elsewhere, or at least demand change. But we should not hold our breath for any internal evolution, as history demonstrates that humanitarian sympathies have never been a priority for Islamic philosophy nor her people, and indeed opposition in any form is considered betrayal and treason.

History of Terror

We do not need to make the point that the political and economic record of Islam is miserable, that only one of 18 Muslim states (Turkey) is democratically governed. In fact, ‘Infidels’, a racist term referring to non-believers/non-conformists, are persecuted everywhere in the world where real Muslims are in power. Infidels and Muslims alike suffer when governments attempt to rule using rigid misinterpreted Islamic principals and law. Unlike Christianity, which, since the Reformation and Counter Reformation, has continually updated itself and adapted to changed conditions, and unlike Judaism, which has experienced what is called the 18th-century Jewish enlightenment, in many parts of the world Islam remains a religion stuck in the Dark Ages. It contains many sects and tendencies, quite apart from the broad division between the majority Sunni Muslims (comparatively moderate and include most of the ruling families of the Gulf), and Shia Muslims (who dominate Iran). But virtually all these fundamentalist sects are in practice more militant and uncompromising than orthodox conservative Islam, which itself is moderate only by comparison, but by western standards is still extreme. It believes, for instance, in a theocratic state, ruled by religious law, still inflicting (as in Saudi Arabia) grotesquely cruel punishments, which became obsolete in Western Europe in the early Middle Ages. Moreover, Qur’anic teaches that the faith or “submission” can be, and in suitable circumstances must be, imposed by force, and as such the history of Islam has essentially been a history of conquest and re-conquest. Former (US President) Carter administration official Samuel P. Huntington, now a Harvard professor and founder of Foreign Affairs magazine wrote in the 1966 book ‘The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order”: “Some Westerners, including President Bill Clinton, have argued that the West does not have problems with Islam but only with violent Islamist extremists … Fourteen hundred years of history demonstrate otherwise.” Indeed, he says, we’ve been deeply engaged in a quasi war that, as we know now, has become something much larger. The West is not alone in being under threat from Islamic expansion. While the Ottomans moved into South-East Europe, the Mongul invasion of India destroyed much of Hindu and Buddhist civilization there. The recent destruction by Muslims in Afghanistan of colossal Buddhist statues is a reminder of what happened to temples and shrines, on an enormous scale, when Islam took over large areas of India. The writer V. S. Naipaul has recently pointed out that the destructiveness of the Muslim Conquest is at the root of India’s appalling poverty today. Indeed, looked at historically, the record shows that Muslim rule has tended both to promote and to perpetuate poverty. Meanwhile, the religion of “submission” continues to advance, as a rule by force, in Africa, in Nigeria and Sudan, and in Asia, notably in Indonesia, where non-Muslims are given the choice of conversion or death. And in all countries where Islamic law is applied, converts (compulsory or not), who revert to their earlier faith, are often punished by death. The survival and expansion of militant Islam in the 20th century came as a surprise. After the First World War, many believed that Turkey, where the Kemal Ataturk regime imposed secularization by force, would set the pattern for the future, and that Islam would at last be reformed and modernized. Though secularism has (so far) survived in Turkey, in the rest of Islam fundamentalism, or more properly ‘orthodoxy’, has increased its grip on both the rulers and the masses. For the past quarter-century, radical Islamist fundamentalism has roiled nations in which it arose. Before the September 11 attacks, in Iran where its first victory was won, some argued that Islamist totalitarianism was a movement in decline. In the decades since the Iranian revolution, formidable Islamist opposition movements have built up around the Islamic world. In Sudan, the Muslim government in Khartoum imposed Islamic law nationwide in 1993, and has killed 2 million Sudanese Christians and animists, and enslaved countless more, in an attempt to Islamize the country. Coptic Christians in Egypt, whose presence in that country predates the arrival of Islam, have been slaughtered by fundamentalist Muslims, with authorities doing little or nothing to stop them. In the Philippines and East Timor, Christians are being massacred by Muslims. Churches and Christian homes in Nigeria are being burned, and Christians murdered, by Muslim extremists. The ancient Christian presence in many Arab lands – Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, among others – has been decimated in the last century by Muslim persecution. Although totalitarian regimes have come to power in Indonesia, the Sudan and formally Taliban Afghanistan, elsewhere insurgencies have been or are being repressed (in Algeria, Egypt, and Chechnya). In Iran, revolutionary fervor seems to be slowly giving way to disillusionment and cynics, with the reformist government of Mohammed Khatami creeping gingerly toward a more moderate course. It is unclear whether the U.S. military responses since Sept 11 will precipitate new waves of radicalization in the Islamic world toppling existing regimes and bringing Islamic totalitarians to power, or the opposite. In June 1950, Kim Il Sung posed a large problem for the U.S in Korea. But he was not the problem. Stalin was, and Truman never lost sight of that fact. The problem today is not a scattering of global terrorists, but a whole raft of challenges to western culture through the script and sword of Islamist totalitarianism. The Threat! Now Islam has reached out to wage a direct, frontal assault on its antithesis – its “Great Satan”: the United States, or, to be more accurate, liberty. All the while it attempts to pacify and confuse by claiming to be the victim, and claiming to represent peace, equality, and justice. This movement follows the standard ‘modus operandi’ of falsehoods by claiming to be the opposite of what it is, whispering in our ears that evil is actually good, and that good is evil. That evil lies is not surprising, but that anyone of any intelligence and education believes it is astonishing. Indeed it seems that “the bigger the lie, the easier it is for unenlightened masses to swallow”. At first glance, shadowy Islamist terrorists look very different from any enemy we have ever faced, and indeed, the tactics they employ are novel. But on closer scrutiny, the fundamental nature of our present adversaries, once seen plainly, is all too familiar. What we confront today is repackaged totalitarianism: Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, their coconspirators and enablers are the modern-day successors of Lenin and Stalin, Mussolini and Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot, as they join the list of the worst found among human beings. If one wants a literary parallel that sheds light on the operation of Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants, one should look to that enormous bestseller, published in two volumes in 1925 and 1926, Mein Kampf. Hitler was candid about his ambitions, aversions, and intentions. His virulent hatred of the Jews is patent on every page, as is his narcissistic egotism, his sense of himself as a destiny, his cold-blooded lucidity. Mein Kampf is the testament of a man bent on war, conquest, and slaughter. Civilized society in the 20s and 30s did not take him seriously, being widely viewed as the ravings of a lunatic too far out on the fringe to be of any credible threat. It was thought that surely voices of reason in a country and people as enlightened as Germany in central Europe would not allow it. The world was wrong then, and those who do not learn from history… Osama bin Laden has been similarly candid. In a 1999 interview published in Esquire, bin Laden was perfectly clear that his first ambition was to remove the American military from Saudi Arabia. “Every day the Americans delay their departure,” he said, “they will receive a new corpse.” It does not require much intelligence to understand that sentence. Nor was bin Laden ambiguous about his willingness to attack civilians: “We do not differentiate between those dressed in military uniforms and civilians; they are all targets in this fatwa”. Published February 23, 1998 in the Al-Quds al-‘Arabi was a statement signed by Sheikh Usamah Bin-Muhammad Bin-Ladin and other like-minded leaders; “ … [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” … “We – with God’s help – call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan’s U.S. troops and the devil’s supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson. “ When the U.S. Marines landed in Somalia at the end of 1992 as part of a U.N. humanitarian effort, Bin-Ladin’s troops were there, shooting down our helicopters and dragging the bodies of our murdered sons through the streets. No action ever taken by Bill Clinton, who assumed office in the immediate aftermath of the Somalian debacle, ever did anything to dissuade bin Laden of his convictions or slow his minions. What lessons should we learn from this? The same lessons the world ought to have learned in the late 1930s when Hitler occupied the Rhineland, remilitarized, and set about gobbling up his neighbors in an attempt to make his Third Reich the –only- ‘Reich’. The first lesson is that weakness is provocative to those who would conquer us. Whatever is or is not authentic transcription of Islamic dogma, we do know that the people who ran the airliners into the World Trade Center believed that a Qur’anic voice was telling them to do what they did. We have the four-page document that told them not only what to do, but what to think. “Kill them, as God said; No Prophet can have prisoners of war … God has prepared for believers in endless happiness for martyrs … Be steadfast and remember [that in] God you will be triumphant.” Can we continue to refer to large parts of angry Islam as simply another religion when it clearly seeks the destruction of western civilization? Carefully selected, there are Qur’anic preachments that are consistent with civilized life, but we would be blind indeed to exclude the dominant Jihadist text and the political and cultural realities of the remainder of widely taught dogma that incite issue after issue of violent edicts (Fatwas) from its local leadership. On September 11th we were looked in the face by a deed done by Muslims who understood they were acting out Muslim ideals. It is all very well for individual Muslim spokesmen to assert the misjudgment of the terrorist, but we must recognize that the Islamic world is substantially made up of countries that ignore, countenance, if not support terrorist activity.

In December 1994, Bassam Alamoush, a prominent Jordanian fundamentalist, began talk before the Muslim Arab Youth Association in Chicago with an anecdote: “Somebody approached me at the mosque [in Amman] and asked me, ‘If I see a Jew in the street, should I kill him?’” From a videotape in his possession, Steven Emerson, the well-known authority on international terrorism, describes what happened next: After pausing a moment with a dumbfounded face, Alamoush answered the question to a laughing crowd: “Don’t ask me. After you kill him, come and tell me. What do you want from me, a fatwa [legal ruling]? Really, a good deed does not require one.” Later in the speech, Alamoush was interrupted by an aide with a note “Good news there has been a suicide operation in Jerusalem” killing three people. Thunderous applause followed his statement.

A little more than two weeks after the 9/11 attack, an Associated Press reporter in Hamburg, Germany was with some 200 worshippers who listened raptly as the imam at al-Quds mosque delivered a fiery 45-minute sermon on the sins of the infidels and the arrogance of the West. “God, we implore You to destroy the United States of America,” shouted the imam. Not a soul flinched. The congregation recited in unison, “Amen.”. Mustafa Kamal Uddin, a 32-year-old body-and-fender man in Karachi, explained it to a New York Times reporter. You see, he said, holy wars come about only when Allah has no other way to maintain justice, times like now. “That is why Allah took out his sword”.

We demand to know: Who taught Mustafa Kamal Uddin to reason in that way, and the crowds in Karachi to support such thinking? Can the answer be other than Islam and many or most of its clerics? Pending an answer to the question, and the unmistakable responsibility by reputable Muslims to extirpate such mis-teaching, it is incumbent on all civilized peoples to renounce modern acrimonious Islam. Responsible and thoughtful Muslims themselves need to recognize the fatal flaws within Islam’s society, teachings, and structure, which are responsible for so many sorrows. Honest introspection will prompt the wise, moral, and the spiritually alive to abandon dark anti-western tenants, and if still inclined to look for purpose and structure from God, to a search for a superior source of inspiration. The Answer All Arab/Muslim grievances together could not possibly justify their actions or hatreds towards this people, but rather are only very poor excuses from an errant thought process, otherwise known as “magical thinking”. But those errors in thinking and subsequent acts cannot mitigate in the slightest culpability nor consequences. Whatever excuse Muslims offer, whatever cause they claim to champion must now be dismissed out of hand. They damn themselves and their causes with their acts, and care must be taken not to reinforce them by advancing or even giving voice to them. Let us stop allowing their propaganda machines to assign the blame back to the USA for the hatred and failings of these people and their culture. Let us simply hold individuals, groups, and nations responsible for their actions. There is no excuse for the hateful actions they freely choose, and we would be weak not to respond with great force and determination. Now is not a time for caution, now is a time for ferocity. Liberty will only be preserved if this generation is willing to stand up and fight to protect their fathers and mothers, brothers, sisters, and children. After Pearl Harbor, the persecuted, often interned, immigrant Japanese-Americans were eager to send their sons to join the war effort. They wanted, in large measure, to prove their bona fides as Americans. Those 33,000 sons served honorably as true patriots in Europe. What a contrast with the young Muslim people interviewed by the New York Times in Brooklyn and elsewhere since 9/11 who largely pledge to go fight for “Osama.” We can either sit around making diversity quilts and thinking happy thoughts, or we can seek clarity and knowledge, purge from thought the contradictions suggested by enemies, intent on killing us, and fully commit ourselves to soberly assessing the historical and present-day reality of radical “peaceful” Islam and its relations and intentions with non-Muslims and Muslims alike. There has been a lot of talk about terrorist “sleeper cells” in countries worldwide: followers of bin Laden and his ilk that have integrated themselves into society and are waiting for marching orders. That is a possibility very much worth worrying about. Yet at the moment even more worrisome, because more certain, are the forces of capitulation: those who induce slumber in us through expressions of politically correct sentimentality, cowardliness, and moral ineptitude. Any victory less than total conquest and eradication of existing groups of extremists, as well as control of the radical religious elements that inspire it, will be interpreted in history books of the future as nothing more than a marker to Islam’s conquering march. So how to respond, throw bags of wheat at them? Do we bury them in charity, sympathy, and understanding? Is there any other answer other than to put our sons and daughters at risk in a sustained effort to destroy them and their infrastructure? It is vitally important that we execute the campaign relentlessly and thoroughly. Although assistance should be welcomed, it is better in the long run for us to act without many allies, or even alone, than to engage in a messy compromise dictated by nervousness and cowardice. Now is the ideal moment for the United States to use all its physical capacity to eliminate large-scale international terrorism. Every civilized member of humanity hopes for the interment of Islamist totalitarianism in what President Bush so stirringly referred to as “history’s unmarked grave of discarded lies”. The cause is overwhelmingly just. We must not allow our focus to be blurred when the weasel words of caution, proportionate, and restraint are pronounced. Religious and personal freedoms are at stake and under attack. We must clearly see them for who they are, and then without mercy or hesitation, pull-the-trigger. Not just once in Afghanistan, or twice in Iraq, but again and again until the cancer is eradicated. Anything short of a total and complete whipping will only embolden them to plan and execute even more heinous actions against this country and all her people. President Bush on Oct. 7th 2001 spoke from the White House Treaty room on Duty and Sacrifice. He told us of a very special communiqué he had received from an important diplomat; “I recently received a touching letter that says a lot about the state of America in these difficult times – a letter from a 4th-grade girl, with a father in the military: “As much as I don’t want my Dad to fight,” she wrote, “I am willing to give him to you.” … This is a precious gift, the greatest she could give.” This young hero and her father are the finest and most noble liberty has ever produced. When joined by others like them, they represent the greatest hope for this nation, if not humanity itself. They stand united with noble veterans, visionary forefathers, great heroes from the creation of democracy to this day, as one nation under God. You can feel and almost see their strong presence, pride, and support. My hope and prayer is that we are worthy of that support; we are going to need it. CHAPTER 23 Hard Options in Israel So much emphasis is being placed on finding Peace in Israel, so much unwarranted blame for the world’s Islamic problem laid at the feet of the Israeli people for their failure to accommodate and pacify Palestinian demands. The whole conflict, couched as it is in terms of a disenfranchised persecuted people, is not the force that guides Islam’s hand against Israel and the West. Arabs and Muslims living in Israel as citizens are treated infinitely better than Palestinians living in Jordan, Kuwait, and other Arab lands. For orthodox Muslims, it’s all a convenient pretext to practice Jihad on the world stage behind the cloak of more widely accepted nationalistic goals. We go back to this topic for study because the struggles facing Israel and the stark options she faces against a world sympathetic to the Palestinian cause may be similar to the options the US faces in its “War” on terror. In a misguided attempt to be even-handed, liberal editorialists suggest Palestinian terrorist activities against Israel should be viewed as legitimate wartime action against a more powerful adversary, but all such suggestions are nothing more than immoral attempts to manipulate public opinion to accept suicide bombers and terrorists as legitimate. Without saying as much, these arguments presumably extend from the 'total war' philosophy adopted to justify attacks against a nations infrastructure and civilians as necessary for defense and victory. However, absent from these suggestions is the implication that any nation or people adopting a 'total war' fighting philosophy, must also accept the same approach from their declared enemies without complaint. As such, Israeli incursions are as legitimate as the bombers, and anyone who laments Israelis response, while at the same time justifying the bombers and those who send them as legitimate wartime activities, are nothing more than hypocrites. In fact, by extending the logic, carpet bombings, or indiscriminately targeting the entire Palestinian population by any means is as legitimate as the homicide bombing activity of the Palestinians. Lets not beat around the bush, if a people or culture declare total war against another people or nation, and employ total-war methods against that nation, that nation has the legitimate right of self defense and must respond with even greater destructiveness and effect to avoid becoming the vanquished. Those who support Islamic militant actions have absolutely no right to whine and complain about fences being built or Israeli incursions. A people as a whole deserve any resulting hardship or loss as natural consequences of their gross thinking errors and the acts that come from them. They and their children will undoubtedly continue to point the finger at Israel, the US, the West et. al., but they lie to themselves. They are individually and collectively responsible for all natural consequences arising from the actions of terrorist leaders, sons, daughters, and neighbors springing from amongst them. On July 11th 2002 even Amnesty International, the London-based human rights organization normally against Israel, condemned Palestinian suicide bombings and other attacks on Israeli civilians as "crimes against humanity" and unjustified by Palestinian political grievances. The range of effective measures Israel could apply to protect itself against an autonomous neighbor is limited. It would seem to be an impossible situation with no easy answers. Indeed there is nothing currently on the table, which the warring parties can agree upon. The hard answers are rarely spoken. The possible Israeli approaches to improve the safety of its citizens are guaranteed to be impalpable to all, and include the following: 1. The do nothing approach, simply hope that international pressures and good conscience result in the Palestinians abandoning their violent methods, so that Oslo or other ‘road map’ negotiations will later become possible. · History has taught Jews more than any other people that weakness is not respected, but ruthlessly exploited. Empirical data shows, and survival now dictates, that the passive, patient, and measured approach now be rejected. Few live under illusions that any accords bearing similarity to Oslo offer any real hope. Most would agree that Israel is correct in believing that pacifism means suicide. The mindset is very instinctive, fight or flight. With each passing day, Israeli pacifists are becoming harder to find. 2. The April 2002 approach. Send in military units to find, arrest, disassemble, and/or destroy terrorists groups and their physical infrastructure. Temporarily occupy the areas as necessary to undermine terrorist planning, and arrest those responsible for past terrorist acts, surging as needed to dissuade terrorists. · The hope is that it will serve to persuade Hamas, Fatah, and Islamic Jihad to abandon violence, or at least weaken, delay, and/or prevent the number and frequency of suicide attacks. The political reality is that it is a weak approach and not respected by the Palestinians. It actually serves to further radicalize moderate Arabs and generate more extremists to plan and carry out terrorist events. Imbedded in this approach lies two opposing goals, the goal of the Israelis to punish the attackers and alter Palestinian policy thus preventing attacks, …and the goal of the Palestinians to demonstrate that the attacks will continue or increase until Israel changes its policies or capitulates. Both the Palestinian and Israelis are mistaken in hopes for a change in the other sides policies and tactics. The extremists will not change, and their lot will grow, their deepest religious convictions require it. The Israelis will not yield to terrorist’s tactics as further concessions could compromise security and endanger the nations existence. 3. Capitulate to the terrorists terms, hand over all pre-1967 areas to Palestine, capitulate to the ‘right-to-return’, (plus whatever else they demand), and hope and pray the people currently trying to kill you will suddenly become kind, considerate, tolerant, and forever respect the rights of the new Jewish minority, and never harm them or their children again. · To the Palestinians, it seems this is their minimum hope for the outcome of all the current infada and, however strange it may seem to us, is actually what they expect the rest of the world to support. The inherit problem in this approach is two fold. First is that the extremists in the area have well known aspirations that would likely drive them to continued violence despite concessions gained. Second (and related), is that the Israelis have a healthy and normal desire to breath. Consider the promises just made preceding the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon. The Hezbollah have already proven they cannot be taken at their word except, perhaps, their word articulated in the goal to drive the Jews into the Mediterranean. Arafat has also proven on numerous occasions that he is a dishonest and untrustworthy broker. 4. Physically separate the two groups where they stand and live today. Under the premise ‘Good fences make good neighbors’, allow the Palestinians to have their de-facto state behind the fences. · The hope is that both countries will eventually find it in their best interest to avoid costly war and cooperate in mutually beneficial ways. Thus far the fence is proving to result in further hardships to the Palestinians, many who depend on access to the Israeli economy, and hardship to the Israeli economy, which depends on Palestinian labor. Upon completion the Palestinian population is totally and permanently dependent on foreign aid from the EU, the US, and Arab nations. Building a fence to separate combatants (who have demonstrated that they cannot make peace between themselves in 60+ years of continuing conflicts) is actually a practical approach to a huge national security problem. It is certain, however, that the Palestinians and their supporters will find a way to continue their methods despite any fence, and the main Palestinian export would not change from what it is today, ... terror and violence. The other problem is that state to state relationships from nearby hostile regimes would quickly result in the formation of a much more lethal and dangerous Palestinian national army not likely to behave themselves behind new fences and walls they loath, so such an approach seems certain to end up resulting in a nasty war, followed by another occupation (back to square-one). 5. An extension of the June 2002 approach. Revoke permanently autonomy in progressive sections of the occupied territories from which terrorist activities originate, controlling and limiting the scope, power, and limits of Palestinian lives within the newly drawn borders. Were talking true occupation, …a police state, …annexation. Occupy the areas and control residents lives as necessary to undermine and prevent all armed resistance and all terrorist activity. The logical extension to this policy is to outlaw violent political opposition and deport anyone who refuses to live under Israeli law. · This did not work from 1967 to the mid 1990’s in its various forms, and so returning to it would surely fail to stop extremists today. There is obviously no future in this for anyone, but it is being implemented presumably as a potentially less dangerous and costly option to allowing things to continue as they are indefinitely. The problem with this approach is that for the common Palestinian, it is not in reality very much different than the existing political climate, and so there will be little or no perception of loss or cost. This approach will also be deemed weak, and would be used as an excuse for continued exploitation by Islamic terrorists. 6. A combination of methods, including more effectively and ruthlessly attacking and dismantling the groups using more heavy handed methods similar to Egyptian approaches to terrorists. Increasing boarder security and travel restrictions between Israel/territories and Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and by sea. Decreasing access from the Palestine areas by stricter internal border controls (less freedom of movement for foreign and perhaps even Israeli Arabs). Fences and walls and/or other high tech monitoring systems that make practical and economic sense. More manned checkpoints with a forgery proof national personal and vehicle ID/tracking system that makes it easier/faster to identify legitimate individuals cross-referenced with the vehicles they occupy and any legitimate need/rights to be at a given location. Occupying or annexing for long periods areas or regions from which the worst terrorist activities originate. Immediate, irrevocable deportation of anyone involved in illegal groups or tainted by terror. Relocation and/or massive demolition for areas tainted by terror groups. § The problems related to a combination of responses are the cumulative problems related to each individual reaction, and the prohibitive costs associated with implementing a comprehensive Orwellian police state. 7. All out war, including the expulsion of the entire Palestinian population into Syria, Jordan and/or Lebanon. Attacking the Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Syrian forces protecting and supporting them, followed by creating wide unpopulated buffer zones and effective borders as necessary (along the lines of the effective Korean demarcation line). · This is dangerous and costly, but actually the most practical and reasonable solution if one was to accept the premise that the probability of the two peoples ever living as peaceful neighbors is at (or near) zero. If that premise is true, then the only answer is for one group or the other to truly be victorious and the other become the vanquished. Although tragic and unnecessary, this approach may eventually become the only realistic option left on the table in order to guarantee one of the groups remains viable to survive intact. Pessimists wait for such a final solution to be eventually adopted by the parties, optimists hope to avoid the calamity. But for many civilized, intelligent, and educated peoples in the world, if forced to choose as neighbors either; a) the existence of Israel, and end of Palestine, or b) the existence of Palestine, and end of Israel, the choice would be uncomfortable, but easy. All familiar with Middle East history realize that there are trained killers claiming to represent both Islam and the Palestinian people determined to prevent any form of a real, lasting, negotiated peace. Their path is set in concrete, they will not be converted to accept another way, and so the fact is that the only way to stop them … is to eliminate them. It is a hard thing to think about. As peaceful options evaporate with ever increasing Palestinian militancy, and as Israel continues to be maneuvered into a corner, no one should be surprised at Israelis responses, which must become increasingly severe and violent. The options to insure survival and prosperity are hard and distasteful, but are probably preferable to a continuation or escalation of the existing situation. Sadly the obvious eventual logical course of action, and possibly the only approach with any hope permanently ending hostilities, is also guaranteed to be the most painful and distasteful. Perhaps when thousands upon thousands have died, the people of Israel will be prepared to make such a commitment. What ever that point is, when the pain and anguish has reached a tragic crescendo of intolerable proportions, some ugly scenario will likely be played out. Many in Israel and even America are beginning to understand that the problem is not just Arafat or Abu Mazen or Abu Whoever; it is the existence of the Palestinian Authority itself, which is little more than a hothouse for terror, corruption and bloodshed. Installing a new Godfather does not make the Mafia less of a criminal organization. Palestinian leaders have made their true aspirations plain all along, in Arabic: There are no Palestinian leaders who want peace, and there never were. Oslo was a sucker's game from the beginning, nothing more than a diversionary war tactic. The Palestinian Authority is what it has always been: A terrorist organization at war with Israel and the West, willing to settle for nothing less than total victory, starting with Israel's total destruction. Thus, it's not just Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, and al Qaeda that must be destroyed for Israel to survive and for America to win the broader war on terror: It's the PA itself. The idea that a Palestinian state would ever be anything other than a terror state also needs to be retired. In fact, a new survey released March 19th, 2003 shows that 60 percent of Palestinians believe that Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad should continue their armed struggle against Israel even if Israel leaves all of the West Bank and Gaza, including East Jerusalem, and a Palestinian state is created, and also 80 percent say that the Palestinians should never give up the ‘right of return’. (The poll of Palestinians, Israeli Jews, and Israeli Arabs was released in Washington by Itamar Marcus, founder of Palestinian Media Watch and written by pollster Frank Luntz. It was conducted by two polling firms, the Public Opinion Research of Israel and The Palestinian Center for Public Opinion.) CHAPTER 24 The Path Ahead Because of its asymmetrical nature, most people don't appreciate that the War on Terrorism is actually a World War. Nation states are pitted against terrorist organizations and the Islamic theology pushing them, and not against other states like in previous World Wars and the Cold War. In a way, asymmetrical warfare is more dangerous because the enemy (men eager to die so as to be rewarded with carnal Paradise) could be living amongst us. This is unlike the Cold War where the free world fought repressive communists who wanted to live and could be deterred by Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). But there are also similarities with earlier World Wars in that it has an ideological component, and both sides think that they are the good guys. On the one side are the people who believe that democracy with all its accompanying civil liberties is the best way for human beings to organize their societies, whereas the other side spits at democracy and fights for the world to be ruled in accordance to Allah's laws. The conflict and struggle between ideologies had always been a component of total war, but in this war the US has somewhat abandoned ideological warfare, restricting its criticism to terrorists who ‘got their religion wrong’. Even Bush tells us that Islam means peace, recognizing that most Muslims are not terrorists and some even disapprove (quietly) of the terrorist tactics pursued by militants. But the teachings of Islam make it quite difficult, if not impossible, for more moderate Muslims to openly wage war against the terrorists. It should be clear to any casual observer that the vast majority of Muslims instinctively rally to support fellow Muslims when they come under attack. It seems that no matter how unworthy or how violent and repressive a regime is, Muslims always prefer a bad Muslim to a good Infidel. Thus when the US attacked Afghanistan (ruled by the brutal Taliban), or Iraq (ruled by a murderous regime) Muslims all over the world protested. Saddam Hussein killed many more fellow Muslims than archenemy Israel ever did, yet many Muslims from all over the world volunteered to fight for him against the Coalition forces entering to liberate Muslims from the despot. This means that the war will not be effectively enjoined by any Muslim state, even moderates cannot be counted on to support the forces of democracy against other Muslims. All we can reasonably hope for is more lip service and, hopefully, non-interference. The UN is not likely to suddenly improve its vision or develop a backbone either; it is left to us to protect ourselves. In its affluence, peace, and untouched by the violence of ‘total war’ for over a half century, Americans look back with revulsion at the horror of Hiroshima, but hardly any of today’s self appointed moral elitists know anything about Okinawa. Whereas the exploits of George S. Patton and Douglas MacArthur, as well as campaigns in Iwo Jima and Normandy are heralded in books and films, almost none commemorate the far greater struggle on Okinawa in three months in 1945. Few appreciate what impact the suicidal fanaticism exhibited there had on our policymakers. American forces suffered 35 percent casualties in and around Okinawa, with over 12,000 American dead, 35,000 wounded, and over 300 ships damaged or sunk. The Japanese suffered 100,000 killed, many in hand-to-hand fighting, plus 100,000 civilian casualties. Okinawa is a large island but minuscule in comparison with the far better defended Japanese mainland, and these facts weighed heavy on the mind of our president who faced stark predictions of over a half million expected losses likely to be incurred in a Normandy type invasion. The Enola Gay and her crew, vilified by anti-war and anti-nuclear groups worldwide, killed tens of thousands to save hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of Japanese and American lives. Ten to hundreds of lives were saved for every life taken. In all wars emotions run high and there is danger in extremism, but in this case there is also mortal peril in naiveté. It is crystal-clear that militant Islam is at war with the US as has declared as much by writ, word, and deed, so we should cease the intellectual dishonesty and accept that by default we are at war with them. The danger is very real, and we as individuals and as a nation must choose our method of coping. The decision is a simple one, …fight or flight. The elite and peaceniks seem content to bury their heads in the sand and hope it will all go away, the rest are left with the hard task of accessing the situation and deciding how best to preserve both them and the rest of us. The following news release highlights only the tip of the iceberg of extremist activity and the market availability of WMD’s. Much more activity lies beneath the surface well hidden, and therein lies the greatest mortal danger civilization has ever faced. (UPI) Nov 15 2003 - Brno, Czech Republic - Czech uranium smugglers arrested. Two Slovaks were arrested in the Czech Republic for trying to sell what appeared to be low-grade uranium, police revealed Saturday. The men were arrested Friday during a sting operation at a hotel in Brno, police told the BBC. The men were tricked into selling the material to a plainclothes police officer, then arrested as they counted their money in their hotel room, police said. The head of the Czech Republic's nuclear safety authority said it was most likely low-grade uranium and could not have been used to produce nuclear weapons, the BBC said. Testing on the material, however, continued Saturday. It was the largest seizure of radioactive material anywhere in the world in the last nine months, the BBC said. Officials speculated the material may have come from Russia or another country in the former Soviet Union. What form will the next attack take? There is a high probability of near-term attacks on airliners using shoulder-fired anti-air missiles, probably simultaneously at several major US airports. Another scenario is an attack at a fuel terminal or depot, where a massive explosion or series of explosions could be ignited. The Valdez oil terminal in Alaska is under special protection because of intelligence suggesting that possibility. The model would be the May 23, 2002 attempt at the Pi Gilot fuel depot in Tel Aviv, Israel's largest facility, and located near heavily populated areas. Hamas terrorists strapped a bomb on a tanker truck that was detonated inside the depot. Luckily, the terrorists had chosen the wrong target — they bombed a diesel fuel truck that burned rather than exploding. Had they planned the attack better the terrorists might have killed an estimated 20-40,000 people. A strike at similar facilities in the United States, such as at the Port of Houston, would have tremendous human and economic costs. Another possibility is a poison attack of a major water supply center, and/or the destruction of several major dams. The possibility of biological or nuclear attack also grows larger daily. Once the fanatics finally obtain one or more nuclear devices from whatever source, they must quickly use them because they cannot be held indefinitely. The fissionable material in a nuclear weapon decays rapidly, and must be replenished with freshly enriched material about every six years. Terrorists will have a weapon long before they have the ability to indefinitely maintain it, so the clock will be ticking from the moment it is in their hands. The device(s) will probably already have some time on it, and the prospect of obtaining additional weapons may be doubtful. Once obtained, it will be ‘use it or lose it’ for the terrorists, and no one should doubt their eagerness to set it off in a major city like Washington DC. Another strike is coming. It is inevitable that terrorists will continue their efforts to attack us. The next attack is out there. It may not succeed; it may be detected and broken up, it may fail because of poor planning, poor execution, or maybe we will just get lucky, but do not doubt that it is nearing. The victims will include Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, young and old, men and women. The sequel to that horror film “Sept 11th” is currently in production and coming soon to a theatre near you! On September 11, 2001 we were sucker-punched and still seeking to regain our bearing and composure. The chief task at hand since then has been in identifying and targeting enemies previously protected under the often-misguided umbrella of ‘tolerance’. The ‘politically correct’ media has been ‘drinking its own bath-water for so long that they have convinced themselves that every religion is ‘right’ and none are ‘wrong’. Indeed it is taboo to even speak in a way that may be offensive to someone’s religious sensibilities, as if laws separating church and state also apply to church and media-speech. Though many with weak moral foundations remain uncertain, continuing to wrestle with what is right and wrong, truth does indeed ‘stand clear’ of spin and excessive relativism. It is time to wake up from the ‘ignorance-is-bliss’ mentality, recognize and acknowledge the root of the problem and get into the heads of these hateful people to decide out how best to destroy their will to harm us, even if that means killing large numbers of them to convince them of the error if their ways. Both the executive and judicial branches of the U.S. government are essentially declaring itself to be the ultimate authority of what is truly Islamic and what is not. With almost no intimate knowledge of Islamic doctrine and teachings, and almost completely ignoring recent and distant history, our government continuously attempts to sever the association between Islam and terrorism. Officials do not deny that self-proclaimed Muslims are constantly trying to kill Americans, but it stridently denies any connection between violent aggression and genuine Islam. Despite the fact that those proclaiming it are politicians, bureaucrats, judges, and other members of U.S. officialdom, such proclamations are patently false. Not everyone making such claims are being deliberately deceitful, most are simply making certain assumptions about one of the worlds largest religions, having no particular competence to decide what is or is not Islamic, and so are under-qualified to make such judgments. Officials should contain themselves and not issue opinions on what constitutes the Islamic faith and which are its true representatives. Any individual who have reviewed the material presented herein knows much more about terrorism and Islam than all of them, and indeed probably more than most Muslims know about their own religion as well. Hubris, defined as "outrageous arrogance", has brought down many powerful civilizations before. There is hubris in the Senate and House of Representatives where a few, sworn to preserve and protect, visited the enemy in Iraq offering themselves as unwitting propaganda tools for dictators and despots. Today the Democratic presidential candidates exacerbate the difficulties of a nation at war, willing to weaken national resolve in hope of gaining sufficient votes from ‘the convenient masses’ to secure the position of ‘Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces’, which forces they essentially denigrate. The party suffers from myopia, seeing all kinds of far-right conspiracies, but unable (or not allowed by the ‘politically correct’ blinders it designed and advocates) to see the enemy poised to strike us again and again. The Democratic Party seems only equipt to protect its advantage on ‘progressive’ judges, the environment, abortion rights, privacy rights of terrorists, and the entitlements and delicate sensibilities of special interest groups, and seem wholly ill equipped to protect us from anything more dangerous than vague unintended insults from the ‘insensitive’ Republican Party. The greatest Democratic president of all time, Kennedy, understood the perils facing the US by communism and was willing to risk all to stand up to it, but sadly there are no Democrats of his caliber in our day. All the while Islam, by its very nature, remains in permanent competition with other civilizations. This theory was expounded by the Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington, who coined the term "Islam's bloody borders" -- a reference to the fact that wherever Islam rubs up against other civilizations -- Jewish, Christian, Hindu -- wars seem to break out. His work ‘Clash of Civilizations’ should be required reading at high schools, colleges, and universities. Amir Tahiri, the editor of ‘Politique International of Paris’ noted October 2001 that of the 30 wars going on at that time, 28 involve Muslim people fighting either non-Muslims or other Muslims. Thorough research reveals that the Islamic concept of peace goes something like this: “Peace comes through submission to Muhammad and his concept of Allah” (i.e. Islam). The Islamic concept of peace, meaning making the whole world Muslim, is actually a mandate for war. It was inevitable and unavoidable that the conflict would eventually reach our borders, and so it has. So far we have gone to great lengths to reassure the Muslim world that we are not in a war with Islam, but only terrorists. However much of Islam understands better than our leaders do, that to fight the orthodox extremists is to fight against all that Islam holds sacred, and that we are indeed fighting Islam thereby. But we are not fighting all the people who are Muslims, just those who send, support, train, supply, fund, handle, protect, sympathize, admire, or hide Jihadic warriors worldwide. What percentage of Islam is that? A conservative estimate might be 30% of Muslims, which is still a number in the hundreds of millions. This is a huge problem any way you look at it, not likely to be solved by bombing a few camels and decrepit tanks in Afghanistan even when followed by a spectacular column of armor run strait into the heart of Baghdad. In fact tens of thousands of fundamentalists, particularly their ‘religious’ leaders, will need to be helped into paradise to convince the rest it is in their best interest to reform their schools and abandon their terrorist ways. The most dangerous potent extremists in the world currently reside in Iran, Pakistan, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. All these nations need to be rendered impotent economically, militarily, and politically in order to cut off the head of the venomous snake poised to strike us. If we are willing to accept our lot and protect our present and future nation, major changes will be needed in all aspects of our lives. Change is not easy, but as Thomas Jefferson once said; “A little revolution every now and then is a good thing, it clears the atmosphere”. Jihad is not going away on its own, it needs to be helped. An awakening and Cultural Revolution must first take place here before we can successfully commit to the task at hand. The air must be cleared and hands untied to be able to strike with the kind of lethality required to finish the ugly task and put it behind us. The set of changes and actions that could define victory are the responsibility of our military and political leaders, but require the full support and participation of every citizen who must now trust that judgment. A few radical suggestions will be made next. They may seem extreme now, but hearts will change if and when enough pain and death has been visited upon this people, so they are offered here in advance of that consensus: 1. The President should more clearly identify the threat and Congress officially declare war on all forms of Jihadic Islam in any way supporting, justifying, or enabling terrorist threats and acts against this country. A clear call should be issued for volunteers to join the battle, or reinstate the draft if insufficient numbers answer that call. 2. For a specific term, expand the wartime powers of the presidency to transact the war, suspending Habeas Corpus (as Lincoln did in the Civil War) for all matters the presidency deems related to national security. We must not allow liberal weasels from the ACLU, wacked-out tree huggers or an activist interfering Judiciary to obstruct the execution of the war by the Commander in Chief. 3. Retroactively reclassify Islam from a religious organization to the socio-political organization it is, subject to all the taxes, rules and laws of political organizations. 4. Relentlessly prosecute treasonous, seditious, racketeering, inciting to violence, and hate-speech crimes perpetrated by leaders (and members) of the newly classified political organization, spoken or printed. 5. Create new legislation to seize property and terminate citizenship for any individual who actively supports our terrorist enemies, returning those who are not truly American to their country of origin. 6. We should immediately move to control of all Muslim schools (textbooks, teachers and curriculum) against national standards, and close down schools refusing to cooperate. 7. Islamic clergy and texts should be outlawed in our prison system. Other works glorifying treason, rape, murder, and thievery are not allowed, Islam should be no different. 8. Require true ‘Islamic History’ and ‘American History’ courses for all high schools and in all university liberal education departments, to be taught by faculty divorced from left-wing politics. 9. Extend, strengthen, and enlarge the ‘Patriot Act’ to allow (for the express purpose of national defense) monitoring all Muslim Americans and all immigrants from Islamic lands, including penalties for municipalities who fail to support it. Profiling is good. This should not bother any true patriots who have nothing to hide. Create national military-police groups to search for, infiltrate, and flush out militants here. 10. Build and prepare many more rapid-reaction lethal military units to act in concert with fast moving intelligence here and abroad. 11. The CIA should create or recruit an army of indigenous operatives to infiltrate all governments and terrorist organizations suspected of planning harm to our nation. How hard can it be to memorize parts of the Qur’an, bow 5 times a day, praise Allah, spew anti-Jew/American invectives, and (god willing) shoot an AK47. These recruits should not be Muslims, but very knowledgeable of Muhammad (peace be upon him). 12. Terminate all aid to Iraq, Palestinians, Egypt, Jordan, Somalia, Algeria, Sudan, Pakistan, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Albania, Indonesia, and any other Islamic nation who persecutes non-brothers. Let their men spend their time scratching out a living for themselves and their families instead of training for Jihad. 13. Withdraw all forces from Western Europe, leaving the Bosnian/Serbian/Kosovo problem to the French and Germans. Withdraw from Japan and release them from remaining restrictions imposed after WWII; we need our forces elsewhere and they are competent and capable of quickly building forces and shouldering their own defense. We could use the help of a larger, more offensively oriented and capable Japanese Air force, Army, and Navy to counter the growing influence of Islam in Asia. 14. Quickly build up the police and national military forces in Iraq, wish them luck in forming a democracy, then leave. On the way out mention something like; “Don’t make me come back here again”. Recognize the ‘Marshal Plan’ will not work in Islamic lands, and stop trying to buy friends. A people who deeply resent help from inferior Infidels cannot appreciate magnanimity in victory. They will not develop a sudden case of gratitude and become our best friends like Japan and Germany. It is better to be respected than liked anyway. Let Iraq rebuild borrowing against future oil sales. Spend the 87 billion building more bombs and training more forces. 15. Quickly strike Iran and Syria, both for their part in supporting terrorists attacking us in Iraq, and for their support of terrorist activities worldwide. Strike them with such force as to destroy their military machines as effective fighting forces, and to overthrow or kill their leadership. Bite the bullet and shut down Iran’s oil economy, a main funding source for terrorists and Islamic aggression and expansion. 16. Require and support new and expanded Coal and Nuclear energy sources. Nuclear power plants are less polluting anyway. 17. Assign an all new $1/gal energy tax on gasoline and diesel to drive down demand and to fund the following: 18. Require (not allow, require!), responsible drilling and development of oil reserves in Alaska, offshore, and elsewhere. Break the wallets and so the backs of our enemies! Invest in fusion research with the goal of harnessing the power of hydrogen molecule to generate electrical power. Create more incentives for oil/gas conservation like car pooling, higher efficiency engines, braking regeneration/conservation, lighter/stronger vehicles employing smaller engines, more efficient methods of transportation commerce, capturing solar/wind/water potential, etc etc. 19. Open another front against the other tool Islam uses to both weaken us and finance its efforts. Open a front against drug use and drug pushers. Educate citizens on how proceeds are used to fund terrorist activity, and call for volunteers to fight the war on terror and drugs. Stiffen penalties for those who profit in despair, and provide more help getting young people off their dependencies. 20. Warn Pakistan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia that continued friendly relations with the US absolutely depends on an immediate and comprehensive reformation of their schools as well as all new religious leaders abandoning Jihadic concepts. Warn first, and then if they are not serious about reform seize all assets, releasing them upon proof of having separated themselves from Wahhabism and real school reforms. Shut down their oil economies if that’s what it takes to stop the flow of terrorism funding (including Wahhabi school funding worldwide). 21. Forget the EU, forget the UN, and completely rework NATO cutting out France, Turkey, and Germany. Withdraw all support and funding to the UN and send the inept diplomats packing with their flags in tow. Under a new framework sign all new military alliances and treaties with Great Britain, Russia, Poland, Italy, Australia, India, Japan, the Philippines, and other friendly nations (perhaps even Canada and Mexico). Pour the aid we now give to the UN and Arab lands into Russia, other emergent democracies, and under the still infallible ‘Monroe Doctrine’, the Americas. Encourage investment, and assist the good people of Russia with troops and material in their war in Chechnya. 22. Rework START to allow the US, Russia, and other friendly allies to both dominate space and rework their nuclear arsenals including spares for replenishing weapons expended in wartime. If it proves that the Islamic threat becomes unmanageable by other methods, a huge stealth armada of hydrogen and neutron bombs should be developed and deployed in orbit, preemptively shooting down any space asset launched from unfriendly countries who will not guarantee verifiable non-nuclear ambitions. 23. It should be made clear to all nations that the US will respond to nuclear or biological attacks, not in kind, but with such force to destroy all nations and peoples deemed remotely culpable or even sympathetic to acts of terror and genocide against us. It should be denoted the new YAD doctrine (as opposed to MAD), which stands for ‘Your Assured Destruction’. These radical proposals are revolutionary and require courage, vision, sacrifice, and a complete changing of the ‘politically correct’ guard. Pacifism means suicide, anyone who does not realize that yet will soon enough be convinced. Regretfully, the glacial learning curve will be accelerated through the further pain and suffering of innocent friends, neighbors, and fellow citizens. The voice of pacifists will sound shrill as ever, but patience for selfishness, ignorance, and fools will grow short with increasing knowledge and awareness of the goals of terrorist foot soldiers and the hoards of people cheering them on from the sidelines. The sleeping giant stirred briefly after Sept 11th, but slumbers still. That giant may soon be forced to awaken, …for if not he will surely die in his sleep. The enemies of freedom anxiously seek to enter the next world to receive their reward for their hatred and murders of non-believers, and we must as quickly as possible expedite that journey for them. That may sound like warmongering but it is simply a practical reality of survival to kill creatures threatening your family with cold calculation. One could not take pleasure at the death of thousands of Islam’s poor uneducated minions, brainwashed as they are. But it is humane to take pride performing otherwise unpleasant acts to preserve the life of loved ones and the nation that serves us. Anyone not willing to sacrifice for their nation and self-preservation are not merely pacifists, they are suicidal. Would that I could be a bug on the wall as all Islamic terrorists arrive at that way-station between life and their spiritual holding place, to watch as shock and disappointment covers their countenances and to witness their anguish and panic grow as they realize they spent their last wage of agency on Earth serving the enemy of love and free-agency, …the enemy of God. In taking effective measures to protect ourselves and dissuade Muslim militants, we should not be so arrogant to think such actions will end the huge problem of Jihad for all peoples and places, especially for the billions trapped in majority Islamic countries. When billions of Muslims see, through such actions, that their philosophy is flawed and their God cannot help them, it will be but the first small step in the long process of Islam’s eventual ruin and subsequent reformation. In reality Islam can only be brought down from within, by men such as Ali Sina who runs a site to help his fellows see the error of their ways, and who offer the 21st century equivalent of a ‘freedom train’ to assist those wanting to escape the misery of its spiritual slavery (visit www.faithfreedom.org). The end of the worldwide danger, which Islam brings, will come at the hands of good Muslims following their conscience, and dedicated to principals of human rights and equality. Such men represent the best hope for Muslims, and the only path ahead available leading out of despair and into prosperity. As we act against the militants and their supporters, every effort should be made to support such good people and all legitimate freedom movements in Islamic lands. EPILOG Dark Premonitions Am not sure quite what's going on, or what drives me to pursue this work. Possibly the Sympathetic Fallacy is playing tricks with my soul. The Sympathetic Fallacy is the one that goes: "I feel like this, therefore the world is (or should/will be) like this too. Yet every spring I open a window and can still see buds, hear birds and smell flowers, but now the images seem so very provisional, so surreal. I feel prompted to ask how can all these flowers be blooming and all these birds warbling? It is not quite visible with the naked eye, but one can sense a force like ‘The Nothing’, that malevolent entity in the ‘Never Ending Story’, nibbling at the edges and poised at any moment to gobble up our entire world. I fear that, as Myers says, we may be sailing off the edge of the world, into the realm of chaos. Don't get me wrong. I have no specific occasion to be obsessed with apprehension, as a single father of several young children I am much too busy to waste thought and energy chasing ghosts or slaying windmills. Perhaps it is too much reading J. R. Tolken or C. S. Lewis that put me in this frame of mind, or pushed me deeper into it, or perhaps it is the endless string of news releases filled with violent manifestations cascading down my consciousness and sucking hope dry. The dreaded Orakai of Saraman the White in ‘Lord of the Rings’ resemble crazed, mindless terrorists. All these groups waging Jihad look exactly like the ‘Borg Collective’ intending to assimilate our society. The phrase ‘resistance is futile’ disturbs both my dreams and drifts into daytime thoughts. Anyway, it didn't start like that. In the numbness following Sept 11th my spirit self-comforted with the idea that truth, right and the American way would prevail once again, believing every foe would soon repent or be destroyed. Then I read a piece by Paul Johnson in the Spectator reprinted below, its first sentence reading as follows: "The sound of the explosion was so loud, so prolonged, and so unusual that I knew at once I was listening to a historical singularity." There followed a great wind sweeping over his London house, in the library of which he was sitting, and something that felt like an earthquake. Stepping up to the flat roof of his house, he saw "destruction on an immense scale." He saw London being consumed by a vast swelling ball of fire and smoke. It is all described with terrific fluency and vividness, in just a thousand words, with the skill that comes easily to a man who has written a shelf-full of thick books and innumerable pieces of throwaway journalism. What he is seeing is the detonation of a hydrogen bomb, a megaton-scale nuclear weapon. "As the darkness increased and the compensating fire drew nearer, I grasped that the catastrophe would soon swallow up my house and me, too..." In the last paragraph, of course, he wakes up. Johnson's nightmare was the more striking because he normally doesn't write like that at all. A levelheaded, practical sort of fellow, worldly and very knowledgeable about politics, he usually has his feet firmly on the ground. Johnson's dream still lingers, buried in the nether portions of my consciousness, ready to reappear like a sudden thunderstorm to ruin any bright sunny feelings. Then there is the stuff about wacko North Korea having nukes, and reports of Iranian Mullahs receiving streams of prominent representatives from the Muslim world like a wedding reception, all paying honor and seeking favor for some achievement of nuclear proportions. Libya also, has programs well hidden and of unknown maturity, and Syria may have inherited the bulk of forbidden Iraqi arsenals and programs. Thinking about that, it dawned on me, as it has on many others, that there has been some qualitative change in world affairs. In the past, scary as it was, all nuclear nations had long histories, and ancient imperial or grand-republican political traditions - traditions, that is, of responsible governance. None of them was fundamentally nihilistic, with a desire to do mischief in the world just for its own sake. That state of affairs went on for decades, and lulled us into thinking it was permanent. It wasn't. The genie is now out of the bottle. Now nutcase nations or pseudo-nations like North Korea and Pakistan have nukes, and the base principle upon which deterrence is based, which served us so well 1949-89, has broken down. Deterrence only works with responsible people, people who give a damn, and who, if they plan conquest, plan it the old fashioned way - armies, battlefields. It is useless against Mohammed Atta, or any nation that cares to use his sort as proxies. Well, those were the lines I was thinking along. Then I started to notice how many other people were thinking the same way. "Thinking" is actually the wrong word. This isn't something thought so much as something felt, something in the air. And what I really didn't like a bit was that the people who are thinking it are people I have found to be pretty reliable guides to what is going on in the world. The things people say in conversation nowadays! - things like: "It'll take another 9/11...". And then there is the image of the guy living on Long Island, waving his arm at the busy suburban landscape beyond the window of a diner, and saying: "When New York City's been taken out, all this real estate will be worth zip." Nobody talked like that ten, five years ago. Nobody even thought those things. Is something unspeakably horrible going to happen? I don't know. I'm only saying that there is something in the air - a grimness, a bracing. Perhaps I'm just scaring myself over nothing. As in all times, the future casts its shadow over the past helping us to forget it, but the past ever projects its image into the future to form it. I can't shake off the feeling that we are living, right now, in that chill shadow cast from recent and distant Islamic history. Surly we have come to the end of a golden age of relative peace and security, and there are nasty things lurking in the not too distant future. Is chaos the only option left for our great Western society obsessed as we are with consumption and self-absorption? Look at us! Look at the gross vulgar overflowing fat wealth we live amongst! Look at the great cars that 20-year-old kids drive 300 yards to the mall, to buy things they don't need, gadgets to pack into houses already overflowing with gadgets, clothes to cram into closets stuffed with clothes. Look at the work we do, sitting in humming cubicles scrolling through screens full of words and numbers as our wealth grows. Look at the bright, airy schools our kids attend, to be taught that their ancestors were moral criminals, their parents are liars, and their culture is a sham. Look at our popular heroes, all self-absorbed rock stars, sports icons, or made for movie fantasy personalities. Look at our "reality TV" programs, where people with empty heads wallow in infantile hedonism. Look at our fool politicians and diplomats, pouring over their poll numbers and UN resolutions, playing tug-of-war with pork while young men with burning eyes slip silently into our cities with boxes, canisters, cargoes, vials, and suitcases curiously heavy. Icons live in a make-believe world using popular influence to undermine national values. Hollywood weenies like Martin Sheen and Sean Penn rake in millions playing soldiers in films like "Apocalypse Now" and "Casualties of War" and then, in real life, give the finger to those who really wear the uniform and risk all to defend us. Violent rappers get rich issuing songs like "Cop Killer", and "Die, die, die, pig, die! Fuck the police!". The elite from among us (Actor, Artist, Intellectual, Union leader, Tenured Faculty, Judge, Lawyer, ACLU, and powerful advocacy groups including left-leaning media) arrogantly live their lives demanding the full measure of entitlements and freedoms paid for by the blood of the kind of men they disparage. Young people at universities regurgitate excessive relativism leaving campus with no core, no love of country, and no willingness to sacrifice for it. For decades now we have selfishly chased vanity, postponing and/or limiting our offspring, thus limiting the available pool of young men and women we wish to call upon now for protection. Is there enough, are they strong enough? I wonder why Osama bothered to create such a fracas to kill 3000, and why he did not simply sit back and watch with satisfaction as we do it to ourselves, on a scale orders of magnitude higher, using the arbitrary tool of abortion. From the surviving young who do walk amongst us, premonition often prompts me to look hard into their eyes and hearts searching for strength, but probing the windows into their souls has revealed a vast cavernous emptiness bringing little comfort. Look at this proud tower! And feel its foundations tremble.


The sound of the explosion was so loud, so prolonged and so unusual that I knew at once I was listening to a historic singularity. Indeed, it may not have been an explosion: more a catastrophic global event. Was it the end of the world? As the initial noise fell in volume, though it did not cease, a pentecostal wind swept over my house in Notting Hill. It faces north into the street, and the air current came from the south, as I could see from the trees bending over in our south-facing garden. I was sitting in my library, in my habitual chair near the French windows, and was astonished to see fallen leaves plastered on to them and held there by the fierce wind. Then I felt movement. It was not like an earthquake, which I had experienced in South America. In such tremors parts of the earth's crust crack and move in relation to each other, to produce disorientation and dizziness. It was, rather, as if the entire earth moved, as a unit, but out of its regular axis. Despite the feeling of movement, I went to the bottom of the stairs and began to climb them, up to the top floor, where a glass door in my bathroom leads out to a flat roof. It was midday, but I became uneasily conscious that I was ascending not into light but into darkness. There was no disturbance inside the house and the roof door opened easily. But once I stepped outside I knew I was in a different world, and that the constants of the old, familiar one had changed utterly. The noise continued but spasmodically, ranging in its decibels and nature in an erratic and unpredictable fashion. It was now, audibly, the noise of destruction on an immense scale. The wind, too, came in gusts. I feared the wind. I was beginning to fear everything. The light, or rather the comparative absence of light, was sinister. To the north, the sky was blue, yet there was no daylight. The light was thickening. When I glanced south, into central London, I saw why, and I began to get, for the first time, an inkling of what was taking place. The whole of the southern view was occupied by a dense, swirling, expanding and ascending column of smoke. It was many miles wide and already tens of thousands of feet high. Though five miles distant at its nearest (I guessed), it was moving with great speed, not so much horizontally as vertically. It was punching a colossal hole in the sky, filling it, then finding fresh energy to punch another, so that at intervals the column was encircled by giant haloes, stretching out vast distances into the stratosphere. I could not see the top of the central column. It was covered by one of these haloes, which was now stretching into the northern portion of the sky, so producing that progressive light reduction I had already noticed. I call the column smoke, and some of it was smoke — the result of a giant conflagration — but most of it was dense, throbbing, twisting cloud, white and grey vapour, of the kind emitted by the steam-engines of my childhood but on an unimaginable scale. How had so much water — or whatever it once was — been turned so swiftly into trillions of square yards of foggy miasma, still piling itself up at high speed into the stratosphere and beyond? What incalculable force had done this monstrous thing? As my eye fell to the bottom of the column, I began to grasp the source of its power. A white incandescence, low by comparison with the column but still perhaps a mile high and 20 or more broad, filled the skyline of the south horizon. Its fiery heat mitigated the gloom caused by the towering cloud above obscuring the sun. As my eyes grew accustomed to looking at this radiant epicenter, I saw that it was composed not only of white-hot elements, but also of fiery red particles, orange and blue flames, shooting heavenwards like the gigantic tongues which leap out of sunspots thousands of miles into space. There were also sporadic flashes of white, caused, I assumed, by continuing detonations on a stupendous scale. The epicenter was spreading steadily; or rather not entirely steadily, for it moved in spurts and formidable leaps, as well as munching and digesting its periphery. It was alive, this prodigious sore or cancer in London's heart, expanding its frontiers all the time. It had swallowed and vaporized all Westminster, and sucked out the entire contents of the Thames and turned them into thick clouds. It had gone down the river at thousands of miles an hour, engulfed the City and its tall towers, vaporizing steel, concrete, glass and water as it punched and thrashed and pounded the streets of massive buildings into nothingness — or, rather, minute particles of its flaming column, surging high into space. Now it was crumpling and atomizing St James's. The glittering, searing edge of the immense fire, with its bottomless black crater beneath, advanced before my eyes, having snuffed out Buckingham Palace and the Mall in an instant, snapped at Mayfair with cavernous jaws, swallowing it in three rapidly succeeding mouthfuls, while simultaneously devouring all Belgravia in one tremendous gulp. Appetite unappeased and seemingly unappeasable, it was now guzzling up Hyde Park, its trees whooshing into brief candles of flame, the Serpentine quaffed and vaporized in an instant, the Round Pond licked away in one fiery rub of its tongue.

As the darkness increased and the compensating fire drew nearer, I grasped that the catastrophe would soon swallow up my house and me, too. This was not an episode, like an earthquake, leaving a giant print on the earth in a minute of time, but more like a volcano, spreading its lava with all deliberate speed over a vast area. How many billions of tons of high-explosive equivalent had gone into what I assumed to be the detonator, at ground level, of an enormous hydrogen device, I could not guess. Yet, surely, even the largest blast conceivable must be of limited duration, and its immediate physical consequences reckoned in minutes, not hours or days. But there was no sign yet of an end, or even a diminuendo.

I suddenly noticed that I was not alone. At my feet, or very near them, was a curious congregation of creatures. First, there was a fat wood-pigeon, who usually gives me the widest of berths for he knows he is not a favorite. He was motionless, cowering, his feathers dank and bedraggled as though he was in a cold sweat. There was a crow I had never seen before, more composed than the pigeon and looking about him with alert eyes. There was the hen-thrush, who nested in the tree a few feet from my study window this year and produced a brood: no sign of them — flown off, perhaps, already — and she was clearly frightened, too. Above all — and I was strangely comforted to see him — was Randolf, or Randy, my audacious squirrel, not bold now, however, but sitting stock-still in terror, waiting for a doom which he could not evade by flight. It suddenly struck me that these varied creatures, enemies or competitors as a rule, were crowding together for comfort, and looked to me for salvation. But how was I, or anyone, to render help in this Armageddon, or apocalypse?

At that point I became aware that my eyes were open, and focused on family photos near the foot of my bed, all steady and correct. Behind my head, my beautiful crucifix, carved by a holy monk in the hardest of woods, hung motionless, not a millimeter out of place. The sun was wintry, but it shone nevertheless.

REFERENCES [1] Fregosi, Paul, "Jihad", Prometheus Books, Amherst, New York, 1998 [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] Payne, Robert, "The History of Islam", Dorset Press, New York, 1990 [6] Kassis, Hanna, "Concordance of the Qur’an", University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 1983. [7] "Shorter Encyclopedia 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, 1997 [10] Muslim, Abu’l-Husain, "Sahih Muslim", translated by A. Siddiqi, International Islamic Publishing House, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1971 [Internet version available at: 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 available at: 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 available at: www.witness-pioneer.org/vil ] [16] Dawood, N. J., "The Koran", Penguin, London, England, 1995 [17] Ayoub, Mahmoud, "The Qur’an and Its Interpreters" vol. II - The House of Imran, Albany, N.Y.; State University of New York Press, 1992 [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 [22] Ali, Yusef, "The Holy Qur'an", published by Amana, Beltsville, Maryland, USA, 1989 [Internet version available at: www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran ] [23] Asad, Muhammad , "The Message of the Qur’an", Dar Al-Andaulus, Gibraltar, 1980 [24] Wensinck, A., "Muhammad and the Jews of Medina", pub. by K. S. V. [25] WILLIAM MUIR, ESQ. “THE LIFE OF MAHOMET. VOLUME III” [Smith, Elder, & Co., London, 1861], Chapter 13 (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 available at: www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/abudawud ] [27] Report in the San Ramon Valley Herald; quoted by Daniel Pipes in CAIR: Moderate Friends of Terror, New York Post, April 22, 2002. [28] Ayako Sono ''Arabu-no Kakugen'' (Arabic maxims) published by Shinchosha, 2001

About the Author Many years ago, performing a multi-year service mission in a foreign country, I had the occasion to discuss religious concepts with many practicing Muslims. Not long afterwards I had a university study partner who was a devout Muslim from Lebanon, and we had several discussions concerning the Qur’an (a.k.a. Koran) and Islam. Our relationship was typical and warm, but later became strained following a bombing in Israel. In a discussion I learned he would be happy to use his degree in electrical engineering (acquired at tax-payer expense) to facilitate killing Jews upon his return home. Prior to that, my family enjoyed the company of three Muslim University students from Jordan, some staying at our household, and we call them friends today, none of them at the time seemed capable of such thinking. My father, stepmother, and their two children spent 10 years living and working in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. While living there, my father 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 have had many discussions with Muslims about their perception of the US and the West. In all cases the young men (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. An engineer by trade, I have also been a student of history and have studied in some depth various religious philosophies throughout my life. I have also visited Israel four times, and have taken the time to learn from both the Israeli and Arab points of view religious concepts and perspectives on the ongoing conflicts in the area. I have tried to be open-minded and to make friends with both Muslims and Jews. My contacts include merchants, some religious leaders, and even Israeli military officers from whom I have attempted to understand their perspectives and passions. I was especially impressed attending a huge celebration of ‘Purim’ in Tel Aviv on my own where numerous young people and whole families danced and socialized. As an obvious outsider I remember feeling very safe amongst the many young people at that event, the same way feel attending church-sponsored youth social events at home. I did not observe the usual trappings of gothic, gang, punk, or other threatening paraphernalia that accompany public events in the US. For whatever reason, generations of Israelis seem more cohesive than Americans. My overall impressions were that Israelis are a competent, family oriented, a hard working and industrious people generally disposed to treat others well. My dealings with Palestinians also showed me they are generally intelligent, hard working, and family oriented. Both groups would prefer to avoid war, however the distrust and paranoia of each toward the other is great, based as it is on the long litany of conflicts with no end in sight. Aside from these and some other limited contacts, the author admits that his experience with Muslims is otherwise limited. As mentioned earlier I am an engineer by training and trade, and as with many of that discipline comes a certain inclination and aptitude to disassemble every problem to its most basic root-form components as the first step in the problem solving process. After Sept 11th it became apparent that few were searching for the root cause of the war declared on us, and my natural curiosity and a certain passion has driven me to explore in some detail the true source driving the varied violent acts of Islamic zealots. My studies have revealed unexpected data, which it appears is not widely known, or is often very much misunderstood. The initial curiosity and effort on my part was to identify for myself just exactly where and how Muslim militants had erred in deviating from peaceful Islam by choosing a violent path. Mush to my chagrin, I could not discover any error, only support. These findings and the inescapable inferences that must be drawn thereby served to inspire this effort to share this knowledge with my fellow citizens. This book, considered in its entirety, could and should alter convictions and politics for the sincere searcher of truth and knowledge.