That incident changed the history of humanity, or at least that is what I thought at first, and I kept on saying that Adolf Hitler was the worst human being ever born on the face of the earth. He was a heartless, cruel, barbaric and sadistic son of a bitch. You can’t imagine how much I loathed and despised him ever since I read the history of the holocaust. I could not help but feel resentment towards the education system of my country for not indoctrinating us about this hideous and gruesome chapter of history.
Then flash forward to September 2001, when I finally mustered up enough courage to address my fears and doubts about Islam, and started searching and reading whatever I could lay my hands on. But still, it took me ten years to finally have the fortitude to leave that evil cult in October 2011. What brought about the changes, you might ask. I would definitely say the English translation of the Quran, and after reading it I realized that it is the most pernicious literature on the face of the earth. Finally, on October 24th 2011, I wrote to Ali Sina, and the rest, as they say, is history. Ali Sina surely deserves most of the credit for my apostasy, because had it not been for him and his book Understanding Muhammad, I would have never opened up my eyes, or my brain, for that matter. I was totally brainwashed from the time I was born that Islam is the true religion of God and Mohammed is the best human being in the history of humanity, and that there can never be anyone like him. Of course, it is right in a way; there could never be anyone like him. He was the most clever and conniving son of a bitch, and Hitler probably apotheosized, because I really do believe that Adolf Hitler was a clone of Mohammed. Do you have any idea what he did to the Jews of Medina? He slaughtered them heartlessly in front of their wives and then raped their wives that very night. One of the examples is Safiya, and here I would like to refer to Ali Sina’s website www.alisina.org.
The following is the story of Safiyah Bint Huyai Ibn Akhtab, the Jewish woman who was captured when Muhammad’s troops attacked Khaibar and brought her to the Prophet as part of his share of the booty. Muhammad ordered Kinana, the young husband of Safiyah to be tortured to death to make him reveal the whereabouts of the treasure of the town. On the very nigh of that murder, he took Safiyah to his bed and claimed her as his trophy. This story is reported by Tabari in detail. It can also be found in Sira of Ibn Ishaq. The following is reported in the Book of Tabaqat, compiled by Ibn Sa’d. Two years earlier, Muhammad had beheaded Huyai, the father of Safiyah along with 900 men of Bani Quraiza. Huyai Ibn Akhtab, the father of Safiyah was the leader of the Bani Nadir, one of the Jewish tribes of Medina. Muhammad’s followers had killed a couple of Arabs with whom Muhammad had signed a peace treaty. He decided to pay the blood money to the families of the victims who were killed by error. He went to the Bani Nadir asking them to pay that money. This was a strange request since the Jews had nothing to do with those murders. However, the Jews were afraid of Muhammad. He had banished another Jewish tribe, the Bani Qainiqa and they feared this may happen to them too.
They elders of the Bani Nadir retreated to collect the money. Muhammad and his companions sat beneath a wall in their Jewish quarter waiting. However, Muhammad’s real intention was to destroy the Jews and take possession of all their belongings, and not just the blood money for the crime of his followers. He hoped that the Jews would protest and he would use it as an excuse to wage war on them.
After sitting and waiting for a while, he suddenly stood up and left without saying anything to anyone. His follower noticing that he is not coming back also left. Later he told them that Gabriel informed him that the Jews were planning to throw a stone from the top of the wall and kill him.
This was a lie. If the Bani Nadir wanted to kill him they did not need to throw a stone on him. He was in their hands. They were afraid and this cost them their lives. Cowardice never pays.
Muhammad then laid siege on the Bani Nadir and cut the water to them. When they surrendered, he decided to kill them all. Abdullah ibn Obay, an old leader of the Arabs of Median intervened. Muhammad feared that this could cause split among his followers and decided to not kill the Bani Nadir, instead he took possession of their wealth and property and banished them.
Then Bani Nadir took refuge in Khaibar, a Jews' fortress to the North of Medina. That is how Safiyah ended up in Khaibar and married the Kinana the youthful leader of that town. However, her father Huyai was beheaded when Muhammad laid siege on the last Jewish tribe of Medina, the Bani Quriaza and found him there.
Safiyah was seventeen and very beautiful. When Muhammad raided Khaibar, he killed all the men. People were not ready for war. They were taken by surprise. Muhammad was not a warrior. He was a terrorist. His wars are called gazwah (raid, ambush, sudden attack).
Muhammad then captured Kinana and tortured him. He wanted to know whereabouts of the town’s treasure. He passed red hot iron to his eyes and blinded him. Kinana was a valiant man. He did not speak. A Jew, maybe the ancestor of Noam Chomsky and George Soros, told Muhammad where he can find the treasures. Jews have always had their good share of traitors.
Kinana died under torture. Then Muhammad asked his men to bring him the prettiest girl. Safiyah, the seventeen years old wife of Kinana was the prettiest.
Bilal, brought Kinana and her cousin, the sister of Kinana to Muhammad. When Kinana’s sister saw her brother’s mutilated corps, she became hysterical. Muhammad became enrages and said, take this devil away from me. Later he told Bilal, don’t you have any humanity to parade women in front of the corpse of their loved ones? How wonderful. The Prophet was full of compassion and humanity.
However, he took Safiyah to his tent because she had become a widow, he took compassion on her and decided to take her as his wife. Of course the fact that she was young and pretty had nothing to do with it. There were hundreds of other women who also had become widows on that day. The younger and prettier ones were saved by the self abnegating compassionate Murderers of their husbands and fathers and the older ones were left to till the land, and give 50% of the produce to the most perfect human and the Mercy of God on earth.
The following is from Tabaqat.
“Safiyah was born in Medinah. She belonged to the Jewish tribe of Banu ‘I-Nadir. When this tribe was expelled from Medinah in the year 4 A.H, Huyai was one of those who settled in the fertile colony of Khaibar together with Kinana ibn al-Rabi’ to whom Safiyah was married a little before the Muslims attacked Khaibar. She was then seventeen. She had formerly been the wife of Sallam ibn Mishkam, who divorced her. One mile from Khaibar. Here the Prophet married Safiyah. She was groomed and made-up for the Prophet by Umm Sulaim, the mother of Anas ibn Malik. They spent the night there. Abu Ayyub al-Ansari guarded the tent of the Prophet the whole night. When, in the early dawn, the Prophet saw Abu Ayyub strolling up and down, he asked him what he meant by this sentry-go; he replied: “I was afraid for you with this young lady. You had killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives, and till recently she was an unbeliever. I was really afraid for you on her account”. The Prophet prayed for Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (Ibn Hisham, p. 766) Safiyah had requested the Prophet to wait till he had gone a stage away from Khaibar. “Why?” asked the Prophet. “I was afraid for you on account of the Jews who still happened to be near at Khaibar!”
The reason Safiyah rejected the sexual advances of Muhammad should be obvious to any thinking person. I believe most women prefer to mourn than jump into bed with the killer of their father, husband and many relatives on the same day of their death. But the fact that the prophet of Allah could not contain his sexual urges for one day to let this young girl grieve, says a lot of his moral character. He was a psychopath and bereft of conscience of empathy.
As for the rest of the story we are not sure whether it is true or was fabricated by Muslim historians to wipe the impression of rape. But this is all we have and to find the truth we have to rely on these biased documents narrated and written by Muslims.
The story goes on to say that Abu Ayyub was concerned for the safety of the prophet because he (Muhammad) had killed Safiyah’s father, husband and many of her relatives. This is logical. It is foolish to sleep with a woman after killing her loved ones. But Safiyah’s excuse for rejecting Muhammad’s advances towards her seems unreasonable. When Muhammad took this young girl into his tent, he had already killed many Jews and had chained others. If there were any Jews left, they probably were more worried for their own lives than Safiyah being raped. Also she was already in the tent alone with Muhammad, how the Jews would have known if they were engaged in sex or not? This excuse sounds foolish and most likely is forged by Muslims to claim that Safiyah wanted to have sex with Muhammad, if she didn’t it was because she was concerned for his safety.
Muslims are a bunch of stupid people that believe in any asininity without thinking, but I am sure others have more sense to know this is a lie.
“The next day a Walima (we dding-feast) was arranged on behalf of the Prophet…
Note that the historian is saying that the wedding took place one day after Muhammad got private with Safiyah and made his moves to have sex with her. This presented no problem for the prophet as he had his Allah reveal a verse saying it is okay to sleep with women captured in war without marrying them even if they are married. And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess…” (Q. 4:24 )
The above verse shows that Muhammad did not believe that slaves have any right. Should Muslims come to power, this would be the fate of all non-Muslim women. Muslims can’t change anything that Muhammad has said or done.
This is confirmed in another place.
(Q. 23: 1-7)
1-The believers must (eventually) win through,-
2- Those who humble themselves in their prayers;
3-Who avoid vain talk;
4- Who are active in deeds of charity;
5- Who abstain from sex,
6- Except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame,
7- But those whose desires exceed those limits are transgressors;-
Let us continue with the story of Safiyah.
“The other wives of the Prophet showed their jealousy by making slights upon her Jewish origin. But the Prophet always defended her. Once Safiyah was vexed to the extreme by the taunts of all the Arab wives of the Prophet. She took the complaint to the Prophet, who felt great compassion for her. He consoled her. He encouraged her. He equipped her with logic. He said: “Safiyah, take courage and be bold. They are in no way superior to you. Tell them: I am a daughter of the Prophet Harun, a niece of the Prophet Musa, and a wife of the Prophet Muhammad”.
When she was brought along with other prisoners-of-war, the Prophet said to her, “Safiyah, your father always maintained enmity with me until Allah made the final decision.” She said, “But Allah does not catch one for the sins of another.”
This of course contradicts Muhammad’s own behavior that annihilated the entire Bani Qainuqa with the pretext that few of them had killed a Muslim in retaliation of him killing a Jew.
He banished an entire tribe, making them pay for the killing of a Muslim. That Muslim had already killed a Jew. But this did not matter to Muhammad. He needed an excuse to lay his hand on their wealth.
That is despite the verse that says “Namely, that no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another” (Q. 53:38) Also it was not Allah who made the final decision.
See how this despicable man washes his hand from his own crime. Safiyah’s father was killed by Muhammad’s not by Allah. If God wanted to kill all those people He could have done it on his own. God needs no mercenaries to do his will.
“The Prophet then gave her the choice of joining her people after freedom or accepting Islam and coming into a matrimonial relationship with him”
Gave her a choice? What choice? Muhammad had killed her husband and all her relatives. Where could she go? Joining her people? Which people? The men were killed and the women were enslaved.
She was very intelligent and gentle and said, “O Allah’s Messenger, I had hoped for Islam, and I confirmed you before your invitation. Now when I have the honour to be in your presence, I am given a choice between kufr and Islam I swear by Allah, that Allah and His Messenger is dearer to me than my own freedom and my joining with my people.”
Was this confession, if true, sincere? Was she safe to speak her mind? She was enslaved by a man who had exterminated her family. See the reference made to her “freedom”. This shows clearly that she was not free. In fact she must have been very intelligent to fabricate those lies to save her own life. But the truth is that this story is most likely a lie.
“When Safiyah was married, she was very young, and according to one report she was hardly seventeen years old and was extremely beautiful. Once A’isha said a few sentences about her short stature, at which the Prophet said, “You have said a thing that if it were left in the sea, it would mix with it (and make its water dirty). ” (Abu Dawud). She not only deeply loved the Prophet but also greatly respected him as Allah’s Messenger, for she heard the conversations of her father and uncle after they went to Medinah. When the Prophet migrated to Medinah, they came to see him and find out whether he was the true Messenger of Allah spoken of in the Scriptures. When they got back and talked together that night, Safiyah was in her bed listening to them. One of them said, “What do you think about him?” He replied, “He is the same Prophet foretold by our Scriptures.” Then the other said, “What is to be done?” The reply came that they must oppose him with all their might.”
Is this story, narrated by Abu Dawud, credible? How can two Jews recognize Muhammad as the prophet foretold by their scriptures and decide to oppose him with all their might? It defies all logic. It takes a “deficient in intelligence” or a Muslim to believe in this nonsense.
She was deeply in love with Muhammad, the murderer of her father and husband? How stupid can Muslim be to believe in this narration? How can a seventeen years old beautiful girl fall in love with an aging crippled man with a broken tooth and fetid smell? Read my book Understanding Muhammad to learn how Muhammad was deformed and smelled foul.
It’s doubtful these were the words of Safiyah. If she said such thing, she was lying, to make herself safe, but I doubt she said such thing. All we need is a working brain to find where Muslims lie.
Why would someone decide to oppose with all his might the one who he knows is the promised one of his own scriptures? Where in the Bible Muhammad is foretold? Is Muhammad mentioned in the Bible? Read this article to see the pathetic lies of Muslims. Muhammad is not mentioned in the Bible or in any sacred book.
“So Safiyah was convinced of the truth of the Prophet. She spared no pain to look after him, care for him and provide every comfort that she could think of. This is evident since she came into his presence after the fall of Khaibar.”
See how the writer contradicts himself in one page? Just a few lines above we read that she was captured and was taken to Muhammad as a prisoner. She didn’t come on her own. She was taken to Muhammad because she was young and the beautiful.
“The Prophet had a slight grievance against her for she had refused when the Prophet wanted to have privacy with her at the previous stage (of the journey). At the next halt, the Prophet had privacy with her and spent all night with her. When she was asked by Umm Sulaim, “What did you see in Allah’s Messenger?” She said he was very pleased with her and did not sleep at all but was talking to her all night. He had asked her, ‘Why did you refuse at the first stage when I desired privacy with you?’ She had said, ‘I was afraid for you because of the nearness of the Jews. “‘This thing further increased my merit in his eyes.” (Tabaqat).
Bukhari also has recorded some Hadithes telling the invasion of Khaibar and how Muhammad met Safiyah.
Narrated ‘Abdul ‘Aziz:
Anas said, ‘When Allah’s Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, ‘Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.’ He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, ‘Muhammad (has come).’ (Some of our companions added, “With his army.”) We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, ‘O Allah’s Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.’ The Prophet said, ‘Go and take any slave girl.’ He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, ‘O Allah’s Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.’ So the Prophet said, ‘Bring him along with her.’ So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, ‘Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.’ Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her.”
Thabit asked Anas, “O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?” He said, “Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her.” Anas added, “While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet . (Sahih Bukhari 1.367)
Mahr is the dowry that a bride gets from her husband when he marries her. Muhammad did not pay Safiyah her Mahr because he had to pay it to himself for manumitting her. This story is significant because it gives us an insight into the moral and ethical values of Muhammad and his benighted followers. Muhammad was a psychopath. But Muslims have no shame. They worship a psychopath and want us to respect them. Does stupidity deserve respect? By virtue of following an insane man, every one of them acts insane.
Any decent, or even normal person cringer with stories like this, yet Muhammad taught that he is going to receive two rewards by marrying Safiyah. One for manumitting someone whom no one but himself had enslaved, and the other for marrying her.
Abu Musa reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said about one who emancipated a slave woman, and then married her, that for him there are two rewards. (Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3327)
Isn’t that disgusting? Drop this stupid political correctness and call a spade a spade. Muslims are a bunch of morons. How stupid these people can get?
Narrated Anas:
The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, “Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.” Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives, She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet . The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr’. (Sahih Bukhari V.5 B.59 N.512)
http://alisina.org/muhammad-raped-safiyah/
To say that I was in a total shock for the next few days is an understatement. I realized that Mohammed orchestrated the first Holocaust in the history of mankind, and then Hitler merely followed his footsteps.
How can any Muslim every justify what he did? He slaughtered innocent men and young boys just because they were Jewish.
My next post would be about the tribulations and afflictions which the Jewish people have been facing for thousands of years and are still fighting for their own land and their identity.
Muslims will carry out vicious, sadistic and perverted genocide against ANY non-Muslims they're strong enough to attack successfully.
ReplyDeleteAlthough we are all familiar with attacks on Jews and Christians, many minority religions are even now being exterminated by Muslims. A new website, People of Shambhala, has been set up to record these lesser-known holocausts.
I applaud your bravery to write the truth. I will pray for your protection and guidance. God Bless you.
ReplyDeleteLiberated, you are a delight. Keep on posting. You have crossed over from merely questioning to educating, and thus have become an invaluable resource in the fight against barbarity.
ReplyDeleteI also have Ali Sina's revealing expose about mahomet and have sent it to friends. I recommend it highly to all.
It was inevitable that the anti-muslim movement would slowly but surely place the blame for the holocaust on Muslims. Robert Spencer usually uses proxies for his most outlandish and disgusting claims and this par for the course.
ReplyDeleteI guarantee, "evidence" will soon come to light that hitler must have been a Muslim convert since he acted so much like one.
I guarantee, "evidence" will soon come to light that hitler must have been a Muslim convert since he acted so much like one.
DeleteIt's pretty well-established that hitler was a catholic-born atheist. So I doubt your guarantee will ever come to pass; unlike mohamedans, Western historians do not usually fabricate evidence to rewrite history.
But what I will venture to guarantee though, is that islam will surely and steadily converge towards nazism.
ps. google up hitler and the grand mufti of Jerusalem!
Liberated:
ReplyDeleteYou might want to think about asking Robert to block some of the trolls that have been infesting this blog, that is, if they disturb you in any way. The comments are illustrative of the mahoundian mindset, to be sure, but they do fill up space with trash. More than a few of us have just begun skimming over their posts.
All the Best, always,
CGW
By the way dear liberated one, could you comment on the following quotes by Ali Sina? Im sure someone who can condemn the hate in the Koran can also recognize it elsewhere?
ReplyDelete"Send all the Muslims out of the West. They are all the same. Disgusting is a mild word."http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=21638&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=615
"You are only dangerous creatures and nothing more. Filthy to the core. Evil in your hearts. Disgusting is your thoughts of hate. Satanic is your ethos. Barbaric is your conduct. You must be rounded up and sent to where you came from. Leave Islam or leave our country. This must become the slogan in all the Western countries."
"This war can be won in only two ways. By educating Muslims so they leave Islam like Mehmood did or by killing them. "
"it is not an insult to say Muslims are not human"
"Muslims are liars by nature. Muslims are the followers of Satan and they lie instinctively."
"I don’t see Muslims as innocent people. They are all guilty as sin. It is not necessary to be part of al Qaida to be guilty. If you are a Muslim you agree with Muhammad and that is enough evidence against you”
ah the fake blogger is back
ReplyDeletealive are we ???
Not hung, drawn and quartered ???
Well of course not since you aren't real, isn't that right spencer :)
anway lets deal with the bollocks posted by the fake blogger
n Medina, the chief casualties of this Muslim success were the three Jewish tribes of Qaynuqah, Nadir and Qurayzah, who were determined to destroy Muhammad and who all independently formed alliances with Mecca. They had powerful armies, and obviously posed a threat to the Muslims, since their territory was so situated that they could easily join a besieging Meccan army or attack the ummah from the rear. When the Qaynuqah staged an unsuccessful rebellion against Muhammad in 625, they were expelled from Medina, in accordance with Arab custom. Muhammad tried to reassure the Nadir, and made a special treaty with them, but when he discovered that they had been plotting to assassinate him they too were sent into exile, where they joined the nearby Jewish settlement of Khaybar, and drummed up support for Abu Sufyan among the northern Arab tribes. The Nadir proved to be even more of a danger outside Medina, so when the Jewish tribe of Qurayzah sided with Mecca during the Battle of the Trench, when for a time it seemed that the Muslims faced certain defeat, Muhammad showed no mercy. The seven hundred men of the Qurayzah were killed, and their women and children sold as slaves.
The massacre of the Qurayzah was a horrible incident, but it would be a mistake to judge it by the standards of our own time. This was a very primitive society: the Muslims themselves had just narrowly escaped extermination, and had Muhammad simply exiled the Qurayzah they would have swelled the Jewish opposition in Khaybar and brought another war upon the ummah. In seventh-century Arabia an Arab chief was not expected to show mercy to traitors like the Qurayzah. The executions sent a grim message to Khaybar and helped to quell the pagan opposition in Medina, since the pagan leaders had been the allies of the rebellious Jews. This was a fight to the death, and everybody had always known that the stakes were high. The struggle did not indicate any hostility towards Jews in general, but only towards the three rebel tribes. The Quran continued to revere Jewish prophets and to urge Muslims to respect the People of the Book. Smaller Jewish groups continued to live in Medina, and later Jews, like Christians, enjoyed full religious liberty in the Islamic empires. Anti-semitism is a Christian vice
http://www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm/study_res/karen_arm/qurayzah.html
p.s. six millon jews were wiped out by white people......not muslims
p.s. six millon jews were wiped out by white people......not muslims
Deletemohamad started the practice...
Liberated, I hope that you will not allow this blog to become a zone for musloid apologists to spew their misinformation. You do a disservice to *us*, your fellow anti-islamists, by allowing them to abuse you in this way.
ReplyDeleteThe truth according skouti or is it the convenient lie about what really happened 1400 years ago.Strange but there is simply no account of the jews either attacking mohamad or his merry thieves.The so called jewish plots like everything else related to it is just one big lie on the same level as the so called religion.Use your brains skouti(I am sure you have a little)and see how self serving the version put out by the muslims is to justify the barbaric murderous nature of mohamd is.Oh I am sure you also believe that Safiya was madly in love with mohamad.Sheesh.
ReplyDeleteskouti - wow... you amazed me for the entire two micro-seconds when I read your name and the posting. I thought I was mistaken, this guy knows his history and he is a champ.. then I didn't waste the entire second and googled randomly a complete sentence from your repertoire- I got a truck load of hits..
ReplyDeleteYou are the same loon that I thought you were last year. You didn't improve an inch. You wasted a whole of your life - all 12 years of it (are the loon years? - kidding, ok) - don't you see that yourself? Never mind.
So, what makes you so sure that all that cock and bull story you posted is plausible?
Lets see - in your paragraph, I picked at random a couple of sentences - "it seemed that the Muslims faced certain defeat, Muhammad showed no mercy. The seven hundred men of the Qurayzah were killed, and their women and children sold as slaves."
Do you see what I see in here? Do you see the massacre, Pedo-Mo showed no mercy, seven hundred killed.. no big deal for the pedo-mo parade. It is a big deal if you believe he was a Prophet...don't tell me that alla didn't warn him in advance - so he has to kill to defend. Any warlord will do that. I would expect something extraordinary from an extraordinary person the Moslum think he is.
Oh skouti,
ReplyDeleteI almost forgot.Keep up with the jokes.I find you almost entertaining
CGW - Please refrain from opposing skouti in that manner. That puts you at his level. That is the way Muslims treat the others. Lets help me out of the situation by engaging him and making him think about his postings. That is the only way to defeat his type of character. Its also fun to have a class clown to make a fun of.
ReplyDeleteI personally would not like it if he is blocked.
Correction in my last posting should read - "Lets help him out of his situation by engaging him and making him think about his postings. "
ReplyDeleteDar:
ReplyDeleteI have an idea that the situation re skouti's ignorance is hopeless. I just happen to have a low threshold for stupidity. It's not up to me, so I'll just ignore him and hope for more substantive, relevant, informational posts from the "enlightened" posters.
Ah, I see the "they were conspiring against Mohammed" defence from our resident apologist for Islamo-fascism...
ReplyDeleteSo, skouti, let's see some of the other slaughters to have taken place in history, and "why" they took place (from the point of view of those doing the slaughtering)
The Holocaust - according to Hitler, Jews were responsible for all wars, and they were also responsible for starting World War II. They were conspiring to control German banks and finance, and leading an international plot to bring Communism in Germany.
The Soviet purges - Stalin purged his army of masses of officers because, in his view, they were "conspiring against him". And they were even sent on trial!!
The Armenian genocide - the Armenians were conspiring with Russia against Turkey, according to the Turks.
Now skouti, can you name me one slaughter in history, for which a "justification" (or denial of that slaughter) was not provided by those carrying it out?
Call me naive, but I would have expected such an "exceptional prophet" to have acted ahead of his time, giving an example for centuries and millenia ahead, in the style of Jesus. Alas, Mohammed instead chose to conform to the standards of what you call a "primitive society". And here, it seems like you're acting as his mouthpiece, just like the apologists for Hitler and Stalin, and repeating the official "reason" for carrying out the massacre of the Qurayza... well done!!
Skouti - "p.s. six millon jews were wiped out by white people......not muslims "
ReplyDeleteCongratulations as a Jihadi accepting the fact about the "The Holocaust". If any Mussi doesn't believe it, they ought to go and visit the graves in Poland and Germany near where the concentration camps were to actually feel the chill go through your spine, that is if you have it.
Don't back track now, you have come a little forward - did you know Hitler was admirer of pedo-Mo? Not that he believed pedo_Mo was a prophet. He admired him, because Hitler, the mad man, thought he may get away with massacre and the Germans will worship him once he subdued the Poles, the Cheque, the Slaves. Btw - if he had won the war, he would have bull-dozed over Muslims. He was only friendly with them to bite more time. He showed no mercy to other races.
More than 99.99% of the Germans now are ashamed of their so called BLACK past. They acknowledge he is the most hated person in the German history, till now.
There are an estimate of 5.6 thousand neo-Nazis in German with the grand population about 82 Millions. Russia has the largest numbers about 150,000.
Compare that to 1.2 Billion muslims following a pedo-Mo. Who can only be compared with Hitler.
skouti, I guess you can't help yourself, so keep being a HATER
ReplyDeleteEnjoy :)
From the Islamic World: Television Clips about Jews
Note: the themes in the soap operas and their characterization of Jews from Muhammad's time are taken from the core Islamic texts.
Part I: A Jordanian-produced Soap Opera Demonizes the Jews
Part II: A Jordanian-produced Soap Opera Demonizes the Jews
Part III: A Jordanian-produced Soap Opera Demonizes the Jews
Jewish conspiracy soap opera set during Muhammad's lifetime
A good short video:
Islam, Nazism, and Children
Saudi Arabian TV Asks People If They Would Shake Hands With a Jew
Iranian TV shows professor lecturing that Tom and Jerry cartoons are a Jewish conspiracy
Saudi Arabian/UAE TV: Former Jordanian Minister and a Cleric Explain the Canonical Hadiths About Talking Trees and Stones Helping to Kill the Jews
TV clip of 3 year old Muslim girl being taught to hate
Hi Shakila.
ReplyDeleteJust want to say that you are such a brave person. Your courage is inspirational to all people. The facts presented here are mind blowing.
Allowing Mohammed to get away with Murder for 1400 years has proved a fatal ignorance of mankind. Nations continue to pay a price with their sons and daughters' blood today. It seems though that some hard core fanatics have been permantely altered into what I could only say, " ruthless hynas and wolves" in a human's body. We can see some of them here with their writings on this blog. I will not name shame but I suppose they know themselves. My only message for them is, carry on showing us the true colours of the " religion of peace" and you have no idea what you are missing if you live a life as a human being.
This demon-man who walked into the planet as a prophet sent by his blood thirst God Allah has no qualities of being a human being.
What is left now for all sane individuals and nations is to plug courage and spread the truth.
Everybody should support all those who are in the mission to destroy the evil in every possible way including financial support. I mean everybody.
Shakila, keep writing your posts. The truth hurts but it also set free. I am praying for your safety.
Muhammud's apologists claim that the Jews presented a powerful threat to Muhammad. They were so powerful, he simply rode to their village and picked off the men as they were going out to work. Obviously, they were a great threat. Muslims excuse Muhammad's savagery by saying he was simply a product of his primitive times. Now, Muhammad was the perfect man, so he is to be emulated in every way.
ReplyDeleteSo, there is a choice. Either Muhammad was a typical savage, bloodthirsty, thieving man of his time; or Muhammad was a man who sets the example for all time. Which is it?
Next, Muhammad tortures Safiyah's husband to death in order to steal the treasure. Now, what part did the treasure have to do with defending Medina? Does it help to prevent treachery to spread the word that Muhammad is merciless when he smells treasure to steal?
I don't know why anyone would want to learn from the example of this greedy, murderous filth whose best defense is simply that he didn't know any better. Of course, he did know better. He berated and insulted the people of Mecca for years, without being injured, before they finally got tired of him. If you grant that he was simply an ignorant hick, following the worst practices of his time, why in the world would one join a cult devoted to enshrining him.
Liberated. Again, thanks for sharing your story and your education. The fact that you have stimulated a reasonable debate, where Muslims have to resort to such obvious mental gymnastics, shows that your efforts are fruitful.
Liberated One,
ReplyDeleteTo give more meat to the facts that you presented, here are some more facts:
http://prophetofdoom.net/Prophet_of_Doom_19_Islams_Holocaust.Islam
It will behoove skouti to read this with an open heart and mind:)-
Kingdom - "This demon-man who walked into the planet as a prophet sent by his blood thirst God Allah has no qualities of being a human being."
ReplyDeleteThe real problem is not Mo. There has been plenty of loon-bums throughout the history of mankind. Some were good and evil, and some well..only evil...
Mo is dead and buried over 1400 years ago. He was all the evil you can think of. Nevertheless, he was a master salesman. The problem that we are facing is that 1.2 billion people believe he was a swell guy - they are proposing sharia, his dictates, on us. You can't blame Mo for that. The problem is these people from Saudi, Paksiatn, some Muslims from the UK/USA etc.
Mo tried a stunt, he is out of here over 1400 years ago. I think blaming Mo is a wrong focus.
Shakila, thank you for your history lesson. I loved your lone, "A Jew, maybe the ancestor of Noam Chomsky and George Soros." That was great!
ReplyDeleteAs a Jew, as well as a former teacher of Holocaust studies, I greatly enjoyed your post, as well as your passion.
The Head of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar University, the chief center of Islamic and Arabic learning in the world, explains the main qualities of the Jews according to the Qur'an
ReplyDelete[The following article used to be posted at IslamOnline.net, but outrage from non-Muslims eventually forced them to take the article down. However, it can now be found at numerous sites on the web by pasting some of the text into Google.
Everything italicized below is from the Head of the Fatwa committee at the prestigious Al-Azhar University, and from the Qur'an.]
Sheikh 'Atiyyah Saqr, who died in 2006, wrote,
“The Qur’an has specified a considerable deal of its verses to talking about Jews, their personal qualities and characteristics. The Qur’anic description of Jews is quite impartial; praising them in some occasions where they deserve praise and condemning them in other occasions where they practice blameworthy acts. Yet, the latter occasions outnumbered the former, due to their bad qualities and the heinous acts they used to commit.
The Qur’an praises them on the verse that reads: “ And verily We gave the Children of Israel the Scripture and the Command and the Prophethood, and provided them with good things and favored them above (all) peoples.” i.e. the peoples of their time. (Qur'an 45:16)
Among the bad qualities they were characterized with are the following:
1. They used to fabricate things and falsely ascribe them to Allah. Allah Almighty says: “ That is because they say: We have no duty to the Gentiles. They speak a lie concerning Allah knowingly.” (Qur'an 3:75) Also: “The Jews say: Allah's hand is fettered. Their hands are fettered and they are accursed for saying so. Nay, but both His hands are spread out wide in bounty. He bestoweth as He will.” (Qur'an 5:64)
In another verse Almighty Allah says: “Verily Allah heard the saying of those who said, (when asked for contributions to the war): "Allah, forsooth, is poor, and we are rich! We shall record their saying with their slaying of the Prophets wrongfully and We shall say: Taste ye the punishment of burning!” (Qur'an 3:181)
2. They love to listen to lies. Concerning this Allah says: “and of the Jews: listeners for the sake of falsehood, listeners on behalf of other folk” (Qur'an 5:41)
3. Disobeying Almighty Allah and never observing His commands. Allah says: “And because of their breaking their covenant, We have cursed them and made hard their hearts.” (Qur'an 5:13)
4. Disputing and quarreling. This is clear in the verse that reads: “Their Prophet said unto them: Lo! Allah hath raised up Saul to be a king for you. They said: How can he have kingdom over us when we are more deserving of the kingdom than he is, since he hath not been given wealth enough?” (Qur'an 2:247)
[continued below]
[continued from above: How the Qur'an describes the Jews, explained by a recent Head of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar University]
ReplyDelete5. Hiding the truth and standing for misleading. This can be understood from the verse that reads: “…distort the Scripture with their tongues, that ye may think that what they say is from the Scripture, when it is not from the Scripture.” (Qur'an 3:78)
6. Staging rebellion against the Prophets and rejecting their guidance. This is clear in the verse: “And when ye said: O Moses! We will not believe in thee till we see Allah plainly.” (Qur'an 2:55
7. Hypocrisy. In a verse, we read: “And when they fall in with those who believe, they say: We believe; but when they go apart to their devils they declare: Lo! we are with you; verily we did but mock.” (Qur'an 2:14) In another verse, we read: “Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practice it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense?” (Qur'an 2:44)
8. Giving preference to their own interests over the rulings of religion and the dictates of truth. Allah says: “…when there cometh unto you a messenger (from Allah) with that which ye yourselves desire not, ye grow arrogant, and some ye disbelieve and some ye slay?” (Qur'an 2:87)
9. Wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them. This is clear in the verse that reads: “Many of the People of the Scripture long to make you disbelievers after your belief, through envy on their own account, after the truth hath become manifest unto them.” (Qur'an 2:109)
10. They feel pain to see others in happiness and are gleeful when others are afflicted with a calamity. This is clear in the verse that reads: “If a lucky chance befall you, it is evil unto them, and if disaster strike you they rejoice thereat.” (Qur'an 3:120)
11. They are known of their arrogance and haughtiness. They claimed to be the sons and of Allah and His beloved ones. Allah tells us about this in the verse that reads: “The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones.” (Qur'an 5:18
[continued below]
[continued from above: How the Qur'an describes the Jews, explained by a recent Head of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar University]
ReplyDelete12. Utilitarianism and opportunism are among their innate traits. This is clear in the verse that reads: “And of their taking usury when they were forbidden it, and of their devouring people's wealth by false pretences.” (Qur'an 4:161)
13. Their impoliteness and indecent way of speech is beyond description. Referring to this, the Qur’anic verse reads: “Some of those who are Jews change words from their context and say: "We hear and disobey; hear thou as one who heareth not" and "Listen to us!" distorting with their tongues and slandering religion. If they had said: "We hear and we obey; hear thou, and look at us" it had been better for them, and more upright. But Allah hath cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, save a few.” (Qur'an 4:46)
14. It is easy for them to slay people and kill innocents. Nothing in the world is dear to their hearts than shedding blood and murdering human beings. They never give up this trait even with the Messengers and the Prophets. Allah says: “…and slew the prophets wrongfully.” (Qur'an 2:61)
15. They are merciless and heartless. In this meaning, the Qur’anic verse explains: “Then, even after that, your hearts were hardened and became as rocks, or worse than rocks, for hardness.” (Qur'an 2:74)
16. They never keep their promises or fulfill their words. Almighty Allah says: “Is it ever so that when ye make a covenant a party of you set it aside? The truth is, most of them believe not.” (Qur'an 2:100)
17. They rush hurriedly to sins and compete in transgression. Allah says: “They restrained not one another from the wickedness they did. Verily evil was that they used to do!” (Qur'an 5:79)
[continued below]
[continued from above: How the Qur'an describes the Jews, explained by a recent Head of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar University]
ReplyDelete18. Cowardice and their love for this worldly life are their undisputable traits. To this, the Qur’an refers when saying: “Ye are more awful as a fear in their bosoms than Allah. That is because they are a folk who understand not. They will not fight against you in a body save in fortified villages or from behind walls. Their adversity among themselves is very great. Ye think of them as a whole whereas their hearts are divers.” (Qur'an 59:13-14). Allah Almighty also says: “And thou wilt find them greediest of mankind for life and (greedier) than the idolaters.” (Qur'an 2:96)
19. Miserliness runs deep in their hearts. Describing this, the Qur’an states: “Or have they even a share in the Sovereignty? Then in that case, they would not give mankind even the speck on a date stone.” (Qur'an 4:53)
20. Distorting Divine Revelation and Allah’s Sacred Books. Allah says in this regard: “Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands anthem say, "This is from Allah," that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby.” (Qur'an 2:79)
After this clear explanation, we would like to note that these are but some of the most famous traits of the Jews as described in the Qur’an. They have revolted against the Divine ordinances, distorted what has been revealed to them and invented new teachings which, they claimed, were much more better than what has been recorded in the Torah. It was for these traits that they found no warm reception in all countries where they tried to reside. Rather, they would either be driven out or live in isolation. It was Almighty Allah who placed on them His Wrath and made them den of humiliation due to their transgression. Almighty Allah told us that He’d send to them people who’d pour on them rain of severe punishment that would last till the Day of Resurrection. All this gives us glad tidings of the coming victory of Muslims over them once Muslims stick to strong faith and belief in Allah and adopt the modern means of technology."
End of the Al-Azhar Sheikh's Description of Jews.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"The massacre of the Qurayzah was a horrible incident, but it would be a mistake to judge it by the standards of our own time. This was a very primitive society: the Muslims themselves had just narrowly escaped extermination, and had Muhammad simply exiled the Qurayzah they would have swelled the Jewish opposition in Khaybar and brought another war upon the ummah. In seventh-century Arabia an Arab chief was not expected to show mercy to traitors like the Qurayzah"
ReplyDeleteIn the above statement, the poster in question completely misses the point made in the blog. We CAN judge ALL of muslim society and Islam by this "primitive" action. ALL of Mohammad's actions were approved of and sanctioned by Allah. He was the "perfect" man. He could do NO wrong. By calling his actions "primitive" and "horrible" and less than the standards of our modern time the poster is saying that this was substandard behaviour upon which Islam and Islamic jurisprudence is based on. We need more Muslim apologists of this calibre as you prove our point better than we can.
"flarov" (sounds like a Russian felt pen brand name) quotes Ali Sina as having written:
ReplyDelete"Send all the Muslims out of the West. They are all the same. Disgusting is a mild word."
I checked the link, and apparently it was Ali Sina who wrote that back in 2004. I'm confused however, as Ali Sina has said recently that "millions of Muslims are leaving Islam" -- which would imply that among the Muslims of the West surely are many in whom we must place reasonable hope for their apostasy. So why send them "all" out of the West?
As I do not share in Ali Sina's hope for Muslims, I have no problem whatsoever with his 2004 statement. However, I do not elsewhere, or later, seem to contradict myself.
Incidentally, "flarov" failed to provide links to the other statements he claims were Ali Sina's -- such as this one:
"it is not an insult to say Muslims are not human"
"flarov" was either being inconsistently sloppy, or trying to be clever, by providing a credible link to the first claim, then hoping the reader would just glaze over and assume the remaining claims also had substantiation.
Thanks for the link to the Jewish Virtual Library Holocaust Wing. My specialty in Military History Studies was WWII Europe, but it is good to have that resource on the Jewish perspective.
ReplyDeleteI can see how difficult your struggle with Islam was. I can't imagine struggling with something for ten years before having resolution.
"I really do believe that Adolf Hitler was a clone of Mohammed."
The nature of human evil remains the same throughout generations. The actors may change, but the play remains the same. Hence there are extensive commonalities shared by Islam, Nazism, and Communism notwithstanding the local variations. This theme is also addressed further in The Book of Mormon.
A note to Shakila on the Holocaust:
ReplyDeleteAs Hugh Fitzgerald (former writer on Jihad Watch) has noted many times, there are two different Antisemitisms -- Nazi, and Islamic. Often modern Westerners, in their well-intentioned ignorance and anxious need to defend Muslims, will imply that Islamic antisemitism somehow was "influenced" by Hitler, and thus did not exist prior to the 1930s.
I'm glad you framed your presentation around Muhammad, which brings out the obvious pre-Hitlerian lineage of Islamic antisemitism.
Also important is the documentation we have of Muslims throughout the ages mistreating Jews in various ways based upon the Islamic blueprint for doing so, which includes a pathological hatred for Jews long before there even existed a German people per se.
A good source for this documentation is The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism, by Andrew Bostom -- a compendium of primary and secondary sources on the history of Islamic hatred for Jews as encoded in their culture. For an overview, see this:
Understanding the Islam in Islamic Antisemitism
The Hesperado
Shakila,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your honesty.
One thought: Despite the evident evils of Islam, many Muslims (especially women) are just victims of a lie that they have been fed all their lives. They deserve our compassion.
Praying for you
Wisdom Hunter,
ReplyDeleteAs long as compassion does not interfere with protecting an airport and all the men, women and children in it, I'm all for it.
Hitler criticized Christianity and praised Islam. He wished Islam would have conquered Europe centuries earlier so he would have inherited an Islamic country. He viewed Christianity as wimpy. Here's a quote from Hitler posted by a Muslim:
ReplyDelete"Only in the Roman Empire and in Spain under Arab domination has culture been a potent factor. Under the Arab, the standard attained was wholly admirable; to Spain flocked the greatest scientists, thinkers, astronomers, and mathematicians of the world, and side by side there flourished a spirit of sweet human tolerance and a sense of purist chivalry. Then with the advent of Christianity, came the barbarians. Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers—already you see the world had already fallen into the hands of the Jews, so gutless a thing Christianity!—then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so.
28 August 1942"
http://www.aussiemuslims.com/forums/showthread.php?29451-Hitler-quotes-regarding-Islam-Muslims
When I write an article I almost always have in mind the Koran-only Muslims.They won't believe the hadith and Sira/biography literature.
ReplyDeleteThat forced me to really analyse the Koran.In the article that is here I stated:
http://www.antisharia.com/2011/02/11/allah-as-the-litteral-creator-of-evil-christiansjews-and-evil-persons/
Here I don't say the whole content but the main ideas of the article
Suppose a religious book said:
“I,God will:
1.Create hatred and enmity
2.And it will be among Black people
3.And it will last till the End of Time“.
You would say it is intolerant,bad,racist,xenophobic.
And if it were Really the Word of God?
Then God would be responsible for:
The Rwanda Genocide
In 1994 in the course of 100 days 800,000 black people were killed by other black people in Rwanda because of hatred between themselves.
A Similar Case in the Koran
There is a curse on Christians in the Koran:
Chapter 5:14:
“And with those who say “We are Christians” We took compact; and they have forgotten a portion of that they were reminded of. So We(Note:Allah) have stirred up among them enmity and hatred, till the Day of Resurrection; and God will assuredly tell them of the things they wrought.”
“We(Note:Allah) have stirred up among them enmity and hatred, till the Day of Resurrection”
Reasoning logically it means Allah is the creator,originator of evil,hatred,enmity between differnt Cristians,for century after century.He is the reason and cause of it,being the ultimate responsible for:
St.Bartholomew’s Massacre in 1572
The 30 Year War in Germany (1618-1648)
The KKK
The Lord’s Resistance Army
A Similar Curse on the Jews
Chapter 5:64:
“They (Note:the Jews) have said, “God’s hand is fettered/chained.” Fettered are their hands, and they are cursed for what they have said. No, but His hands are outspread; He expends how He will. And what has been sent down to you from thy Lord will surely increase many of them in insolence and unbelief;
and We(Note:Allah) have cast between them enmity and hatred, till the Day of Resurrection. As often as they light a fire for war, God will extinguish it. They hasten about the earth, to do corruption there; and God loves not the workers of corruption.”
“God’s hand is fettered/chained.”
That is what the Jews of Arabia in Muhammad’s day had said.It means:“Allah,the God of Muhammad is powerless,impotent,can not do anything.”For that reason they were cursed in chapter 5:64.
So What?
Jews have not fought much between themselves but we have:
The Strange Case of Karl Marx (1818-1883)
He was a German Jew and atheist who was the founder of Communism.He was also a Judeophobe,his writings are unmistakable,he hated and had enmity toward the Jews.So a Jew who had hatred/enmity for fellow Jews created a movement that affected the entire world for the worse,for evil.
The Number of Deaths by Communism,the Ideology created by a Jew who Hated/had Enmity for the Jews
It numbers about 100 million in the XX century,the innocent killed by Stalin,Mao,Pol Pot,Castro,etc in peacetime,when their countries where not at war.
In a debate between Muslim Shabir Ally and rabbi Shmuley Boteach the Muslim said,in effect:
ReplyDeleteIf the palestinians are terrorists/suicide-bombers for killing civilians then Samson was a terrorist also,who killed civilians and suicided.
Here is the article on why his comment is wrong.
http://www.avraidire.com/2010/08/was-samson-a-terroristas-the-muslim-shabir-ally-says/
@Hesperado Ali Sina writes such things to ridicule muslims and to shame them so that they can start thinking and feeling like normal humans. Having read his articles for many years, I assure you that the only thing that he wants from muslims is for them to use their brain, realize the dangers of Islam, and leave this cult. But I think he underestimated the stubborn-ness of skoutis and other slaves of Allah.
ReplyDelete"Robert Spencer usually uses proxies for his most outlandish and disgusting claims and this par for the course."
ReplyDeleteExcellent point. jihad watch must really SUCK for spencer to create a fake MURTAD, LOL
What Unbiased Thinkers Say About Holy Prophet
"I become more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme for life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and his own mission. These and not the sword, carried everything before them and surmounted every trouble. The sayings of Muhammad are a treasure of wisdom not only for Muslims but for all mankind." -- Mahatma Gandhi
"Among leaders who have made the greatest impact through ages, I would consider Muhammad before Jesus Christ." -- [James Gavin, Speeches of a U.S. Army General]
"My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels". Michael H. Hart, The 100, American Astrophysicist
Liberated/Shakila,
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting to hear about how the history of the Holocaust was whitewashed in your education. I am glad that you pursued your own study of it to get the facts. I've also heard many reports, over the years, that Hitler is still quite popular and viewed favorably by many Muslims in the Middle East.
I have read the Sira and the hadiths regarding Muhammad's attacks on the Jews of Medina, and his aggressive surprise attack on the Jews of Khaybar. All the captive women were distributed to the Muslim men for their own use, either for sex or for selling for profit. This was yet one more precedent-setting example of Muhammad (plus the Quran's permissions) establishing for Muslims, for all time, the policy of raping non-Muslim women and girls as an integral part of the jihad and humiliation of the "kuffar". While one may question the authenticity of these pious Islamic stories, the reality is that Muslim jurists used these precedents to establish the use of rape as an element of terror/threat, jihad, and subjugation and genocide of the non-Muslims. What matters to non-Muslims is that this policy became enshrined in Islamic law proper and was an integral part of the legislation of jihad, and was carried out against non-Muslims for centuries.* Many Muslim men in the West and other non-Muslim countries are still influenced by this policy, whereby they believe it is okay to rape non-Muslim women who are not protected under dhimma. (That would include, for example, any women of a people who are at war with Muslims, or who don't allow the implementation of sharia, etc.). I have seen this rape-of-non-Muslim-women issue debated by apologists, but they are weak on this issue. Moreover, I have not yet seen any apologist cite any jurist claiming that Muslim men are not allowed to have sex with (i.e., rape) non-Muslim female captives and slaves ("right hand possessions"). To do so would be to contradict the Quran, Muhammad's example and rulings, the opinions of the classical scholars of Islam, Islamic law, and centuries of practice.
I look forward to your next article. In addition to the book recommended by Hesperado, I would also recommend anything by Bat Ye'or on this topic.
*This is documented according to original non-Muslim victim sources in Andrew Bostom's edited volume/compendium The Legacy of Jihad.
p.s. "I would also recommend anything by Bat Ye'or on this topic."-- this topic being Islamic anti-Semitism in relation to jihad and dhimmitude.
ReplyDeleteI would add that, through the institution of imperialistic aggressive Islamic jihad, Muslims historically have perpetrated many mass killings, including killing of millions upon millions of Hindus and Africans, and millions of South Asians and Europeans. Millions upon millions of non-Muslim women have been raped, and millions upon millions of people have been enslaved, and millions upon millions subjugated and exploited, all in accordance with jihad policy and Islamic law, motivated by the core fundamental Islamic goal of bringing the whole world, all of humankind, under Islamic law and to convert as many people as possible to Islam until the Last Day. In other words, while particular battles and movements may be limited in scope temporarily, the ultimate ambition of Islamic jihad is not limited by space or time; Muslims are ordered to "struggle" in the way of Allah, to the extent that they are capable, wherever they are, and with whomever they come into contact.
ReplyDeleteOf course, not all Muslims follow this. A minority of Muslim "activists" are pursuing this. But the majority of Muslims today agree with the general goals to establish sharia, establish a caliphate, and restrict freedom of expression to punish critics of Islam and Muhammad. Groups such as Al-Qaeda and Hizballah are still fairly popular among Sunnis and Shias respectively. Hence we see Muslims in recently-formed "democratic" situations voting sharia or "Islamist" parties into power (e.g., Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestinian territories, Lebanon (Hizballah), Egypt, Tunisia, Turkey, etc.).
skouti - "I become more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme for life" - gandi
ReplyDeleteChecking on the internet, these quote from Gandi appears to be only on the Islamic web sites. Either Gandi was clueless about Mo or he was astute about Muslims, he wanted to bring them in align with his policies. Take your pick. My guess is the latter.
Among leaders who have made the greatest impact through ages, I would consider Muhammad before Jesus Christ." -- James Gavin
Sure if you knew the objectives of the speech. His speech was 100% political to promote Islam in the US army. He was tasked to do that by his superiors. There are other Generals who won't buy that.
"skouti - "I become more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme for life" - gandi"
ReplyDeleteWithout the sword, slavery, and rape, Islam never would have expanded beyond being one of the many cults or heretical sects in Arabia circa the 7th century. Only when these Arab imperialists (proto-Muslims or Saracens) began conquering other peoples and forcing conversions and subjugation, and extracting the wealth out of the non-Muslims did Islam begin to pick up momentum.
Re Ghandi: Let's face it: Any detailed unbiased investigation into Ghandi's life and ideas shows that the guy was a complete nut-job who thought the Jews should have allowed themselves to be slaughtered by the Nazis. If Ghandi had his way, there might be no Jews remaining in the world today. Indeed, if the Islamophilic Ghandi had his way, Muslims might be ruling India today and the Muslims' extermination or subjugation of the Hindus might be complete.
Let's see - if not for the sword, where would Muhammad's armies and teachings have got? How many people would have converted in Byzantium, Persia and other places through the promise of 72 virgins and "boys of everlasting youth" in paradise? Not many, I'll venture to guess. But maybe Mo would still have been the dominant one in Mecca and Medina. And some small villages nearby...
ReplyDeleteSo why does Gandhi claim that it was NOT the sword that "carried everything before it" and spread Muhammad's teachings? Could it be something to do with Gandhi (unsuccessfuly) wanting to unify Indians, and avoid a civil war and split of India desired by many Muslims? Whatever the rationale, his words are surely the ultimate proof that saying nice things about Muhammad won't cut you any favours, if fanatic Muslims have something else on their mind... modern dhimmi leaders take note!
Now skouti, any examples of "horrible slaughters" in history, for which a justification was not provided? Or is that something not to be found via a Google search? :D
"Without the sword, slavery, and rape..."
ReplyDeleteI suppose I could add "deception," which is not limited to the doctrine of taqiyya as such but is integral to Islamic policy in relation to circumstances where Muslims are not yet fully in power with the upper hand over the non-Muslims. As the Quran says: 43:88-89 "(Allah has knowledge) of (Prophet Muhammad's) saying: "O my Lord! Verily, these are a people who believe not! So turn away from them (O Muhammad SAW), and say: Salam (peace)! But they will come to know."
The above is a Meccan verse, before Muhammad had thugs and an army. The following verse is Medinan, after Muhammad had thugs and an army and political power:
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."
That is, tell them "Peace!" now, fully with the concealed intention of punishing them, conquering them, later. Hence deception is built into the very essence of Islam.
Islam's policy toward the Jews is fighting and subjugation and exploitation (as per Quran 9:29), followed by extermination (as described in the famous rocks and trees hadith still glorified by Hamas et al.), followed by Allah's hell-fire annihilation of the Jews, along with all non-Muslims and failed Muslims, on the Last Day.
ReplyDeleteSo Allah/Muhammad in policy is just like Hitler: they wanted to persecute the Jews, expel them, then torture and exterminate them.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteskouti says Mohandas Gandhi was right when Gandhi said "I become more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam..."
ReplyDeleteBut Gandhi sometimes tried a little too hard to see good even in the worst-intentioned people and groups. For example he wrote letters to Adolf Hitler addressing Hitler as "Dear Friend," including this December 24, 1940 letter. Gandhi's statement about Islam is an example of trying a little too hard to see the good.
About the Islamic conquest of India, here is what Will Durant, in his eight volume Story of Civilization, says on page 459-462 of Volume 1:
"The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history...The first Moslem attack was a passing raid upon Multan, in the western Punjab (664 AD). Similar raids occurred at the convenience of the invaders during the next three centuries, with the result that the Moslems established themselves in the Indus Valley about the same time that their Arab co-religionists in the West were fighting the battle of Tours (732 AD) for the mastery of Europe...In the year 997 a Turkish chieftain...swept across the [Indian] frontier with a force inspired by a pious aspiration for booty. He met the unprepared Hindus at Bhimnagar, slaughtered them, pillaged their cities, destroyed their temples, and carried away the accumulated treasures of centuries...Each winter Mahmud descended into India, filled his treasure chest with spoils, and amused his men with full freedom to pillage and kill...he expressed his admiration for the architecture of the great shrine [at Mathura on the Jumna], judged that its duplication would cost one hundred million dinars and the labor of two hundred years, and then ordered it to be soaked with naphtha and burnt to the ground. Six years later he sacked another opulent city of northern India, Somnath, killed all its fifty thousand inhabitants, and dragged its wealth to Ghazni...The first of [the] bloody sultans [of the Sultanate of Delhi] was a normal specimen of his kind -- fanatical, ferocious, and merciless. His gifts, as the Mohammedan historian tells us, "were bestowed by hundreds of thousands, and his slaughters likewise were by hundreds of thousands." Sultan Muhammad bin Tughlak...killed so many Hindus that, in the words of a Moslem historian, "there was constantly in front of his royal pavilion and his Civil Court a mound of dead bodies and a heap of corpses, while the sweepers and executioners were wearied out by their work of dragging" the victims "and putting them to death in crowds."..His successor, Firoz Shah, invaded Bengal, offered a reward for every Hindu head, paid for 180,000 of them, raided Hindu villages for slaves...Sultan Ahmad Shah feasted for three days whenever the number of defenseless Hindus slain in his territories in one day reached twenty thousand...The usual policy of the Sultans was clearly sketched by Alau-d-din, who required his advisers to draw up "rules and regulations for grinding down the Hindus..." Half of the gross produce of the soil was collected by the [Islamic] government; native rulers had taken one-sixth. "No Hindu," says a Moslem historian, "could hold up his head, and in their houses no sign of gold or silver...or of any superfluity was to be seen...Blows, confinement in the stocks, imprisonment and chains, were all employed to enforce payment."
Greenforest,
ReplyDelete"...followed by Allah's hell-fire annihilation of the Jews, along with all non-Muslims and failed Muslims, on the Last Day."
Actually, I don't think Islamic eschatology entails annihilation of the various kafirs, since that term implies rendering completely non-existent -- but rather eternal torture in Hell, with very literal and horrific tortures described in detail (I recall something about the flesh being burned off, then Allah regrows the flesh so it can be burned off again, again and again, forever) mostly in the hadiths.
If Allah is really Satan, he was (and is) here playing a devilish trick here (pun intended) -- even if ultimately, of course, the joke is on him (and the minions of Mohammedans who follow him).
It was not the Jews alone who suffered after the advent of Muhammad but all mankind. Great civilisations were destroyed and subjugated and Muslims were forced or brainwashed into a morality that extols violence and hate.
ReplyDeleteskouti points to a book whose author gives an opinion of who are the 100 most influential figures in history. The author places Muhammad first. But the author also includes on the same top 100 list Hitler, Stalin, and Mao!
ReplyDeleteLike Hitler, both Stalin and Mao were responsible for the deaths of many millions of people. So being on that list of 100 doesn't automatically say anything good about Muhammad. And after all, even if you cut this historical tabulation of deaths due to Islam in half, still, the number of deaths jihad has caused since Muhammad died is 135 million, a number larger than can be attributed to Stalin, Hitler, or Mao.
Concerning Ghandi -- Traeh, you may recall in Jihad Watch comments going back a couple of years, there used to be a few non-Muslim Indians who knew a lot of their history, and I recall one of them going into detail about how Ghandi unconscionably appeased the Muslim Indians in order to fight the British. In this regard, Ghandi specifically and purposefully overlooked Muslim atrocities against Hindus occurring even in his lifetime. If this is accurate, I don't think this is merely a case of Ghandi having "bigger fish to fry" (the British); I think it's a case of Ghandi suffering from a kind of cultural PTSD, which most people who have had to suffer under Muslim rule develop. One of the chief symptoms includes that famous River that ain't only in Egypt.
ReplyDeleteFor Ghandi to make the British out to be the worse enemy of the Indian people -- preposterously worse than the Muslims -- simply recapitulates the common reflex and tendency of PC MC in general (and apparently modern post-Colonial India has rampant PC MC, just as the West does), to blame the West for everything and to assume nobody can be as bad as the Westerner. It is a supreme irony that this anti-Western attitude is most industriously cultivated -- throughout the school system, throughout Academe, throughout the news media, in the political arena, and throughout the high arts as well as pop culture -- in the West, by Westerners themselves!
I mean sure, the old bromide is true, that the stronger man is the one more capable of self-criticism; but the West is taking this truism ridiculously far, and the situation is becoming deadlier by the decade.
Egregiously off topic:
ReplyDeleteFor anyone curious about my profile pic, I wrote this brief explanation.
Hesperado,
ReplyDeleteI think that people like Gandhi, who feel a redemptive calling, often strive not to let the negative in things blind them to anything positive there might be in those things. Only through the good element in things is there any chance of redeeming them. And such redemptions do sometimes happen. But the occupational hazard of that vocation of redemption is a tendency at times to go overboard into a pollyanna mode. When that happens, one not only admirably forbids the negative from blinding one to the positive. One goes further and makes the mistake of allowing the positive to blind one to the negative. Perhaps that sometimes happened to Gandhi, in addition to the cultural PTSD you speak of and that homophone of the Brooklyn cabbie's pronunciation of "the Nile."
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDante: Muhammad in Hell
ReplyDeleteA cask by losing centre-piece or cant
Was never shattered so, as I saw one
Rent from the chin to where one breaketh wind.
Between his legs were hanging down his entrails;
His heart was visible, and the dismal sack
That maketh excrement of what is eaten.
While I was all absorbed in seeing him,
He looked at me, and opened with his hands
His bosom, saying: "See now how I rend me;
How mutilated, see, is Mahomet;
In front of me doth Ali weeping go,
Cleft in the face from forelock unto chin;
- From Canto 28 of Dante's Inferno
Traeh,
ReplyDelete"I think that people like Gandhi, who feel a redemptive calling, often strive not to let the negative in things blind them to anything positive there might be in those things."
Then why did he obsess about the negative in the British?
Not only did he flout your description with regard to the British (which I think is accurate, but only shows his inconsistency and incoherence), he countenanced the horrible evils of Islam -- for which he should earn eternal shame from all good and reasonable men.
Latest from Afganistan..
ReplyDeletehttp://in.news.yahoo.com/photos/afghanistan-s-child-bride-torture-1325743466-slideshow/wednesday-dec-28-2011-file-photo-15-old-photo-180416585.html
"Re Ghandi: Let's face it: Any detailed unbiased investigation into Ghandi's life and ideas shows that the guy was a complete nut-job "
ReplyDeleteCrack on greenforest......or are just like the rest of the islam hating "internet warriors".....good at running off your mouth but not much else.
Hilarious to see everyone's rwaction to Ghandi's admiration for Muhammed. Lets post some more
"he critics are blind. They cannot see that the only 'sword' Muhammad wielded was the sword of mercy, compassion, friendship and forgiveness - the sword that conquers enemies and purifies their hearts. His sword was sharper than the sword of steel. But the biased critics of Islam are prejudicial and partisan, who are narrow minded and whose eyes are covered by a veil of ignorance. They see fire instead of light, ugliness instead of beauty and evil instead of good. They distort and present every good quality as a great vice. It reflects their own depravity." -- Pandit Gyanandra Dev Sharma Shastri
Hi Shakila,
ReplyDeleteMaybe I missed it, but now that you've seen what Islam is not God's religion what do you now consider yourself to be?
I post this link from a Christian I believe is truly a servant of the One True God. It takes about a minute to upload the messages, but it's worth listening to.
Hell's Best Kept Secret/True and False Conversions.
Praying for all Muslims that they may come to the True Light.
Familiarize yourselves with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalen and his complicity in Hitler's Holocaust.
ReplyDeleteShakila:
ReplyDeleteVery passionate post.
How do you feel about Jews now? Have you met any or befriended any?
Hesperado,
ReplyDeleteRe the annihilation versus eternal torture/punishment point, let us remember that the Islamic texts do not propose a coherent set of propositions. They threaten eternal torture, but they also threaten the unbelievers with losing their souls, complete annihilation, etc.
"The critics are blind. They cannot see that the only 'sword' Muhammad wielded was the sword of mercy, compassion, friendship and forgiveness..."
ReplyDeleteLOL! Is that the Iraqi Information Minister talking, "re-incarnated" as a Hindu Pandit? Or maybe Colonel Ghadaffi?? In any case, let's talk to the Banu Qurayza about that mercy, compassion, friendship and forgiveness. Or to relatives of 9/11 victims. Or victims of disco bombings in Israel. Etc etc etc. Plenty know what "Islamic compassion" looks like.
skouti, go on being a HATER if you can't help yourself
ReplyDeleteenjoy :)
Winston Churchill on Islam
That religion, which above all others was founded and propagated by the sword -- the tenets and principles of which are instinct with incentives to slaughter and which in three continents has produced fighting breeds of men -- stimulates a wild and merciless fanaticism.
"The author places Muhammad first. But the author also includes on the same top 100 list Hitler, Stalin, and Mao!"
ReplyDeleteCould Mohammed have found himself among more appropriate company? All 4 leaders relied on a "cult of personality". And while Mohammed wanted to conquer the world for his "brother Muslims" (as Rageh Omaar once put it on Al Jazeera), Hitler wanted to build a thousand-year Reich. The main difference being, that instead of immediately exterminating his "conquered peoples" in the style of Hitler, Mohammed put them to "good use" - as labourers, sex-slaves or just dhimmis paying extra tax.
Slave of Allah, skouti etc
ReplyDeleteThis may be of some use to you.
A 'Perfect' Qur'an?
flarov222 wrote:
ReplyDelete"By the way dear liberated one, could you comment on the following quotes by Ali Sina? Im sure someone who can condemn the hate in the Koran can also recognize it elsewhere?"
Shouldn't this be the other way around? Shouldn't one be asking why Islamic apologists are eager to condemn the rhetorical excesses of an anti-Islam evangelist, but can't condemn the evil policies in the Quran, Hadith, Sira, and Islamic law? Why do they want us to focus on the one, but not the other?
Why are they so worked up about Ali Sina's rhetoric, yet they are not at all troubled by the Islamic doctrine, policy, and practice of hatred that has been programmed, by force, into hundreds of millions of children throughout the past 1400 years? Why are they worked up about a commentator on the internet who has never harmed anyone and who has worked to convert some Muslims out of Islam, but they are not disturbed by an ideology that has been used to motivate and justify the killing, raping, subjugating, and enslaving of millions upon millions of innocent people, for 1400 years? Indeed, not only are these Islam propagandists not disturbed by the evils of Islam and Muhammad, they are enthralled by Islam and either think the evils are good or that the few minor good elements somehow make up for all the great evils. In fact, the only superficial good-seeming aspects of Islam merely serve as a distraction which endangers the unsuspecting non-Muslims. As Muhammad/Allah said, "Say to them [non-Muslims] 'Peace!', but they will come to know," i.e., they will come to know when Muslims conquer them, humiliate them, force their ways upon them.
I can't defend Ali Sina's rhetorical choices in those quotes, but I will note a distinction: Whereas Ali Sina is using strong rhetoric to shock Muslims into doubting their faith and rejecting an evil ideology of hatred, the Islamic texts promote and indeed demand obedient service to the evil ideology which promotes murder, genocide, slavery, rape of women and girls, subjugation, inequality, exploitation, plunder, deception, and the death of free thought and free expression.
So there are differences between the two.
The trials the Jews periodically endured in the various Christian West kingdoms echoed the catastrophes that occurred during Crusades. In the First Crusade (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine and the Danube were utterly destroyed; see German Crusade, 1096. In the Second Crusade (1147) the Jews in France suffered especially. Philip Augustus treated them with exceptional severity. In his days the Third Crusade took place (1188); and the preparations for it proved to be momentous for the English Jews. After being the victim of increasing oppression that made living all but impossible, Jews were banished from England in 1290; and 365 years passed before they were allowed to settle again in the British Isles (see History of the Jews in England). The Jews were also subjected to attacks by the Shepherds' Crusades of 1251 and 1320.
ReplyDeleteAny born-again Christian will condemn such senseless killing of Jews as being ungodly, if not outright demonic. Are you saying the same of mohamad's slaughter of Jewish males and his rapes of their wifes/daughters?
DeleteSoA
ReplyDeleteThe Crusades were not ordered by God, but Muhammad's wars were ordered by Allah.
The situation only got worse for Jews as the 13th century progressed. In 1218, England became the first European nation to require Jews to wear a marking badge. Taxation grew increasingly intense. Between 1219 and 1272, 49 levies were imposed on Jews for a total of 200,000 marks, a vast sum of money. The first major step towards expulsion took place in 1275, with the Statute of Jewry. The statute outlawed all usury and gave Jews fifteen years to readjust. However, guilds as well as popular prejudice made Jewish movement into mercantile or agricultural pursuits almost impossible.
ReplyDeleteWhile in his duchy of Gascony in 1287, Edward ordered the local Jews expelled. All their property was seized by the crown and all outstanding debts payable to Jews were transferred to the King’s name. Whatever his personal feelings, by the time he returned to England in 1289 Edward was deeply in debt.[12] The next summer he summoned his knights to impose a steep tax. To make the tax more palatable, Edward in exchange essentially offered to expel all Jews. The heavy tax was passed, and three days later, on July 18, the Edict of Expulsion was issued. One official reason for the expulsion was that Jews had neglected to follow the Statute of Jewry. The edict of expulsion was widely popular and met with little resistance, and the expulsion was quickly carried out.
The Jewish population in England at the time was relatively small. While population estimates vary, probably less than 1% of England was Jewish; perhaps 3,000 people.[14][dubious – discuss] The expulsion process went fairly smoothly, although there were a few horrific stories. One story told of a captain taking a ship full of Jews to the Thames while the tide was going out and convincing them to go out for a walk with him. He then lost them and made it back to his ship before the tide came back in, leaving them all to drown.
Many Jews emigrated to countries such as Poland, which at that time protected them (see Statute of Kalisz).
"The trials the Jews periodically endured in the various Christian West kingdoms echoed the catastrophes that occurred during Crusades. In the First Crusade (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine and the Danube were utterly destroyed"
ReplyDeleteExcellent point. Can any of our Islam Haters tell ud how many jews were slaughtered in the above genocide ?.......
"At *Trier the bishop could not protect his Jews, as he himself had to go into hiding, and he consequently advised them to become Christians. The great majority refused, preferring suicide. At *Regensburg, all the Jews were dragged to the Danube where they were flung into the water and forced to accept baptism. At *Metz, *Prague, and throughout *Bohemia, one massacre followed another. These came to an end when Emicho's crusaders were decisively halted and crushed by the Hungarians, who, incensed by their excesses when they poured through the country, had risen against them. Seeing in this the hand of God, the Jews promptly set about reconstructing their ruined communities. There had been more than 5,000 victims."
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0005_0_04737.html
p.s. six million jews were wiped out by white people.......not muslims
p.s. six million jews were wiped out by white people.......not muslims
Deletemohamad started the practice...
It's quite pathetic that musloids use the fact that mo the putrid was listed as one of the most important men in history by an obscure writer who also listed Hitler, Stalin and Mao.
ReplyDeleteWhat is even more pathetic is when they cite quotes made from whole cloth very much the same way they lie about Neil Armstrong and Jacques Costeau being converts to their criminal cult.
There is no "Speeches by a U.S. Army General" in existence anywhere other than musloid sites. There is no reference to General Gavin mentioning mo the putrid on any military history sites, any government sites or even any academic citations.
The only places "Speeches by a U.S. Army General" is found are musloid sites being quoted exactly as skumbucketi above quoted.
It is yet again another example of musloid tall tales attempting to cover up the stench of their criminal cult.
Slave of Allah,
ReplyDeleteI don't think anyone is disputing that Jews were persecuted historically by the Christians and by others before them.
Yet your spamming of irrelevant material here does raise a question: If you think all that is bad, then surely you think Islam's and Muhammad's policies toward the Jews, which were followed historically by Muslims, are also bad if not quite a bit worse.
It is also important to remember the present and why we are even having this discussion in the first place. The only reason so many people are "interested" in Islam today is because of the very bad behaviour of so many Muslims, including many Muslims' murderous and hateful policies and actions against the Jews. It is primarily the millions upon millions of Muslims today--not just the relatively small numbers of Neo-Nazis--who are telling us they want to exterminate the Jews. (That is, those Muslims who do not deny the Holocaust outright. Then again, there are those Muslims also who deny the Holocaust but threaten the Jews today with a Holocaust).
The vast majority of us are not historians or scholars of religion and politics. The main reason why ordinary laypeople are becoming so concerned about Islam (and are beginning to explore its texts, history, and policies) is because Muslims' adherence to Islam is causing great evils, great problems, right now today and it threatens much worse in the future.
While you may accept Islam as a personal faith, surely you reject sharia and militant jihad, don't you, Slave of Allah?
Here is an more coherent analysis when compared to the rant of the fake blogger:
ReplyDelete"Bottom line: the status of a dhimmi in a Muslim-run state was much better compared to that of a Jew living in Christian-run Europe.
There is no denying that the Jewish tribe of Bani Quraiza was punished by the Prophet of Islam. But can Muhammad (S) be blamed for their treason? They were punished not for rejecting Muhammad (S) as the last Prophet (nabi) of Allah, but for their confessed crime against the nascent Islamic state, and judged by their own laws, by their appointed judge. My question is: was Musa [Moses] (AS) more merciful to the Jews when he and his faithful disciples killed 3000 misguided Children of Israel (Exodus 32:28)? [See Md. Saidul Islam’s “Were the Jews maltreated by Prophet Muhammad, or vice-versa?” for a good analysis.]
A closer scrutiny will show that the verses in the Qur’an that castigated Jews of Madinah for their nefarious activities were comparatively milder than those found in the Bible (see, e.g., the Books of Isaiah, Micah, Hosea and Ezekiel, and especially those of Jesus in the so-called NT)."
http://www.aljazeerah.info/Opinion%20editorials/2006%20Opinion%20Editorials/May/27%20o/Treatment%20of%20Jews%20in%20Islam%20By%20Habib%20Siddiqui.htm
""At *Trier the bishop could not protect his Jews, as he himself had to go into hiding" - You mean the Christians' persecution was so bad, that they were persecuting their own bishop? What could have caused the persecuiton in that case? The Christian faith, telling the Christians to revere their bishop, or something else? Like money, power, or a pure will for revenge and violence?
ReplyDeleteAnyhow - I'm not sure it would be possible to find many people trying to justify such massacres. Can you find anyone like that, skouti? If not, then thanks for providing yet another example of why the massacre of the Banu Qurayza is different - there are many willing to justify it... even on this post!
skouti, being a RACIST and a HATER, thinks skin color very important. But he doesn't want you to know that his Jew-killer hero Muhammad was white.
ReplyDeleteCanonical hadiths:
whiteness of Muhammad's leg
Sahih al-Bukhari 4.56.767
whiteness of Muhammad's forearm
Sunan Abu Dawud 20.3200
whiteness of Muhammad's armpit
Sahih al-Bukhari 8.78.631
whiteness of Muhammad's stomach
Sahih al-Bukhari 9.90.342
whiteness of Muhammad's cheek
Sahih Muslim 4.1208
whiteness of Muhammad's face
Sahih Muslim
whiteness of Muhammad's general appearance
Sahih al-Bukhari 1.3.63
Sahih al-Bukhari 2.17.122
First of all I reject any of the absurd revisionist propaganda that the Jews prior to the 20th century had it better under Islam than under other civilizations.
ReplyDelete(The exception here is Nazi Germany, of course. But the problem with this comparison is that Muslims have not had in modern times the military power to carry out mass exterminations to the extent that Hitler did, though see the Turkish massacres of the Armenians. Were Muslim jihadists to have the fervor of Muhammad and his companions, plus access to modern weaponry and the mechanisms of the modern state, plus access to huge populations of millions of victims, we know what they would probably do. Hizballah and Hamas would, according to their own publicly expressed statements, exterminate the Jews; or at best subjugate them under the brutally restrictive dhimma, a state of totalitarian oppression, after subduing them through slaughter and mayhem in accordance with the Quran and Muhammad's example.).
Second, more to the point, ask Jews today outside of Israel where they would like to live now and for the foreseeable future; in free Christian-majority countries (or indeed any free non-Muslim majority countries), or Muslim-majority countries?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOver 98% of Jews currently live in the non-Muslim world, less than half in Israel. A tiny percentage live in the Muslim world.
ReplyDeleteThat same preference was true already more than a century ago.
Christians and Muslims have in the past both treated Jews like dirt. That treatment is in accord with the Qur'an and Muhammad's teachings of dhimmitude. Such treatment is not in accord with the teachings of JC. That is part of why Christians have learned to treat their Jewish brothers far better than in medieval times, while Muslims now treat Jews even worse, as shown by the fact that Jews have for well over a century now been voting with their feet to leave the Muslim world.
FREE PALESTINE! SAY NO TO ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS!
ReplyDeleteAmeeeeen!!! get out of Palestine muslims! allah gave Palestine to the Jews:
Deletesurah 10:93 And certainly We lodged the children of Israel in a goodly abode and We provided them with good things; but they did not disagree until the knowledge had come to them; surely your Lord will judge between them on the resurrection day concerning that in which they disagreed.
surah 17:104 And We said to the Israelites after him: Dwell in the land: and when the promise of the next life shall come to pass, we will bring you both together in judgment.
Slave of Allah,
ReplyDeleteI asked you this: While you may accept Islam as a personal faith, surely you reject sharia and militant jihad, don't you?
Screw fakestine and the fakestinians. They are nothing but arab musloid squatters!
ReplyDeleteOn page 369 (554 in the Arabic) of the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad, Muhammad says "kill any Jew who falls into your power":
ReplyDeleteIt's a "charming" story of two brothers, Muhayyissa and Huwayyisa: (To avoid confusing the two brothers, keep in mind that the brother whose name begins with M is the Murderer in the story.)
"The apostle [Muhammad] said, ‘Kill any Jew that falls into your power.’ Thereupon Muhayyisa bin 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 [the Jewish merchant] Huwayyisa began to beat [his brother Muhayyisa], 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.'...[Huwayyisa] replied, 'By God, if Muhammad had ordered you to kill me would you have killed me?' [Muhayyisa] said, 'Yes, by God, had he ordered me to cut off your head I would have done so.' [Huwayyisa] exclaimed, "By God, a religion which can bring you to this is marvellous!' and [Huwayyisa] became a Muslim."
Yes but the real question is do you accept the imperialist aspirations of the anglo-saxans?
ReplyDelete...indeed Traeh, that testimonial anecdote has always struck me as bizarre, capturing the strange combination of terror and absurdity that is the essence of Islam. The testimonial anecdote is almost in the form of that employed in advertisements for some new product: Mike extols the virtues of some new product, but Harry is skeptical and resists. Then Mike does or says something to show how wonderful this product is, and suddenly Harry is persuaded and, by modeling this, supposedly the viewer or reader is likewise supposed to be convinced due to the character in the anecdote being convinced. A classic advertising technique.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet here we have not an advertisement for a new brand of toothpaste, or some new gizmo, but rather an ad for a sword-wielding, axe-murdering psychotic cult wherein people are to be killed for the flimsiest of reasons in order to satisfy the demands of the imagined cult leader.
BTW, this is another one of many examples from the Sira which makes me suspect it is (to at least some significant extent) a pious fraud. It is simply not believable that Huwayyisa genuinely went from objecting to Muhayyisa's murderous outburst against another person to gladly celebrating and thinking "marvelous" the prospect of Muhayyisa murdering him too.
One possibility that might rescue this story's credibility is that Huwayyisa wasn't sincerely approving of Muhayyisa's newfound cult and murderous intent; rather he was just feigning approval and embracing Islam to avoid have his head chopped off by his newly psychoticized brother.
Slave of Allah,
ReplyDeleteYou counter-ask: "Yes but the real question is do you accept the imperialist aspirations of the anglo-saxans?"
I will happily answer this question when you answer mine.
But in the spirit of good will I'll give you a hint in lieu of a more complete response: No I don't support anyone's aspirations to abolish Islam (or Christianity, Judaism, etc.) as merely a personal faith.
Useful analysis, Greenforest.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete(continuing reply to Slave of Allah)
ReplyDelete...i.e., I would oppose Islam as a mere personal faith but not beyond persuasion and debate. It is sharia and jihad that I am concerned about. As for Islam as a personal faith, because I don't believe in it, I would certainly argue against it if the topic arose. But to be frank, Islam and discussion of religion is sufficiently uninteresting to me that I would probably not waste time on it. As I said in an earlier comment, the only reason I'm "interested" in Islam today is because of the problems caused due to Muslims' maintaining and imposing sharia and waging jihad to impose sharia.
Muhammad says the earth belongs to Muhammad and Allah, warns the Jews to accept Islam if they wish to be safe, and says he wants to deport them:
ReplyDeleteIn Sahih Muslim, a canonical hadith collection:
Book 019, Number 4363:
"It has been narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira who said: We were (sitting) in the mosque when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) 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 [Muhammad] (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 [father of Qasim], you have communicated (God's Message to us). The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) 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 (may peace be upon him) said: I want this... - He said to them (the same words) the third time (and on getting the same reply) he [Muhammad] 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).
Here's an article that adds credence to the belief that in Hitler's adulthood, it was known that he despised Catholics. The article is not about Hitler and Catholicism per se, but note the final comment:
ReplyDelete"Being rescued by a boy who went on to represent a religion he despised would not have sat well with the myth he had built around himself of being called by destiny to save Germany."
That religion is of course, Catholicism.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082640/How-year-old-Adolf-Hitler-saved-certain-death--drowning-icy-river-rescued.html?ITO=1490
Greenforest,
ReplyDelete"this is another one of many examples from the Sira which makes me suspect it is (to at least some significant extent) a pious fraud."
Religious texts often have what seem to be "instructional" additions or tagged-on morals for endings. This story of Muhayyissa and Huwayyisa could have had origins in a real event and real people, but along the way have acquired "helpful" additions in its traduction.
On the other hand, Arabia in that time wasn't the healthiest culture even among many of the non-Muslims, and it's not outlandish to consider that quite a few Arabs were impressed with the thuggish fanaticism of Islam, particularly as it proved effective over time.
"First of all I reject any of the absurd revisionist propaganda that the Jews prior to the 20th century had it better under Islam than under other civilizations."
ReplyDeleteBecause it doesn't quite tally with the bullshit you have been swallowing from spencer.....you should have stopped and asked why
fact remains that more jews were killed in europe than those killed under muslim rule
" FREE PALESTINE! SAY NO TO ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS!"
Well said SoA!!!!
Can't wait for the next tripe posted by the fake MURTAD. apparently she said "its all from her heart".....well quite a lot from your arse and very little from your brain sweetheart :)
" FREE PALESTINE! SAY NO TO ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS!"
DeleteWell said SoA!!!!
So get your rabid co-religionists outta Palestine! allah gave Palestine to the Jews:
surah 10:93 And certainly We lodged the children of Israel in a goodly abode and We provided them with good things; but they did not disagree until the knowledge had come to them; surely your Lord will judge between them on the resurrection day concerning that in which they disagreed.
surah 17:104 And We said to the Israelites after him: Dwell in the land: and when the promise of the next life shall come to pass, we will bring you both together in judgment.
Muhammad says that one day the very trees and stones will help Muslims to kill Jews.
ReplyDeleteHe says it both in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, Islam's two most canonical hadith collections:
Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 56, Number 791:
Narrated Abdullah bin Umar:
"I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'The Jews will fight with you, and you will be given victory over them so that a stone will say, "O Muslim! There is a Jew behind me; kill him!" ' "
Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 176:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin Umar:
"Allah's Apostle [Muhammad] said, 'You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, "O Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him." ' "
Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
"Allah's Apostle [Muhammad] 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." ' "
Sahih Muslim Book 041, Number 6985:
"Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger [Muhammad] (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews."
Oh look who's talking! :D
ReplyDelete"well quite a lot from your arse and very little from your brain sweetheart"
How does he know?? Well, don't be surprised that mohamedans know more about arses than brains! Sahih muslim 2:458 says:
"Abu Huraira reported Allah's Apostle as saying: When anyone wipes himself with pebbles (after answering the call of nature) he must make use of an odd number [of pebbles]..."
And that's from someone whom quran 33:21 says is an excellent pattern of behavior for all humans!! :D
Alright, I'm going to make an exception to my own rule and respond to skouti:
ReplyDeleteHe quotes me: "First of all I reject any of the absurd revisionist propaganda that the Jews prior to the 20th century had it better under Islam than under other civilizations."
Then skouti says: "Because it doesn't quite tally with the bullshit you have been swallowing from spencer"
In fact I haven't read anything from Spencer on the topic of how many Jews have been killed under (or due to) Islam prior to the 20th century.
".....you should have stopped and asked why
fact remains that more jews were killed in europe than those killed under muslim rule"
You should have stopped and read my comment, where I pointed out why, in the 20th century, Nazis killed more Jews than did Muslims.
I'll add to that: Many Muslims certainly tried to kill more than 6 million Jews in the 20th century. They failed, partly because Israel has been fairly successful in defending itself, and because there is a large population of Jews in North America who are relatively safe due to the relatively small Muslim populations there.
Still, in the 21st century, it is Muslims worldwide who are responsible for most of the killing and persecution of the Jews.
Tears of Jihad in Africa, Europe, and Asia: Tabulation of 270 million deaths in 1400 years
ReplyDeletehttp://www.loonwatch.com/2011/12/third-reich-christendom-church-antisemitism-and-dejudaizing-jesus/
ReplyDeleteThis will educate you, blogger/robert.
Maybe you should read this book too:
[1] Adolph Hitler: The Definitive Biography, John Toland.
or a book called
the aryan jesus
The amount of crap that you post blogger is phenomenal.
"Abu Huraira reported Allah's Apostle as saying: When anyone wipes himself with pebbles (after answering the call of nature) he must make use of an odd number [of pebbles]..."
ReplyDeleteLOL!!! Seems like devout Muslims have a rule for everything. Islamic robots walking around on earth with no free will of their own.
One wonders why Allah gave them a brain!
And kebab fans take note - just before the Muslim has served you your nice, tasty lamb shoarma with his bare hands, when he had to answer the "call of nature", how many pebbles did he use to wipe himself with? Probably an odd number!
ReplyDelete"I'll add to that: Many Muslims certainly tried to kill more than 6 million Jews in the 20th century"
ReplyDeleteTried but only the white europeans managed to pull that trick off........again six million jews were killed by white (christian) people.........NOT muslims.....then these loons have the gall to peddle tripe this latest blog......talk about revisionism :)
http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/12/third-reich-christendom-church-antisemitism-and-dejudaizing-jesus/
This will educate you, blogger/robert.
Great link Anj.
"Hitler’s concept of concentration camps as well as the practicality of genocide owed much, so he claimed, to his studies in English and United States history. He admired the camps for Boer prisoners in South Africa and for Native Americans in the wild west; to his inner circle he often praised the efficiency of America’s extermination – by starvation and uneven combat – of the “red savages” who could not be tamed by captivity.[1]"
here is a question for skouti?
ReplyDeletewhich country in europe had more jews in it after the holocaust than before the holocaust???? Where did the european jews flee to????
oh thats right MUSLIM ALBANIA.
where the leader of the republic sent a message out to the people that the jews were to be protected.
What did the catholic church do in the mean time???????? oh thats right, nothing.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/10/muslims-saved-jews-out-of-religious-obligation-during-world-war-ii/
What did the grad mosque in paris have in its cellars during nazi occupation.
oh thats right it was full of jews seeking shelter.
Where was the western church??????
lets not even begin to talk about the spanish(christian) inquisition of jews.
Blogger pull your head out of sinas arse and get some air. It will do your brain good.
lets not even begin to talk about the spanish(christian) inquisition of jews.
DeleteAnd Christians all over the world condemn these murders as being ungodly, demonic even. So are you willing to do the same of mohamad's murder of Jewish males and his rapes of their wives/daughters?
"which country in europe had more jews in it after the holocaust than before the holocaust???? Where did the european jews flee to????
ReplyDeleteoh thats right MUSLIM ALBANIA.
where the leader of the republic sent a message out to the people that the jews were to be protected."
WHO KNEW!!!! :)
It is obvious that the leader of Albania disobeyed the quran:
Deletesura 9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."
Hehehe, our resident mohamedans are finally starting to agree with Shakila. They say:
ReplyDelete"again six million jews were killed by white (christian) people."
"lets not even begin to talk about the spanish(christian) inquisition of jews."
Which is exactly what Shakila said! She said mohamad was the first to instigate a massive slaughter of jews, and then many years later, hitler & co did the same in Europe. And [my guess is that] these murderers were just following quran 33:21 which says that allah gave us mohamad as the perfect example to follow! Again here, Shakila already understood that when she said hitler was merely following suit.
Isn't Shakila amazing?! She managed to get her fiercest critic to admit she is right! See, told you she was one heckuva smart woman!!
"Isn't Shakila amazing?!"
ReplyDeleteEasy on the bum lickin there dude :)
Since the Islam haters believe that Muhammed didn't exist then thee was no massive slaughter of the jews, LOL
Whoosh.....that's irony flying over the head of "trying follow jesus"
skouti, stay classy as a HATER
ReplyDeleteEnjoy!
BTW skouti, bum licking?!
ReplyDeleteErmmm... let me guess, Oh why yes, it's Friday!!! You've been at the mosque licking the bum in front of you while anj was doing the same to you behind you!!! Come on, admit it, else how would you know??
HAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA...
Whoosh.....that's sarcasm flying over the bum of skouti
Oh look what I found in the hadith Sahih Muslim:
ReplyDeleteThe Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and his Household and grant them peace) has said, "If any of you feels something in his stomach such that it is unclear to him, whether something has come out or not, then he should certainly not leave the mosque, unless he hears a sound or smells an odour."
Hey skouti, is that why you guys use your tongue in each other's bum? To prevent your farts from coming out thereby invalidating your prayer??
Whoosh.....that's my boot flying into the bum of skouti
MUHAMMAD, YOU WITTY DEVIL YOU
ReplyDeleteIn core Islamic texts, Muhammad says the bell is satanic
From Sahih Muslim, canonical hadith collection
Book 024, Number 5279:
"Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The bell is the musical instrument of the Satan."
BUT WAIT A SECOND...
In core Islamic texts, Muhammad compares his Koranic inspirations to the ringing of a...bell
In Sahih al-Bukhari, canonical hadith collection:
Volume 1, Book 1, Number 2:
"Narrated Aisha: (the mother of the faithful believers) Al-Harith bin Hisham asked Allah's Apostle 'O Allah's Apostle! How is the Divine Inspiration revealed to you?' Allah's Apostle replied, 'Sometimes it is (revealed) like the ringing of a bell, this form of Inspiration is the hardest of all and then this state passes off after I have grasped what is inspired. Sometimes the Angel comes in the form of a man and talks to me and I grasp whatever he says.' Aisha added: 'Verily I saw the Prophet being inspired Divinely on a very cold day and noticed the Sweat dropping from his forehead (as the Inspiration was over).' "
" FREE PALESTINE! SAY NO TO ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS!"
ReplyDeleteFree from whom? "ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS?!" Tell me more.
"Peace be upon him" is rather like a totalitarian billboard bolted on every devout Muslim's tongue
ReplyDeleteIn dictatorships, there are often huge billboards everywhere so you can't escape them, showing the dictator in a phony heroic pose. "PBUH" (peace be upon him) said or written after every mention of Muhammad, is similar to those billboards of dictators, except that Islam has bolted the idealizing billboard of Muhammad so to speak onto Muslims' tongues, so that every time they mention him, they must mechanically idealize him by saying PBUH. But it goes deeper than their tongues, into their subconscious minds. Consequently they have difficulty seeing that every time they say PBUH it reveals a hostile force outside them has breached the boundaries of their inner selves, and begun to paralyze and feed off of their most individual being, in order to incorporate them into a totalitarian cult collective.
Islam and Dictatorship
ReplyDeleteCheck out these pie charts from the international human rights organization Freedom House. Scroll down to the regional pie charts. The pie chart for the Middle East/North Africa -- the core Islamic region -- shows the most unfree area in the world. However, one country included in the Middle East/North Africa pie chart is listed as "free." Can you guess which one that is? (Hint: It's not Islamic.)
Note the weakness and irrelevance of most of these comments from our apparently-Muslim commenters.
ReplyDeleteLiberated/Shakila has written an article, and has quoted Sina at length discussing the Islamic texts, showing what Muhammad did to his Jewish neighbours. Muhammad had his followers expel them, slaughter them, enslave them, subjugate them, torture them, and rape them. Our apparently-Muslim commenters don't dispute any of these aspects which are considered genuine facts in pious Islamic history; they believe Muhammad existed and that he did these things.
...and the response of these apparently-Muslim commenters?
1. "White people!"
2. "Christians!"
3. "Europeans!"
4. "The Native Americans!"
5. "Palestine!"
6. "Spencer!"
...etc., then go on to cite bogus juvenile sites like Loonwatch.
At least skouti admits this: That many Muslims during the 20th century tried to kill more than 6 million Jews. And he does not contest that in the 21st century Muslims are persecuting and killing more Jews than anyone else.
"The short-lived monarchy (1914–1925) was succeeded by an even shorter-lived first Albanian Republic (1925–1928), to be replaced by another monarchy (1928–1939), which was annexed by Fascist Italy and then by Nazi Germany during World War II. After the collapse of the Axis powers, Albania became a communist state, the People's Socialist Republic of Albania, which was dominated by Enver Hoxha (d. 1985)."
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albania#History
So - a fascist-run Albania takes in Jews (in keeping with Fascist Italy's policy of not liquidating them), then after the war, a Communist state is formed... whereabouts is the Muslim influence here???
And since we're on the subject of the Second World War, anything to say from skouti or anj about the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem?? You know, the spiritual leader of the third most-important Muslim city, who visited Auschwitz and was so impressed with the Holocaust that he planned to replicate it in Palestine, and lobbied Hitler to stop Jewish children being released to the Red Cross? The one so popular with his people, that after the war no Arab regime would dare extradite to the British? But then I guess he's not as "Muslim" as the secular, Europeanised Albanians :)
Aren't they same people claiming Muslim Albanians took a largest number of Jews in after WW-II. That was the first I ever heard of that.
ReplyDeleteFacts - There are only 175 Jews living in Albania.
Albanian Demographic picture looks more like this -
"The CIA World Factbook gives a distribution of 70% Muslims, 20% Eastern Orthodox, and 10% Roman Catholics. Other researches gives the Muslim population at lower levels at 38.8%, Christians at 35.4% (Roman Catholics 16.8% Orthodox 16.1% Protestant 0.6% Indeptndent 0.6%) Nonreligious 16.6% Atheist 9.0% Bahai' 0.2%"
At least greenforest admits that Muhammed existed. To state otherwise will be an almighty kick in the nuts of the Islam HATERS and even better make jihad bob spencer's fake blog irrelevant, ROFLMAO :)
ReplyDeleteThey can't even refute this
"With rising anti-Muslim sentiment across the country, an untold story is raising greater awareness about the Muslim faith and the teachings of the Quran. That awareness comes from an unlikely source: a small Jewish congregation in Creve Coeur.
Temple Emanuel is premiering a groundbreaking exhibit of photos that reveals Albanian Muslims who saved 2,000 Jews during World War II.
It’s a story you’ve likely never heard. It is a story told through the faces of Albanian Muslims who risked their own lives to live by a code of faith and honor called Besa."
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/10/muslims-saved-jews-out-of-religious-obligation-during-world-war-ii/
It’s a story you’ve likely never heard. It is a story told through the faces of Albanian Muslims who risked their own lives to live by a code of faith and honor called Besa."
DeleteGlad to see you admit that they followed the Besa over the quran, which says this:
sura 9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."
If I was skouti and his raving buddy, I will check the facts before posting here on this blog, because you guys gonna get busted for and BS postings.
ReplyDeleteIRONY ANYONE!!!
ReplyDeleteskouti - loonwatch is for the loons. You are not seriously thiningk that web site is to be credible do you? You got to be out of your tiny mind.
ReplyDeleteRefute the facts that I posted. If any Albania Muslims is telling you differnt - that doesn't stack up with the facts.
Albania was and still is to a large extent a very backward country. More than 80% of the country doesn't even have a clean drinking water today. After WW II, Albanians had the largest number of illiterates in the whole of Europe - check the historical background about that country. There is absolutely no way they were able to know how many Jews were helped by them.
When you read history books by Muslims, the figures are exaggerated or minimised purely for political reasons. They are never ever presented accurately - for example loonwatch disagrees with the actual figures used by the Allies.
For you and your raving buddy skouti -
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Albania#World_War_II
"Albania had about 200 Jews at the beginning of the war. It subsequently became a safe haven for several hundreds of Jewish refugees from other countries. At the Wannsee Conference in 1942, Adolf Eichmann, planner of the mass murder of Jews across Europe, estimated the number of Jews in Albania that were to be killed at 200. Nevertheless, Jews in Albania remained at first unmolested both under Italian occupation and in the first months after the Italian collapse of September 1943. However, in April 1944, under German pressure, some 400 German and Austrian Jews who had taken refuge in Tirana and Durrës were first interned in Pristina (Kosovo) and then deported to Bergen-Belsen. Still, at the end of the war, Albania had 2,000 Jews after the end of the WWII and it was one of the few countries in Europe to do so"
There were 2000 Jews left after WW II in Albania.
Skouti - go on and tell us in which way the Muslims helped Jews in Albania.
ReplyDeleteskouti - "Temple Emanuel is premiering a groundbreaking exhibit of photos that reveals Albanian Muslims who saved 2,000 Jews during World War II."
ReplyDeleteCan you tell us in which way the Muslims saved the Jews during the WW II?
Muslims made no decisions about the Jews. The Europeans, Russians and the Americans told the Albanians what to do.
This photographer called "Norman Gershman" - a Jew - didn't check the facts, and he talked to the Albanian Muslims who said they saved 2000 Jews. So that goes on the loonwatch, a bunch of Muslim loons reading it start calling them facts - BECAUSE IT PROMOTES ISLAM, NO OTHER REASON. In fact its the same people who don't see the facts when they bite them on the front of their noses - BECAUSE THE FACTS GOING TO DESTROY ISLAM.
ReplyDeleteNorman Gersham, a late comer to photography, is a loser who never checks facts. He is interested in publicity and exhibitions of his photos.
Dar-schan
ReplyDeletecopy and paste vermin.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3354014,00.html
Read for youself how the jews honoured the albanian muslims.
after this bitch slap, do me favour and let the big boys play.
Dar-schan
ReplyDeletehappy now fool?
are you scared you and your other bigoted friends will have your arse handed to you at loonwatch?
Is that why spencer runs away?
I promise we will play nice.
Dar-schan
ReplyDeletesilence really is golden.............?
MUSLIMS saved the jews in albania:
This fact has been noted by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and by Yad Vashem in Israel, where Albanian Muslims have been honored as “righteous Gentiles.”
now who needs the history lesson and who needs to check their facts?
As jon stewart says "bboooooooooommmmmm"
silence really is golden.............?
DeleteLook in the mirror anj, why are you so silent about my questions on islam??
greenforest
ReplyDeletestop talking rubbish sunshine!
http://www.usislam.org/islamicyouth/Muhammad/safiyya_bint_huyayy.htm
period.
end of your silly discussion.
anything else smart arse?
anj,
ReplyDeleteRelax, take some deep breaths, then go back and read the article by Shakila posted above with Sina's assessment. It addresses the issues raised in the hagiographic source you cite.
The point that matters: Islamic policy based on Muhammad's orders and thus the permitted practices of his companions, Muhammad's example conduct, the Quran's rulings, major Islamic scholars, Islamic law, etc., all agree: Muslim jihadists are permitted to have sex with (i.e., rape) the non-Muslim female captives once their iddah period has been observed.
There may well be modern Western Muslims who disagree with this policy and want to reform it. In fact I have read a few of them discuss this. Good for them. But let's not deny the policy is there and needs to be rejected.
Shame on you, and shame on Loonwatch, for failing to acknowledge and address this issue.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnj - as usual you leave the facts out : "Everyone in the village knew they were Jews, but no one betrayed them," Kohen recalled Wednesday as the Anti-Defamation League praised Albania as the only occupied country where no Jews died at the hands of the Nazis, thanks to the country's Christians and Muslims"
ReplyDeleteFurther in the article from yahoo site that you presented -
"The league posthumously honored a Muslim Albanian man and his son for protecting six Jewish families"
aint the Muslims always exaggerate their achievements?
Conclusion I draw from that article - the Albanian villagers saved the Jews. It happened some of them were Muslim - they joined the others against the Nazies what everyone thought what was happening to the Jews was unjust.
The Albanian Muslims didn't save the Jews because they thought they were Muslims - more than 90% of the Albans think of themselves as Albanians - their religion is secondary to them.
Now lets get back to the reality - what about the facts the Muslims been butchering unprovoked for over thousand years, Christians, Budhists, Hindus, atheists, Armenians, bahaies, Ahamdedians ... I can't think there is much more left, do you?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnj - the above response was for you ass clown. Now beat it.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteanj - there are thousands of X-Muslims they never want to do anything with Islam again. They all say it is a set of evil dictates.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't the folks who leave Christianity or any other religion e.g. Hinduism feel vigerously repulsive about their X-religion as the Muslims about Islam?
Can't you conclude from the evidance something like - there got be rot in Islam, and it stinks?
skouti said:
ReplyDelete"At least greenforest admits that Muhammed existed."
From the very day this blog started, most of us here were on board that muhammed was a mass-murderer, a thief and a pedophile rapist.
It's great to see skouti to join our ranks about the existence of muhammed!
anj said:
ReplyDelete"anything else smart arse?"
Another muslim obsessed with backsides :D
But can you blame the poor mohamedan, every Friday, that's all he sees for an hour or so at the mosque.
islamic joke of the week:
ReplyDeleteQ: why did the cork fly across the mosque?
A: because someone farted.
:D
skouti says: "IRONY ANYONE!!!"
ReplyDeleteHey skouti and anj, I've been so very impressed by your wisdom and purity that I am just so ready to become a muslim! One little problem though, as you know I've been trying to follow Christ and read the Bible. In the quran, surah 7:157 says those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah ...
However, I couldn't find mohamad's name in the Torah. Could you tell me which book and verse of the Torah has his name? That would really help me a lot. I am just so willing to keel over and recite the shahada right now!
skouti says: "At least greenforest admits that Muhammed existed."
ReplyDeleteAh, no, that's not what I said or implied. My position is that the historical veracity of Muhammad is in some doubt, and indeed that there is no independent direct evidence for it, and that there are certainly fictionalized elements in the Sira. The practical point though is that (most) Muslims believe Muhammad was real, (most) Muslims believe Muhammad was a prophet, and (most) Muslims believe that Muhammad was good and in principle that they should follow his rulings. These erroneous and unfounded beliefs contribute to most Muslims endorsing sharia and jihad.
Hence, when I criticize Muhammad, I am criticizing the law-giving, precedent-setting figure who Muslims believe in. I don't have to believe in Muhammad's literal existence myself to criticize him, anymore than I have to believe in the existence of the evil villain in a fictional story in order to criticize the behaviour of that evil villain. It is especially important to criticize the evil fictional villain if hundreds of millions of people think they should follow his evil behaviors, such as restricting free expression and free thought. In other words, if real people follow a fictional character and their following has a huge negative impact on millions of peoples lives, then it behooves us to criticize that evil fictional character in the course of criticizing and opposing that evil ideology as implemented by those who now call themselves "Muslims".
To criticize Muhammad, we no more have to believe that he was a prophet--which the Islamic texts insist we must--than we have to believe he was a real historical figure.
The point of criticizing Muhammad's massacres of the Jews and approval of the rape of non-Muslim female captives is that according to mainstream Muslim belief these policies are not only okay but should be put into practice. Otherwise, most non-Muslims would not care about some quasi-legendary warlord-charlatan type of figure from the 7th century.
"To state otherwise will be an almighty kick in the nuts of the Islam HATERS"
Not at all. See above. Those of us who doubt Muhammad's existence are criticizing Muslims' beliefs and behaviors, and one of those beliefs is that the character "Muhammad" ("Praised One") was a real historical figure.
"...and even better make jihad bob spencer's fake blog irrelevant, ROFLMAO :)"
Despite your baseless and absurd conspiratory-type allegations this blog is getting pretty good amounts of traffic I think, for only being up for about two weeks.
Everything about the Muslims is they follow the backwards - Mo, who couldn't read or write, and in the modern day there is that Mullah Omar in Pakistan.
ReplyDeleteWhat a bunch of loonwatchers...
Hello? skouti? anj? any other pure muslim out there?
ReplyDeletePlease please, help me on my journey to islam! I couldn't find the name of mohamad in the Torah. But I know it must be there because the quran, surah 7:157, says it's there: "Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the Torah and the ..."
Which chapter and verse of the Torah has mohamad's blessed name? Help me please...
trying to follow jesus
ReplyDeletemaybe you should try harder???????
doing a lame job at the moment.
A book called muhammed in the bible written by the reverend david benjamin keldani will tell you all about it. A roman catholic priest no less.
enoj the read and then consider the shahada.
anj, why not just give me the chapter and verse of the Torah? Surely as a pure muslim you should do that wholeheartedly!
ReplyDeleteBTW anj, you say: "A roman catholic priest no less."
ReplyDeleteWhy are you now relying on the words of a roman catholic priest?? skouti and slave of allah already said that these people are molesters and pedophiles!!
Oh and anj, did you read the book "muhammed in the bible" by the roman catholic priest? Or are you saying this to send me away?? mohamad would not have sent away a seeker of truth!
ReplyDeleteMuhammad in the Torah? LOL!! that's hilarous i would love to see the passage, but i think they are refering to the song of solomon 5, which they try to twist "muhammadin" into Muhammad forgetting the context, the gramatical hebrew laws, and other issues, if that's the case let me know it and i will show you why this claim is false...
ReplyDeleteThe great scholar of Islam, David S. Margoliouth (1905), wrote that
ReplyDelete“The taking of Khaibar marks the stage at which Islam became a menace to the whole world. True, Mohammad had now for six years lived by robbery and brigandage: but in plundering Meccans he could plead that he had been driven from his home and possessions: and with the Jewish tribes of Medina he had in each case some outrage, real or pretended, to avenge. But the people of Khaibar, all that distance from Medinah, had certainly done him and his followers no wrong: for their leaving unavenged the murder of one of their number by his emissary was no act of aggression. Ali, when told to lead the forces against them, had to enquire for what he was fighting: and was told that he must compel them to adopt the formulae of Islam. Khaibar was attacked because there was booty to be acquired there, and the plea for attacking it was that its inhabitants were not Moslems. That plea could cover attacks on the whole world outside of Medinah and its neighborhood: and on leaving Khaibar the Prophet seemed to see the world already in his grasp....Now the fact that a community was idolatrous, or Jewish, or anything but Mohammadan, warranted murderous attack upon it: the passion for fresh conquests dominated the Prophet."
from Mohammad and the Rise of Islam, pp. 362-363
From the Sira:
ReplyDeleteIshaq, p. 511
“When the apostle raided a people he waited until the morning. If he heard a call to prayer he held back; if he did not hear it he attacked. We came to Khaybar by night, and the apostle passed the night there; and when morning came he did not hear the call to prayer, so he rode and we rode with him….We met the workers of Khaybar coming out in the morning with their spades and baskets. When they saw the apostle and the army they cried, ‘Muhammad with his force,’ and turned tail and fled. The apostle said, ‘Allah akbar! Khaybar is destroyed. When we arrive in a people’s square it is a bad morning for those who have been warned.’”
Ishaq, p. 511 (continued)
“The apostle seized the property piece by piece and conquered the forts one by one as he came to them. ...The apostle took captives from them among whom Safiya d. Huyayy b. Akhtab who had been the wife of Kinana b. al-Rabi‘ b. Abu’l-Huqayq, and two cousins of hers. The apostle chose Safiya for himself. …The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims.”
Quran, 33:27. “And He caused you to inherit their land and their houses and their wealth, and land [1] ye have not trodden. Allah is ever Able to do all things.”
[1] Khaybar, according to Ibn Ishaq, p. 468. Ishaq notes that those who were taken down from their strongholds (33:26)—“forts and castles”--were the Qurayzah.
Ibn Ishaq, p. 468. “ ‘And he cast terror into their hearts; some you slew, and some you captured,’ i.e., he killed the men and captured the women and children. ‘And caused you to inherit their land and their dwellings, and their property, and a land you had not trod,’ i.e., Khaybar. ‘For Allah can do all things.’ ”
Ibn Kathir (33:27): “…(And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses, and their riches,) means, `He gave these things to you after you killed them.'
(and a land which you had not trodden.) It was said that this was Khaybar, or that it was the lands of the Persians and Romans. Ibn Jarir said, "It could be that all of these are referred to””
al-Jalalayn (33:27): “And He made you inherit their land and their homes and their possessions, and a land you had not trodden, thitherto, and this was [the territory of] Khaybar, which was captured after [that of] Qurayza. And God has power over all things.”
Ibn ‘Abbas (33:27): “(And He caused you to inherit their land) their mansions (and their houses and their wealth) He made their wealth booty for you, (and land) the land of Khaybar (ye have not trodden) which did not belong to you but which will soon belong to you. (Allah is Able to do all things) whether it is a conquest or assistance.”
From the essay "Communism and Islam" in International Affairs, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Jan., 1954), pp. 1-12, here is the eminent Bernard Lewis on Islam's inherent totalitarianism:
ReplyDelete"I turn now from the accidental to the essential factors, to those deriving from the very nature of Islamic society, tradition, and thought. The first of these is the authoritarianism, perhaps we may even say the totalitarianism, of the Islamic political tradition...Many attempts have been made to show that Islam and democracy are identical -- attempts usually based on a misunderstanding of Islam or democracy or both...In point of fact, except for the early caliphate, when the anarchic individualism of tribal Arabia was still effective, the political history of Islam is one of almost unrelieved autocracy...[I]t was authoritarian, often arbitrary, sometimes tyrannical. There are no parliaments or representative assemblies of any kind, no councils or communes, no chambers of nobility or estates, no municipalities in the history of Islam; nothing but the sovereign power, to which the subject owed complete and unwavering obedience as a religious duty imposed by the Holy Law. In the great days of classical Islam this duty was only owed to the lawfully appointed caliph, as God's vicegerent on earth and head of the theocratic community, and then only for as long as he upheld the law; but with the decline of the caliphate and the growth of military dictatorship, Muslim jurists and theologians accommodated their teachings to the changed situation and extended the religious duty of obedience to any effective authority, however impious, however barbarous. For the last thousand years, the political thinking of Islam has been dominated by such maxims as "tyranny is better than anarchy" and "whose power is established, obedience to him is incumbent."
...Quite obviously, the Ulama of Islam are very different from the Communist Party. Nevertheless, on closer examination, we find certain uncomfortable resemblances. Both groups profess a totalitarian doctrine, with complete and final answers to all questions on heaven and earth; the answers are different in every respect, alike only in their finality and completeness, and in the contrast they offer with the eternal questioning of Western man. Both groups offer to their members and followers the agreeable sensation of belonging to a community of believers, who are always right, as against an outer world of unbelievers, who are always wrong. Both offer an exhilarating feeling of mission, of purpose, of being engaged in a collective adventure to accelerate the historically inevitable victory of the true faith over the infidel evil-doers. The traditional Islamic division of the world into the House of Islam and the House of War, two necessarily opposed groups, of which- the first has the collective obligation of perpetual struggle against the second, also has obvious parallels in the Communist view of world affairs. There again, the content of belief is utterly different, but the aggressive fanaticism of the believer is the same. The humorist who summed up the Communist creed as "There is no God and Karl Marx is his Prophet!" was laying his finger on a real affinity. The call to a Communist Jihad, a Holy War for the faith -- a new faith, but against the self-same Western Christian enemy -- might well strike a responsive note."
CristoTeAma, thanx but am not interested in your view (no offense).
ReplyDeleteAre you there anj? skouti? slave of allah? Can you send me the Torah chapter and verse where, according to quran sura 7:157, mohamad is mentioned?
“Their ideal is no less than that the whole earth should join in the faith that there is no god but Allah and that Mohammed is Allah's last and most perfect messenger, who brought the latest and final revelation of Allah to humanity in Allah's own words.”
ReplyDelete--C. Snouck Hurgronje, Mohammedanism (1916). http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/10163
“The crux of the doctrine is the existence of one single Islamic state, ruling the entire umma [Muslim community]. It is the duty of the umma to expand the territory of this state in order to bring as many people under its rule as possible. The ultimate aim is to expand the territory of this state in order to bring the whole earth under the sway of Islam and to extirpate unbelief.”
--from Rudolph Peters, 1996, p. 3, in Jihad in Classical and Modern Islam, Princeton: Markus Wiener Publishers. Rudolph Peters is professor of Islamic Law and Law of the Middle East at the University of Amsterdam.
"The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever-expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principle function was to put God's laws into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world. It refused to recognize the coexistence of non-Muslim communities, except perhaps as subordinate entities, because by its very nature a universal state tolerates no other state than itself." p. 305
"...the jihad may be regarded as Islam's instrument for carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers..." p. 311
--Khadduri, Majid. The Law of War: The Jihad, pp. 305-319, in Bostom, Andrew (Ed.)., (2005). The Legacy of Jihad. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.
John Esposito, in Islam: The Straight Path writes that "As Islam penetrated new areas, people were offered three options: (1) conversion, that is, full membership in the Muslim community, with its rights and duties; (2) acceptance of Muslim rule as ‘protected’ people and payment of a poll tax; (3) battle or the sword if neither the first nor the second option was accepted" (p. 35)
"The following is the teaching of the Hanafi school of Sunni Islam on the subject of Jihad, as given in the Hidayah, vol. Ii. P. 140:
ReplyDelete"...The sacred injunction concerning war is sufficiently observed when it is carried on by any one party or tribe of Muslims, and it is then no longer of any force with respect to the rest. It is established as a divine ordinance, by the word of God, who said in the Qur’an, ‘Slay the infidels,’ and also by a saying of the Prophet, ‘War is permanently established until the Day of Judgment’ (meaning the ordinance respecting war). The observance, however, in the degree above mentioned, suffices, because war is not a positive injunction, as it is in its nature murderous and destructive, and is enjoined only for the purpose of advancing the true faith or repelling evil from the servants of God..."
"...If the infidels, upon receiving the call [to embrace Islam], neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax, it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do. And having so done, the Muslims must then with God’s assistance attack the infidels with all manner of warlike engines (as the Prophet did by the people of Ta’if), and must also set fire to their habitations (in the same manner as the Prophet fired Baweera), and must inundate them with water and tear up their plantations and tread down their grain because by these means they will become weakened, and their resolution will fail and their force be broken; these means are, therefore, all sanctified by the law..."
[Brackets added]
Qaradawi, the popular and influential Muslim scholar, writes:
"1. In his Sahih, Imam Muslim recorded that Thawban quoted the Prophet (peace and blessings upon him) as saying: “Almighty Allah has gathered the earth for me so that I could see all its corners. My nation will rule over all that which Almighty Allah has gathered for me.”
2. Ibn Hibban quoted the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) as saying: “This matter (i.e. Islam) will spread to cover all areas where there is night and day. Allah will never leave a house in a rural area or in urban community without its people being Muslims. Honor is for those who embrace it (i.e. Islam) while disbelievers are doomed to disgrace and humiliation.”
This hadith, along with many others, give us glad tidings that the patch of the Muslim state will expand to cover the whole earth and that the strength of this state will grow and become obvious to all. This also denotes good news for the long-cherished hope of revival of Muslims’ unity and rebirth of Islamic Caliphate."
Source
Islam q & a (popular Sunni site):
ReplyDeleteQuestion: "Was Islam Spread by the Sword?" http://islamqa.info/en/ref/43087
Answer "Praise be to Allaah.
We have already stated in question no. 34830 that jihad is of two types: taking the initiative in fighting and jihad in self-defence.
Undoubtedly taking the initiative in fighting has a great effect in spreading Islam and bringing people into the religion of Allaah in crowds. Hence the hearts of the enemies of Islam are filled with fear of jihad.
[...]
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Faroosiyyah (p.18):
"Allaah sent him – meaning the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) – with the guiding Book and the conquering sword, ahead of the Hour, so that Allaah alone would be worshipped with no partner or associate, and his provision was placed beneath the shade of his sword and spear. Allaah has established the religion of Islam with proof and evidence, and with the sword and spear, both together and inseparable."
[...]
If Islam was only spread by peaceful means, what would the kuffaar have to be afraid of? Of mere words spoken on the tongue? In al-Saheehayn it is narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I have been supported with fear as far as a month’s journey.” Would the kuffaar be afraid of being told, “become Muslim, but if you do not then you are free to believe and do whatever you want”? or were they afraid of jihad and the imposition of the jizyah and being humiliated? That may make them enter Islam so that they may be spared this humiliation.
[...]
3 – When the Messenger called people to Islam, his call was accompanied by the sword, and he commanded his leaders to do likewise, so that when the people saw the serious[ness] of the Muslims in calling people to their religion, that dispelled any confusion.
[...]
Al-Bukhaari (4557) narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “ ‘You (true believers in Islamic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind’ [Aal- Imraan 3:110 – interpretation of the meaning].” He said: “You are the best (i.e., the most beneficial) of people for mankind, you bring them in the chains that are around their necks until they enter Islam.” Can people be brought in chains except in the case of jihad??
[...]
It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (12/14):
Islam spread by means of proof and evidence to those who listened to the message and responded to it, and it spread by means of force and the sword to those who were stubborn and arrogant, until they were overwhelmed and became no longer stubborn, and submitted to that reality.
And Allaah knows best."
Muhammad rapes Safiya after hasty sham "marriage":
ReplyDeleteSahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 143:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: “…when Allah enabled him [the Prophet] to conquer the Fort (of Khaibar), the beauty of Safiya bint Huyai bin Akhtab was described to him. Her husband had been killed while she was a bride. So Allah's Apostle selected her for himself and took her along with him till we reached a place called Sad-AsSahba,' where her menses were over and he took her for his wife. Haris (a kind of dish) was served on a small leather sheet. Then Allah's Apostle told me to call those who were around me. So, that was the marriage banquet of Allah's Apostle and Safiya…” (Brackets added. Also see Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3325).
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 523:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: “The Prophet stayed with Safiya bint Huyai for three days on the way of Khaibar where he consummated his marriage with her. Safiya was amongst those who were ordered to use a veil.”
Re the "marriage contract" in Islam:
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 81:
Narrated 'Uqba: “The Prophet said: "The stipulations most entitled to be abided by are those with which you are given the right to enjoy the (women's) private parts (i.e. the stipulations of the marriage contract)."”
Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3302:
“'Uqba b. Amir (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The most worthy condition which must be fulfilled is that which makes sexual intercourse lawful. In the narration transmitted by Ibn Muthanna (instead of the word "condition") it is "conditions".”
Greenforest has excellently quoted core Islamic texts to do with the young Safiya. Here's some more context on her.
ReplyDeleteIn the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad, pages 511-517 (758-766 in the Arabic) we learn how in Khaybar Muhammad ordered the torture of a man in order to get hold of a treasure, then beheaded the man, and how that night Muhammad took into his private tent for consummation of "marriage" the tortured man's widow, Safiya, whose father and other male relatives Muhammad had just killed:
"Kinana b. al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of the B. al-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 [Muhammad] 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 [Muhammad] gave orders to al-Zubayr b. al-'Awwam, 'Torture him until you extract what he has,' so he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head in revenge for his brother Mahmud."
[-- page 515 (763-764 in the Arabic)]
"...The apostle took captives...among whom was Safiya d. Huyayy b. Akhtab who had been the wife of Kinana b. al-Rabi’ b. Abu’l-Huqayq, and two cousins of hers. The apostle chose Safiya for himself."
[-- page 511 (758 in the Arabic)]
"When the apostle married Safiya in Khaybar or on the way, she having been beautified and combed, and got in a fit state for the apostle by Umm Sulaym d. Milhan mother of Anas b. Malik, the apostle passed the night with her in a tent of his. Abu Ayyub, Khalid b. Zayd brother of B. al-Najjar passed the night girt with his sword, guarding the apostle and going round the tent until in the morning the apostle saw him and asked him what he meant by his action. He replied, ‘I was afraid for you with this woman for you have killed her father, her husband, and her people, and till recently she was in unbelief, so I was afraid for you on her account.’ They allege that the apostle said ‘O God, preserve Abu Ayyub as he spent the night preserving me."’
[-- page 516-517 (766 in the Arabic)]
"I don't have to believe in Muhammad's literal existence myself to criticize him,"
ReplyDeleteMan, no wonder these Islam HATERS are so fcuked up inside their heads, hahahahahaha
didn't jihad bob spencer write a book called the truth about muhammed
and now this LOON has done the mother of all flip flops and claims in his next book that Muhammed never existed
must be jihad bob's way of keeping his followers in check as otherwise in the real world they really would be dangerous :)
In the Quran, 21:98, "Allah" says: “Surely you and what you worship besides Allah are the firewood of hell; to it you shall come.”
ReplyDelete"Allah" doesn't believe other gods exist, but he "criticizes" them and even says he's going to burn them in hell.
Muhammad says sex with the female captive is a reward that is deserved to the jihadist:
ReplyDeleteSahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 637:
"Narrated Buraida: The Prophet sent 'Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated Ali, and 'Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, "Don't you see this (i.e. Ali)?" When we reached the Prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, "O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumus."
(Sahih Muslim) "Chapter 29: IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO HAVE SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WITH A CAPTIVE WOMAN AFTER SHE IS PURIFIED (OF MENSES OR DELIVERY) IN CASE SHE HAS A HUSBAND, HER MARRIAGE IS ABROGATED AFTER SHE BECOMES CAPTIVE"
Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3432 (also 3433, 3434):
"Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: "And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end)."
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 34, Number 432:
"Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
that while he was sitting with Allah's Apostle he said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence."
Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3371 (3371-3388):
"Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa'id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): O Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born."
Malik’s Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.95:
"Yahya related to me from Malik from Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman from Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Habban that Ibn Muhayriz said, "I went into the mosque and saw Abu Said al-Khudri and so I sat by him and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Said al-Khudri said, 'We went out with the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, on the expedition to the Banu al-Mustaliq. We took some Arabs prisoner, and we desired the women as celibacy was hard for us. We wanted the ransom, so we wanted to practise coitus interruptus. We said, 'Shall we practise coitus interruptus while the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is among us before we ask him?' We asked him about that and he said, 'You don't have to not do it. There is no self which is to come into existence up to the Day of Rising but that it will come into existence.' "
Malik’s Muwatta, Book 30, Number 30.2.13:
ReplyDelete"Yahya related to me from Malik that Abdullah ibn Dinar said, "A man came to Abdullah ibn Umar when I was with him at the place where judgments were given and asked him about the suckling of an older person. Abdullah ibn Umar replied, 'A man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, 'I have a slave-girl and I used to have intercourse with her. My wife went to her and suckled her. When I went to the girl, my wife told me to watch out, because she had suckled her!' Umar told him to beat his wife and to go to his slave-girl because kinship by suckling was only by the suckling of the young.' "
Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3373:
"Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported: We took women captives, and we wanted to do 'azl with them. We then asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) about it, and he said to us: Verily you do it, verily you do it, verily you do it, but the soul which has to be born until the Day of judgment must be born."
Malik’s Muwatta, Book 29, Number 29.32.100:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, "Tell them." She was embarrassed. He said, "It is alright, and I do it myself." Malik said, "A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practising coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife, does not practise coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission."
Malik’s Muwatta, Book 2, Number 2.23.90:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that the slave girls of Abdullah ibn Umar used to wash his feet and bring him a mat of palm leaves while they were menstruating.
Malik was asked whether a man who had women and slave girls could have intercourse with all of them before he did ghusl. He said, "There is no harm in a man having intercourse with two of his slave girls before he does ghusl. It is disapproved of, however, to go to a freewoman on another's day. There is no harm in making love first to one slave girl and then to another when one is junub."
Malik was asked about a man who was junub and water was put down for him to do ghusl with. Then he forgot and put his finger into it to find out whether it was hot or cold. Malik said, "If no filth has soiled his fingers, I do not consider that that makes the water impure."
Al-Jalalayn (Quran 4:24):
ReplyDelete"And, forbidden to you are, wedded women, those with spouses, that you should marry them before they have left their spouses, be they Muslim free women or not; save what your right hands own, of captured [slave] girls, whom you may have sexual intercourse with, even if they should have spouses among the enemy camp, but only after they have been absolved of the possibility of pregnancy [after the completion of one menstrual cycle]; this is what God has prescribed for you (kitāba is in the accusative because it is the verbal noun). Lawful for you (read passive wa-uhilla, or active wa-ahalla), beyond all that, that is, except what He has forbidden you of women, is that you seek, women, using your wealth, by way of a dowry or a price, in wedlock and not, fornicating, in illicitly. Such wives as you enjoy thereby, and have had sexual intercourse with, give them their wages, the dowries that you have assigned them, as an obligation; you are not at fault in agreeing together, you and they, after the obligation, is waived, decreased or increased. God is ever Knowing, of His creatures, Wise, in what He has ordained for them."
Ibn Kathir (4:24):
"Forbidding Women Already Married, Except for Female Slaves
Allah said,
[وَالْمُحْصَنَـتُ مِنَ النِّسَآءِ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكْتَ أَيْمَـنُكُمْ]
(Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.) The Ayah means, you are prohibited from marrying women who are already married,
[إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكْتَ أَيْمَـنُكُمْ]
(except those whom your right hands possess) except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed, e
[وَالْمُحْصَنَـتُ مِنَ النِّسَآءِ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكْتَ أَيْمَـنُكُمْ]
(Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess). Consequently, we had sexual relations with these women.'' This is the wording collected by At-Tirmidhi An-Nasa'i, Ibn Jarir and Muslim in his Sahih. Allah's statement,
[كِتَـبَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ]
(Thus has Allah ordained for you) means, this prohibition was ordained for you by Allah. Therefore, adhere to Allah's Book, do not transgress His set limits, and adhere to His legislation and decrees."
Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya
Zad al-Ma’ad
Regarding His Guidance With Respect to Prisoners of War
p. 319
"And the correct opinion which is based upon his guidance and that of his companions is that the Arabs may be taken as slaves and it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with the slave women from among them without it being conditional upon their embracing Islam."
[cites Malik and Bukhari]
The Reliance of the Traveller:
O-9.13
"When a child or a woman is taken captive, they become slaves by the fact of capture, and the woman's previous marriage is immediately annulled."
The Risala of 'Abdullah ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (310/922 - 386/996) A Treatise on Maliki Fiqh (Including commentary from ath-Thamr ad-Dani by al-Azhari)
Chapter 32: On marriage, divorce, remarriage, 'Dhihar'-repudiation, vows of celibacy within marriage, mutual cursing (li'an), 'Khul'-'divorce, and suckling
"[...] intercourse is only permitted in the Shari'a by one of two matters: the contract of marriage or ownership by the words of the Almighty, "those who guard their private parts – except from their wives or those they own as slaves, in which case they are not blameworthy." (23:5-6)"
Favor 222 wrote: "I guarantee, "evidence" will soon come to light that hitler must have been a Muslim convert since he acted so much like one."
ReplyDeleteYes, and the evidence is in the sixth edition of my book. It will be released within a few months. Hitler was not a declared Muslim but admired it intensely and lamented that Muslims had not conqured Germany.
He believed that had the Germans become Muslim they would have ruled the Islamic world because the Arabs, according to him, are an inherently inferior race.
Whahaha! That moron had not read the history of Persia. The Persians are also Arian and they had a superior culture. But once they succumbed to Islam they were reduced into dhimmis and then savages. Fortunately for Iranians they kept something of thier heritage and natioanl pride and hence there is hope that they may regain their old glory. I can't say the same about Egypcians and other nations that lost everything including their identity and language.
Hi flavor222
ReplyDeleteYou listed a series of my quotes about Islam. I stand by every word I said. You should write them in gold.
However, this statement that you quoted is not complete, ""This war can be won in only two ways. By educating Muslims so they leave Islam like Mehmood did or by killing them. "
Here I added, "It is clear that educating them is better." This is how we grow exponentially. I rather have Shakila on my side than dead. I feel the same way about all other Muslims, except those who have already committed murder.
skouti, keep being a HATER if you can't help yourself
ReplyDeleteEnjoy :)
In core Islamic texts, Muhammad says beat your wife, no questions asked
In Sunan Abu Dawud, a canonical hadith collection:
Book 11, Number 2142:
Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab:
"The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: 'A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.' "
Muhammad, in core Islamic texts, rejects religious pluralism, says Arabia will be judenrein and christenrein
ReplyDeleteFor example, in Sahih Muslim, a canonical hadith collection.
Book 19, No. 4366
"It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah [Muhammad] (may peace be upon him) say:"I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim."
In Sahih al-Bukhari, the most canonical hadith collection, Muhammad said,
ReplyDelete"Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him."
Various other canonical hadiths attest that Muhammad called for death to those who leave Islam. That's why even today all the schools of Islamic law prescribe death for apostasy from Islam.
I recently posted these links to news stories, and also these links to news stories about people being killed for daring to leave Islam. And many, many more such stories have been reported in the global media.
MMORPG
ReplyDeleteinstagram takipci satin al
tiktok jeton hilesi
tiktok jeton hilesi
antalya saç ekimi
referans kimliği nedir
İnstagram Takipçi Satın Al
METİN PVP
instagram takipçi satın al
çekmeköy toshiba klima servisi
ReplyDeletekadıköy toshiba klima servisi
maltepe beko klima servisi
kadıköy beko klima servisi
kartal lg klima servisi
ümraniye lg klima servisi
kartal alarko carrier klima servisi
ümraniye alarko carrier klima servisi
üsküdar beko klima servisi