|
The actions of Islamic terrorist groups operating throughout the
world are well known. Islamic terrorists have bombed and destroyed
buildings, planes, and vehicles. Additionally, during the last 20
years, Muslim terrorists have targeted and murdered tens of
thousands of men and women, including children. All over the world,
in Kenya, Algeria, Indonesia, Egypt, Iran, France, South America and
America, etc., Muslim terrorists have attacked and murdered those
they felt were a threat or hindrance to their purpose. No one has
been spared by these treacherous people.
Not surprisingly, examination of the web sites that deal with
terrorism show that about one half of all terrorist groups in the
world are Islamic in nature.
Why are these groups Islamic? What does the religion of Islam
have to do with terrorism? Is there a link between the two? How do
these groups justify murdering civilians based upon Islamic values?
Are terrorism and murder actually allowed under Islam?
This examines the basis for Islamic terrorism found within Islam.
Starting with Muhammad and reviewing his teachings and his actions,
and then surveying what other Muslims have taught, the fundamentals
of Islamic terrorism will be examined.
Top of Page
NOTES
1. My comments or source references will be in [ ] brackets.
Other writers comments will be in the ( ) parentheses.
2. When I talk about terrorist actions, I am talking about motive
and action. Crime exists in every society, and I am not including
all crimes as examples of terrorism. I am focusing on the violent
actions Muslims carry out in Islam's name. For example, in Egypt
some years ago, a Muslim man murdered an American women. He killed
her then robbed her. His motive was greed and not the furtherance of
Islam. I would not call that an Islamic terrorist action. On the
other hand, Muslims who carry out bombings, like the ones in Kenya
and Tanzania - in which hundreds of innocents died, do so because
they feel they are attacking Islamic enemies and have Allah's
sanction to do so. That is an Islamic terrorist action.
Additionally, there are many kinds of terrorists who engage in
violence. There are political terrorists operating in South America,
there are terrorists who murder doctors who perform abortion. There
are Communist terrorists, capitalist terrorists, right wing
terrorists, left wing terrorists, etc. In America, there are gangs
that operate like terrorists in the streets.
However, in this writing, I am focusing on terrorism based upon what
Muhammad taught and did. I am focusing on Muslims, who for the sake
of Islam, commit violent acts of terrorism. However, I
want all my readers to know that I am fully aware there are many
non-Muslim terrorists operating in the world. Some of these other
terrorists are every bit as vicious as Muslim terrorists.
3. A "terrorist" is defined as "one who
engages in acts of terrorism". "Terrorism" is defined as "the
unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or
an organized group against people or property with the intention of
intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for
ideological or political reasons."
Top of Page
When Muhammad started out preaching his religion of Islam he was
not violent. If anything, he was more like Jesus or Gandhi. He was
persecuted for preaching his religious ideas - Islam - and
denigrating the pagan religions of the Meccans. Some of Muhammad's
followers were tortured. Things were so bad for him and his few
followers that he sent many of them to Abyssinia [Ethiopia] for
refuge. Eventually, he and his followers moved north to a city
called Yathrib [Medina], where some members of two Arab tribes
wanted Muhammad to be their prophet.
Top of Page
BEGINNING OF MUHAMMAD'S VIOLENCE
Just prior to Muhammad's leaving for Medina, he received a
"revelation" allowing him to fight the Meccans. He knew that in
Medina, he had a group of armed men who would support him.
Furthermore, in Medina, would be more distant from the Meccans and
their attempts to oppress or kill him. The following is from "The
Life of Muhammad", page 212-213, by A. Guillaume, which is a
rendering of Ibn Ishaq's "Sirat Rasulallah", a biography of Muhammad
written by an early Muslim scholar [1].
"THE APOSTLE RECEIVES THE ORDER TO FIGHT
The apostle had not been given permission to fight or allowed
to shed blood before the second Aqaba [a place where a pledge
was made between Muhammad and his followers from Medina]. He had
simply been ordered to call men to God and to endure insult and
forgive the ignorant. The Quraysh [a leading group of Meccans]
had persecuted his followers, seducing some from their religion
and exiling others from their country. They had to choose
whether to give up their religion, be maltreated at home, or to
flee the country, some to Abyssinia, others to Medina.
When Quraysh became insolent towards God and rejected His
gracious purpose, accused His prophet of lying, and ill treated
and exiled those who served Him and proclaimed His unity,
believed in His prophet and held fast to His religion, He gave
permission to His apostle to fight and to protect himself
against those who wronged them and treated them badly.
......[a] The meaning is "I have allowed them to fight only
because they have been unjustly treated while their sole offense
against men has been that they worship God. When they are in the
ascendant they will establish prayer, pay the poor-tax, enjoin
kindness, and forbid iniquity, i.e., the prophet and his
companions all of them." The God sent down to him: "Fight them
so that there be no more seduction," [b] i.e. until no believer
is seduced from his religion. "And the religion is God's,", i.e.
Until God alone is worshipped."
[Note: two passages from the Qur'an are referenced: [a] Sura
22:39-41, which I did not quote, and [b] Sura 2:193]
Two critical points here:
1) in Mecca, where Muhammad was weak, he attacked no one. He only
preached his religion and insulted the Meccan's religions. But it
was just prior to his leaving for Medina, where he had a limited
amount of armed men to support him, that he received this
"revelation" and began to use violence to further his desires.
Islamic history shows that as Muslims grew
in power their forms of violence changed from criminal terrorism to
outright warfare.
2) At the end of the quote, it says that Muslims are to fight those
that do not worship Allah. When reading this passage from Ibn Ishaq,
Muhammad is made to appear to be long suffering and primarily
fighting in self defense, and that up until just before Muhammad's
departure, the Meccan persecution was tolerable, but that it became
so bad that Muhammad was finally given permission to fight back.
The problem with this is that Muhammad had been severely
persecuted prior to this and that Muslims had been abused well
before their departure. In other words, the quoted passage is an
apologetic work on Ibn Ishaq's part. Earlier, well before the Treaty
of Aqaba, things were so bad for Muhammad that he went to a town
called Taif to seek their help and protection [Guillaume, op cit,
page 192]. The Taifians rejected and abused him. Things were so bad
for Muhammad that in Mecca, Muhammad had to beg three men for their
protection [Guillaume, op cit, page 194].
In Mecca, Muhammad continued to proclaim himself as a prophet and
he was abused all the more. He never received any "revelations" to
fight at that time. Eventually, good fortune fell into Muhammad's
lap and just as in Adolph Hitler's case, his persistence paid off. A
group of feuding Arabs in Medina accepted him as their prophet. They
hoped he could help them maintain peace. They eventually made a
pledge to support Muhammad in war against the Quraysh [Guillaume,
op cit, page 205]. Now Muhammad knew he had an able and armed
following. It was only until he had a following that could defend
themselves, and his people were migrating north to Medina, and that
he knew he was going to leave town, that suddenly "Allah" gave
Muhammad his "revelation" to fight. Muhammad's circumstances
changed, and Muhammad's Allah changed with them. Muhammad went from
being only a "warner" to being an aggressor.
Top of Page
MUHAMMAD'S EARLY TERRORIST ACTS
After moving to Medina, Muhammad began to have conflict with the
Jews and pagans in the area. I'll focus on several incidents, not
necessarily in chronological order, that illustrate Muhammad as a
terrorist. The first terrorist incident
involves Muhammad's command to his followers to "kill any Jew that
comes under your power". From Guillaume, op cit,
page 369:
"The apostle said, "Kill any Jew that falls into your power."
Thereupon Muhayyisa b. Masud leapt upon Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish
merchant with whom they had social and business relations, and
killed him. Huwayyisa was not a Muslim at the time though he was
the elder brother. When Muhayyisa killed him Huwayyisa began to
beat him, saying, 'You enemy of God, did you kill him when much
of the fat on your belly comes from his wealth?" Muhayyisa
answered, "Had the one who ordered me to kill him ordered me to
kill you I would have cut your head off."
This story is also supported in the Sunan of Abu Dawud, Book 19,
Number 2996:
Narrated Muhayyisah: The Apostle of Allah said: If you gain a
victory over the men of Jews, kill them. So Muhayyisah jumped
over Shubaybah, a man of the Jewish merchants. He had close
relations with them. He then killed him. At that time Huwayyisah
(brother of Muhayyisah) had not embraced Islam. He was older
than Muhayyisah. When he killed him, Huwayyisah beat him and
said: O enemy of Allah, I swear by Allah, you have a good deal
of fat in your belly from his property.
This murder was committed upon Muhammad's command. Note that this
Muslim murderer would have killed a family member at the drop of a
hat. Muhammad was no better than a bigoted criminal boss, ordering
his men to wantonly murder Jewish people. Hitler did this. And, this
is what the Serbs did to the Kosovan Muslims. Muhammad's command to
murder Jews puts him in the same category as Milosovic, Hitler, and
others who have persecuted Jews throughout history. A quote from an
Islamic scholar - Wensinck writes in his, "Muhammad and the Jews of
Medina" [2], page 113:
"It is remarkable that tradition attributes Muhammad's most
cruel acts to divine order, namely the siege of Qaynuqa, the
murder of Kab, and he attack upon Qurayzah. Allah's conscience
seems to be more elastic than that of his creatures.".....Ibn
Ishaq and al-Waqidi report that the prophet said the morning
after the murder (of Kab Ashraf), "Kill any Jew you can lay your
hands on."
This incident is also documented in Tabari's History [3], page 97
of volume 7. This shows that Muhammad had unsuspecting people, those
who even had good relations with Muslims, murdered in cold blood
because they were Jewish. There was no justification to murder these
Jews other than they were not Muhammad's followers. These actions
were the work of Muhammad's terrorists committing murder.
The second terrorist incident involves another one of Muhammad's
requests: this one for his men to murder an old Jewish man named Abu
Afak. Abu Afak was 120 years. Afak had urged his fellow Medinans to
question Muhammad. From Guillaume, op cit., page 675:
SALIM B. UMAYR'S EXPEDITION TO KILL ABU AFAK
Abu Afak was one of the B. Amr b. Auf of the B. Ubayda clan. He
showed his disaffection when the apostle killed al-Harith b.
Suwayd b. Samit and said:
"Long have I lived but never have I seen
An assembly or collection of people
More faithful to their undertaking
And their allies when called upon
Than the sons of Qayla when they assembled,
Men who overthrew mountains and never submitted,
A rider who came to them split them in two (saying)
"Permitted", "Forbidden", of all sorts of things.
Had you believed in glory or kingship
You would have followed Tubba
[NOTE: the Tubba was a ruler from Yemen who invaded that part of
what is present Saudi Arabia: the Qaylites resisted him]
The apostle said, "Who will deal with this rascal for me?"
Whereupon Salim b. Umayr, brother of B. Amr b. Auf, one of the
"weepers", went forth and killed him. Umama b. Muzayriya said
concerning that:
You gave the lie to God's religion and the man
Ahmad! [Muhammad]
By him who was your father, evil is the son he produced!
A hanif gave you a thrust in the night saying
"Take that Abu Afak in spite of your age!"
Though I knew whether it was man or jinn
Who slew you in the dead of night (I would say naught).
Additional information is found in the Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir,
(Book of the Major Classes) by Ibn Sa'd, Volume 2, [4], page 32:
Then occurred the "sariyyah" [raid] of Salim Ibn Umayr al-Amri
against Abu Afak, the Jew, in [the month of] Shawwal in the
beginning of the twentieth month from the hijrah [immigration
from Mecca to Medina in 622 AD], of the Apostle of Allah. Abu
Afak, was from Banu Amr Ibn Awf, and was an old man who had
attained the age of one hundred and twenty years. He was a Jew,
and used to instigate the people against the Apostle of Allah,
and composed (satirical) verses [about Muhammad]. Salim Ibn
Umayr who was one of the great weepers and who had participated
in Badr, said, "I take a vow that I shall either kill Abu Afak
or die before him. He waited for an opportunity until a hot
night came, and Abu Afak slept in an open place. Salim Ibn Umayr
knew it, so he placed the sword on his liver and pressed it till
it reached his bed. The enemy of Allah screamed and the people
who were his followers, rushed to him, took him to his house and
interred him.
From a contemporary Muslim scholar - Ali Dashti's "23 Years: A
Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad", [5], page 100:
"Abu Afak, a man of great age (reputedly 120 years) was killed
because he had lampooned Mohammad. The deed was done by Salem b.
Omayr at the behest of the Prophet, who had asked, "Who will
deal with this rascal for me?" The killing of such an old man
moved a poetess, Asma b. Marwan, to compose disrespectful verses
about the Prophet, and she too was assassinated."
Prior to listing all of the assassinations Muhammad had ordered,
Ali Dashti writes on page 97:
"Thus Islam was gradually transformed from a purely spiritual
mission into a militant and punitive organization whose progress
depended on booty from raids and revenue from the zakat tax."
Top of Page
REVIEW
Here another man was murdered upon Muhammad's command. This man
was 120 years old. He was no physical threat to Muhammad and he did
not urge people to commit violent acts against Muhammad or the
Muslims. There was no discussion with Jewish leaders, there was no
dialogue with Abu Afak; it was just an outright murder of another
one of Muhammad's critics. Afak urged the people who lived in Medina
to doubt and leave Muhammad. Afak found that Muhammad's sayings were
strange and dictatorial. He chided the Arabs that put their faith in
Muhammad. Muhammad heard of this and viewed the 120 year old man as
a threat to his credibility, not to his life. Nowhere does it say
that Afak urged his fellow Arabs to attack or harm Muhammad. Yet for
speaking his mind, for the benefit of his friends, this man was
murdered by Muhammad.
The last statement in Umama b. Muzayriya's verse reveals
something though:
"Though I knew whether it was man or jinn Who slew you in the
dead of night (I would say naught)."
This statement displays that the Muslims knew exactly what they
were doing. They knew it was cold-blooded murder that they were
committing upon Muhammad's request. They wanted to keep it secret,
they wanted to hide their evil deeds from the populace at large.
That's why Umama said he wouldn't reveal who murdered Afak.
When I think of what type of people order their followers to
commit murder, I only can think of organized crime bosses or corrupt
political figures. Saddam Hussein comes to mind. How would an Iraqi
be treated if he spoke out about Saddam? Amnesty International just
reported that over 1500 political prisoners were executed in Iraq in
one year. Or take the Ayatollah Khomenni. His fundamentalist Islamic
regime had other dissident Iranians murdered all over the world.
These murderous Muslims represent exactly what Muhammad was all
about. They follow Muhammad's methodology: kill those who are a
threat to your credibility and power over others.
The third incident involves Muhammad's request for his men to
murder a women named Asma b. Marwan. Quoting from Guillaume, pages
675, 676.
UMAYR B. ADIYY'S JOURNEY TO KILL ASMA D. MARWAN
"She was of B. Umayyya b. Zayd. When Abu Afak had been killed
she displayed disaffection. Abdullah b. al-Harith b. Al-Fudayl
from his father said that she was married to a man of B. Khatma
called Yazid b. Zayd. Blaming Islam and its followers she said:
"I despise B. Malik and al-Nabit
and Auf and B. Al-Khazraj.
You obey a stranger who is none of yours,
One not of Murad or Madhhij.
Do you expect good from him after the killing of your chiefs
Like a hungry man waiting for a cook's broth?
Is there no man of pride who would attack him by surprise
And cut off the hopes of those who expect aught from him?"
Hassan b. Thabit answered her:
"Banu Wa'il and B. Waqif and Khatma
Are inferior to B. Al-Khazraj.
When she called for folly woe to her in her weeping,
For death is coming.
She stirred up a man of glorious origin,
Noble in his going out and in his coming in.
Before midnight he dyed her in her blood
And incurred no guilt thereby."
When the apostle heard what she had said he said, "Who will rid
me of Marwan's daughter?" Umayr b. Adiy al-Khatmi who was with
him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and
killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him
what he had done and he [Muhammad] said, "You have helped God
and His apostle, O Umayr!" When he asked if he would have to
bear any evil consequences the apostle said, "Two goats won't
butt their heads about her", so Umayr went back to his people.
Now there was a great commotion among B. Khatma that day about
the affair of bint [girl] Marwan. She had five sons, and when
Umayr went to them from the apostle he said, "I have killed bint
Marwan, O sons of Khatma. Withstand me if you can; don't keep me
waiting." That was the first day Islam became powerful among B.
Khatma; before that those who were Muslims concealed the fact.
The first of them to accept Islam was Umayr b. Adiy who was
called the "Reader", and Abdullah b. Aus and Khuzayma b. Thabit.
The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B. Khatma became
Muslims because they saw the power of Islam." {1} The note reads
"Two tribes of Yamani origin."
And from Ibn Sa'd's, "Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir" [op cit]
volume 2, page 31.
"SARIYYAH OF UMAYR IBN ADI"
Then (occurred) the sariyyah of Umayr ibn adi Ibn Kharashah
al-Khatmi against Asma Bint Marwan, of Banu Umayyah Ibn Zayd,
when five nights had remained from the month of Ramadan, in the
beginning of the nineteenth month from the hijrah of the apostle
of Allah. Asma was the wife of Yazid Ibn Zayd Ibn Hisn
al-Khatmi. She used to revile Islam, offend the prophet and
instigate the (people) against him. She composed verses. Umayr
Ibn Adi came to her in the night and entered her house. Her
children were sleeping around her. There was one whom she was
suckling. He searched her with his hand because he was blind,
and separated the child from her. He thrust his sword in her
chest till it pierced up to her back. Then he offered the
morning prayers with the prophet at al-Medina. The apostle of
Allah said to him: "Have you slain the daughter of Marwan?" He
said: "Yes. Is there something more for me to do?" He [Muhammad]
said: "No two goats will butt together about her. This was the
word that was first heard from the apostle of Allah. The apostle
of Allah called him Umayr, "basir" (the seeing).
Top of Page
DISCUSSION
Let's sum this up and put it in perspective. Muhammad had
al-Harith b. Suwayd b. Samit killed. This upset Abu Afak, so he
spoke out against it. So, likewise, Muhammad had Abu Afak murdered.
This offended Asma b. Marwan and she spoke out against that evil
deed. She encouraged her fellow tribesmen to take action against
Muhammad. When Muhammad heard of what she had said, he had her
killed also. At first glance, this order to kill Asma might seem
justifiable. Asma was calling for someone to kill Muhammad. It is
understandable for Muhammad to be bothered by that.
But let's look deeper at the event and examine the context of
Asma's relationship to her tribe.
1) First of all, Asma has seen Muhammad in action. She had seen
him for what he was, a cold blooded murderer. Of course she spoke
out against a murderer. Second, her tribe was not under Muhammad's
rule. Perhaps they had a treaty with Muhammad, perhaps not. Either
way, this women was free to speak her mind. If a treaty existed, and
if Muhammad thought that she was out of line, Muhammad could have
complained to her tribe's leaders, and they could have commanded her
to be silent or dealt with the situation.
2) What's more noteworthy about this event is that after she was
murdered, Muhammad said "Two goats won't butt their head about her",
meaning no one will care about her death. (Well except her children
and her family). Also note, that there were already people from her
tribe who had become Muslims. Certainly these people were not going
to listen to her. The point is this: if no one really cared about
her being murdered, then no one really cared about what she had to
say. Her people also knew about Muhammad having Abu Afak murdered,
and they didn't care about that either. Even in that light, no one
would take her serious enough to listen to her urgings to murder
Muhammad, who was the leader of a powerful group of people. None of
her people were willing to put their lives on the line for her
words. The bottom line is that Asma b. Marwan was not a legitimate
threat to Muhammad. She didn't scare him, she was not the leader of
her tribe, and she had little or no influence. She was little more
than a nuisance to him. And one wonders why Muhammad didn't kill her
himself? It was always easier for Muhammad
to have someone else do his killing.
Put the shoe on the other foot. Throughout the Middle East, there
are Muslims who call America the Great Satan. These Muslims have
called for the violent destruction of America. Frequently great
crowds have gathered to chant "death to America, or death to one of
its presidents." At times these people have even murdered Americans.
Now, if America, or its president, were to use Muhammad's standards,
they would engage in killing multitudes Muslims, because Muslims
criticized America. America could justify its action by appealing to
Muhammad’s standards of treating those who criticized him. But we
know that the chanting of a crowd of hot-heads does not necessitate
the use of violence against them. There are better ways to deal with
critics and criticisms. Frequently, in the passion of youth, people
do and say things they don't intend to act out, or are not able to
carry out. Given time, people can change, and pursue peaceful
dialog. But if one applied Muhammad's standards, American would be
justified in bombing Tehran; Israel would be justified in wiping out
hundreds of thousands of Arab Muslims.
The only conclusion is that this lady troubled Muhammad and he
wanted her silenced. Again, like Abu Afak, she was murdered in the
night while she slept. What type of people murder those that sleep?
Criminals!
Top of Page
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
1) What alarms me the most about Islam is its disposition to
violence and use of violence as a standard of God's will. Umayr is a
perfect example of this. Here is a Muslim man, a friend of
Muhammad's, acting upon Muhammad's request and going into a woman's
home under the cover of night. He comes upon the women, sleeping in
her bed with her child, and murders her by plunging a sword through
her body.
Afterwards, Muhammad tells the man that he has "helped God and
his apostle". If Allah were really threatened by this woman, I think
He could have killed her Himself, don't you? Does God need men to
sneak around in the night and murder sleeping women?
2) What kind of religion is Islam really? Soon after Umayr
murdered Asma, he went to her family and mocked them! He was
laughing in their faces that he had murdered their mother and that
they were powerless to do anything about it! Here is the quote
again:
"She had five sons, and when Umayr went to them from the
apostle he said,
"I have killed bint Marwan,
O sons of Khatma.
Withstand me if you can;
don't keep me waiting."
3) Finally, similar to observation #1, look at the power of
Islam. Here is the quote:
"That was the first day Islam became powerful among B.
Khatma..... The day after Bint Marwan was killed the men of B.
Khatma became Muslims because they saw the power of Islam."
So then, the power of Islam is to go about and murder sleeping
women in the night, and get away with it? Does "might make right"
ring true in Islam?
Is it "he who has the biggest sword is from
Allah? The only people I know who respect that kind of
power are criminals. Criminals who go out in the night and murder
people while they sleep. We know that there are good and bad in all
religions, but this case is different. This event reflects upon the
man who started Islam: Islam is built upon
Muhammad's words and deeds. We see here that Muhammad had a woman
brutally murdered.
She was killed because she spoke out against him, and she was merely
a nuisance.
The fourth incident involves a Muslim man who murdered his own
slave. From the Hadith of Abu Dawud [6]. Book 38, Number 4348:
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas: A blind man had a slave-mother who
used to abuse the Prophet and disparage him. He forbade her but
she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her
habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet and abuse him.
So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and
killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with
the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet was
informed about it.
He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who
has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he
should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and
trembling the man stood up.
He sat before the Prophet and said: Apostle of Allah! I am her
master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her,
but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon
her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my
companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I
took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed
her. Thereupon the Prophet said: Oh be witness, no retaliation
is payable for her blood.
Here we see here that Muhammad allowed people to murder others
just for insulting him. Here a slave women, who was used as a
concubine by her Muslim master, paid for her criticism of Muhammad
with her life. Note here that one man murdered his own slave, who
was the mother of two of his children! A slave lady made fun of
Muhammad and was brutally murdered and that action received
Muhammad's sanction. Now then, was that slave a threat? Were Muslims
going to leave Islam because of a slave women’s criticisms? Of
course not! Muhammad could not long tolerate any personal criticism,
he didn't want his credibility undermined, so he allowed his
followers to murder anyone who expressed different views. Oh, by the
way, before we move on, let me continue to quote from Abu Dawud. The
note #3800 states:
"This shows that even if a Jew of any non-Muslim abuses the
Prophet he will be killed. This is held by al-Laith, al-Shafi'i,
Ahmad, and Ishaq."
When Jesus said His followers had to hate their families, even
their own lives to follow Him, everyone knew He meant it as a
comparison to their love for Jesus. In addition, Jesus commanded
people to honor their fathers and mothers and to love their enemies.
But Muhammad allowed his followers even to murder members of their
own families!
The fifth incident involves another Muslim man named Amr Umayya,
who was sent out by Muhammad to murder Muhammad's enemy Abu Sufyan,
(Guillaume, op cit, page 673). However, his assassination
attempt failed. As he returned home, he met a one-eyed shepherd. The
shepherd and the Muslim man both identified themselves as members of
the same Arab clan. Prior to going asleep, the shepherd said that he
would never become a Muslim. Umayya waited for the shepherd to fall
asleep, and thereafter:
"as soon as the badu was asleep and snoring I got up and
killed him in a more horrible way than any man has been killed.
I put the end of my bow in his sound eye, then I bore down on it
until I forced it out at the back of his neck." p. 674.
Umayya returned and spoke with Muhammad. He relates,
"He [Muhammad] asked my news and when I told him what had
happened he blessed me". p. 675.
So, Muhammad blessed one of his men who
murdered a one-eyed shepherd while he slept. Another
person who didn't want to follow Muhammad, another murder in Islam's
name. Muhammad's trail of blood continued to grow.
The sixth incident involves the actions of Muslims who were sent
out by Muhammad on a raid against the Fazara tribe. The Fazara
initially defeated the Muslims. The wounded Muslim leader swore
vengeance. After he recovered he went out and attacked the Fazara
again. One very old woman was captured. Here is the account from
Guillaume, op cit, page 665:
"....and Umm Qirfa Fatima was taken prisoner. She was a very
old women, wife of Malik. Her daughter and Abdullah Masada were
also taken. Zayd ordered Qays to kill Umm Qirfa and he killed
her cruelly (Tabari, by putting a rope to her two legs and to
two camels and driving them until they rent her in two.)
Here, Muhammad's companions went out and attacked people, took
some prisoners, then committed some brutal atrocities against their
captives. These men were so destitute of basic human values, that
they ripped an old woman in half by using camels! When one reads of
the horrible things the Serbs have done, one is offended. But I
wonder how many Muslims know that Muhammad's companions did such
things. Muhammad was every bit as brutal as the Nazis.
The 7th incident involves another slave woman who was murdered,
upon Muhammad's command because she had mocked Muhammad some time
earlier. From Guillaume, op cit, page 550, 551:
"Another [to be killed] was Abdullah Khatal of B. Taym b.
Ghalib. He had become a Muslim and the apostle sent him to
collect the poor tax in company with one of the Ansar. He had
with him a freed slave who served him. (He was Muslim). When
they halted he ordered the latter to kill a goat for him and
prepare some food, and went to sleep. When he woke up the man
had done nothing, so he attacked and killed him and apostatized.
He had two singing-girls Fartana and her friend who used to sing
satirical songs about the apostle, so he ordered that they
should be killed with him."
Let's stop here and examine this paragraph. Muhammad ordered that
a man who apostatized, and his two slave girls, be killed. Khatal
was ordered to be killed not because he killed his male slave, a
Muslim, but because he apostatized. Islamic law does not allow a
Muslim man to be put to death for killing a slave. Muhammad also
ordered two slave girls to be killed for singing satirical songs
about him. They sung satirical songs about Muhammad probably at
least a year or more earlier. Now, after Muhammad conquered Mecca,
it was his time to pay those slave girls back. These slave girls
were not threats to Islam, or to the new Islamic state. They were
only slave girls. They were ordered to be executed only because they
sang a silly song about Muhammad. Page 551 finishes the story of the
slave girls:
"As for Ibn Khatal's two singing girls, one was killed and the
other ran away until the apostle, asked for immunity, gave it to
her."
Needless to say, if the second slave girl didn't ask for
"immunity", Muhammad would have had her murdered also. How do you
feel when you hear of Serbs murdering Bosnian and Kosovo women? Yet
Muhammad did exactly that - he had women murdered just for making
fun of him. If a Muslim justified Muhammad's murder of slave girls,
then by their standards, they have to justify what the Serbs did in
Kosovo.
Top of Page
SUMMARY
We see that Muhammad had many people murdered.
By request, by command, by implication, Muhammad had many people
murdered, many killed while they slept. There were no trials, no
judgments, no dialog, if you insulted Muhammad, if you doubted his
credibility and if you spoke out, you were murdered.
Men and women, young and old, all were killed because of Muhammad's
hatred. Here is a summary of the seven terroristic murders committed
at Muhammad's requests or efforts:
1) Ibn Sunayna, a Jewish man who was murdered because he was
simply a Jew
2) Abu Afak, a 120 year old man, murdered while he slept
3) Asma Marwan, mother of 5 children, murdered while she slept
4) A slave women, mother of two children, murdered while she slept
5) A one-eyed shepherd, murdered while he slept
6) A very old women, literally ripped in half by Muslims who
captured her on a raid.
7) A slave girl, who was murdered because she poked fun at
Muhammad.
I will add that there were many more people who suffered a
similar fate. I choose not to list them here because of space
limitations. Make no mistake about it: Muhammad was a terrorist.
Today's Muslim terrorists follow his actions. Like prophet, like
followers; today's Mohammadan terrorists commit their acts based
upon what Muhammad did.
Top of Page
QUESTIONS
1) What kind of man was Muhammad who would have peaceful Jews, a
120 year old man, a mother of 5 children, slave girls, etc. murdered
because they disagreed or criticized him?
2) Is it right to murder others simply because they disagree with
you, or even mock you? Why couldn't Muhammad handle some criticism?
Do people who disagree with others deserve to be murdered, in cold
blood, in the night, secretly, while they sleep? Don't corrupt
politicians or organized criminals do that?
3) Isn't this type of action similar to the actions of Muslim
terrorists today? They operate secretly, they kill unsuspecting
people, they murder without law or justice. They kill those who
merely disagree or even verbally oppose them.
4) Are these "Islamic" values compatible with our values in
America? Should Americans who criticize Muhammad expect to have
their freedom of speech threatened, or should they live in fear of
being killed for speaking their mind? Remember, Muslims in America
have already begun to murder Americans for the sake of Islam.
5) If Muhammad put this system in place, i.e., the murdering of
people who disagree and criticize him, how does it affect Islamic
society? How does it relate to what we have seen done in Islamic
societies such as Algeria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt, and
Sudan? The end result has been brutal massacres, murders, tortures,
etc. This is all traceable to Muhammad's actions.
6) If Muhammad were alive today, and you knew about the people he
murdered, what would you say? Shouldn’t we want this type of
criminal to pay for his crimes, put in jail for life, or possibly
even forfeiting his life for his capital crimes? Who feels sympathy
for a white racist who is sentenced to death for dragging a black
man behind an automobile and killing him? Yet Muhammad tortured a
man then murdered him, just to get money. Muslims are called to
follow Muhammad's "lifestyle" and Islamic law. Murdering others, in
Allah's name, is part of that style and system.
7) Don't we have the right to evaluate Muhammad’s actions
according to decent standards of morality? He claimed to be the last
prophet of God. He claimed his system was God's final revelation for
all humankind. So by any common moral standards, wasn’t what
Muhammad did was terribly evil? If normal human standards of
morality are far better than his behavioral standard, then how does
the morality of this self-asserted "prophethood" rate? Why do our
moral standards eclipse those of God's alleged final prophet?
8) Doesn't this sound exactly like what the Serbs are doing? We
see the Serbs committing some of the most brutal atrocities in
history. Yet Muhammad did the same things. The Serbs have murdered
the Kosovars simply because they were not Serbs. This is exactly
what Muhammad ordered when he urged his follower to murder the Jews.
We see the Serbs taking the possessions of the Kosovars. This is
exactly what Muhammad did to the tribes of people he attacked. We
see the Serbs raping Kosovan women. Muhammad allowed his soldiers to
rape female slaves. If Muhammad were alive today, we'd call him a
Serb or a Nazi!
9) Why wouldn't Muhammad murder her himself? Why is it that every
time Muhammad wanted someone killed, he always got someone else to
do his killing?
10) Look at this dark side of Islam. This is the Islam Muhammad
practiced. When the founder of a religion has to have powerless
women murdered in the night for opposing him, how can that religion
be described?
11) Where are "human rights" now in Islam? If Muhammad denied
freedom of speech to others, how does that reflect upon Islam and
what we see occurring in the Islamic world today?
12) Why is it that the more fundamental a Muslim nation becomes,
the more oppressive it becomes toward all basic human rights? Take
the Taliban for instance. They have been great fighters. But once in
power, they began to oppress the populace, and especially Afghan
women. Initially, they said it was only temporary, but it has
continued to get worse, not better for Afghani women. The
RAWA organization has a website that exposes their oppression.
Top of Page
Muhammad taught his followers to oppress or kill non-Muslims.
Generally, Jews and Christians were allowed to live as such,
provided they paid a special tax. This tax is Jizya, a tax
revenue given to the Muslims to make up for revenues they lost from
no longer dealing in pagan activities. If the Jews and Christians
refused to pay this extortion tax they would have to convert to
Islam or be killed. Non-Jews and non-Christians, such as idolaters
or pagans, had to convert to Islam or be killed. Generally they
didn't have the option of paying the tax. Here is the verse that
teaches Muslims to oppress Jews and Christians:
"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter
day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have
prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, (which is Islam
that abolishes all other religions ) of the people of the Book,
(meaning the Jews and the Christians ) until they pay the Jizya
(the tax imposed upon them) with willing submission and feel
themselves subdued . (with humiliation and submission to the
government of Islam.) 9:29."
(Commentary in parenthesis is from the Tafsir Al-Jalalein.
i.e., Al-Jalalein’s Interpretation of the Koran.)
The order to subjugate or kill Christians and Jews is in that
verse. It is clear that Muhammad ordered his followers to fight
those Christians and Jews to convert them or pay the Jizya, and if
they didn't convert or pay, do you think that he told the followers
to let them go in peace? It is very clear: convert, pay with
submission, or die. The background for this is found in "The Life of
Muhammad", op cit, page 620,
"until they [the Jews and Christians] pay the poll tax out of
hand being humbled", i.e. as a compensation for what you fear to
lose by the closing of the markets. God gave them compensation
for what He cut off from them in their former polytheism by what
He gave them by way of poll tax from the people of scripture."
Muhammad told his followers to attack the Jews and Christians. If
they humble themselves and submit to the Muslims, but choose to
remain Christian or Jewish, then they had to pay the Muslims. Again,
as Muhammad's circumstances changed, Allah changed. Now Muhammad was
an extortionist. Also note that the tax levied upon the Christians
and Jews was not to support the state in general affairs, it was to
compensate the Muslims. Muhammad was exactly like Mafia crime boss,
making others pay for "protection," except it was Christians and
Jews who really needed protection from the Muslims! Here is the
verse in the Qur'an that teaches Muslims to attack and kill pagans:
"When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever
you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush
everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and
render the alms levy, allow them to go their way. God is
forgiving and merciful." Sura 9:5
The background for this verse is found in "The Life of Muhammad",
op cit, page 617-619. Please note that my comments are in [ ]
type brackets, and that it is a very long passage, so I have only
quoted a portion of it:
A discharge came down, [Muhammad received a supposed revelation
from God], permitting the breaking of the agreement between the
apostle and the polytheists that none should be kept back from
the temple when he came to it, and that none need fear during
the sacred months. That there was a general agreement between
him and the polytheists; meanwhile there were particular
agreements between the apostle and the Arab tribes for specified
terms. And there came down about it and about the disaffected
who held back from him in the raid on Tabuk, [a Christian town
Muhammad attacked, and forced them to pay him], .....So travel
through the land for four months and know that you cannot escape
God and that God will put the unbelievers to shame. And a
proclamation from God and His apostle to men on the day of the
greater pilgrimage that God and His apostle are free from
obligation to the polytheists, i.e., after this pilgrimage. So
if you repent it will be better for you; and if you turn back
know that you cannot escape God. Inform those who disbelieve,
about a painful punishment except those polytheists with whom
you have made a treaty. .....If one of the polytheists, i.e. one
of those whom I have ordered you to kill, asks your protection,
give it him so that he may hear the word of God; then convey him
to his place of safety.
Basically, Muhammad had an agreement with a number of Arab
tribes. Some were peaceful with him, others disliked him. "Allah"
gave Muhammad a "revelation" allowing him to break his word, the
"agreement" with the pagan Arabs and attack them after the four
sacred months were over. Once again,
Muhammad had gained power, and things changed. Now Muhammad was
permitted to lie, i.e., break his agreement, and make war upon the
pagans. Muhammad's circumstances changed, and Allah changed again.
Note that in the last quoted paragraph, it is supposed to be God
telling the Muslims to go out and kill people. Some of these people
had gotten along peacefully with the Muslims. But because they
didn't follow Muhammad, they were going to be attacked.
Top of Page
Muhammad was not content to conquer by force, or kill those who
merely opposed him verbally. Muhammad also taught that Muslims who
leave the Islamic faith are to be murdered as well. Here are some
quotes from Bukhari's collection of Hadith. Remember, Bukhari's
Hadith is the second, following the Qur'an, most important writing
in Islam,.
Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17
"Narrated Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, "The blood of a
Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped
but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in
three cases: in Qisas (equality in punishment) for murder, a
married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the
one who reverts from Islam (Apostate) and leaves the Muslims."
Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57,
Narrated Ikrima, "Some atheists were brought to Ali and he
burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn Abbas who said,
"If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as
Allah's messenger forbade it, saying, "Do not punish anybody
with Allah's punishment (fire)." I would have killed them
according to the statement of Allah's Messenger, "Whoever
changed his Islamic religion, then kill him."
Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 64
Narrated Ali, "Whenever I tell you a narration from Allah's
messenger, by Allah, I would rather fall down from the sky, then
ascribe a false statement to him, but if I tell you something
between me and you, (not a Hadith), then it was indeed a trick
(i.e., I may say things just to cheat my enemy). No doubt I
heard Allah's messenger saying, "During the last days there will
appear some young foolish people, who will say the best words,
but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will
leave the faith) and will go out from their religion as an arrow
goes out of the game. So, wherever you find them, kill them, for
whoever kills them shall have reward on the Day of
Resurrection."
Not only did Muhammad teach that Muslims
are to murder those that have left Islam, "wherever you find them",
he further taught that a Muslim who commits this type of murder will
be doing God's service and be rewarded!
Top of Page
Several Muslims have written about the reasons they are allowed
to wage war. From "The Qur’anic Concept of War", by Pakistani
Brigadier S.K. Malik, it says, [in the preface]
"But in Islam war is waged to establish supremacy of the Lord
only when every other argument has failed to convince those who
reject His Will and work against the every purpose of the
creation of mankind." "Many Western Scholars have pointed their
accusing fingers at some of the above verses in the Qur'an to be
able to contend that world of Islam is in a state of perpetual
struggle against the non-Muslims. As to them it is a sufficient
answer to make... that the defiance of God's authority by one
who is His slaves exposes that slave to the risk of being held
guilty of treason and as such a one, in the perspective of
Islamic law, is indeed to be treated as a sort of that cancerous
growth on that organism of humanity.... It thus becomes
necessary to remove the cancerous malformation even if it be by
surgical means, in order to save the rest of humanity."
The Muslim writer states that those who reject Islam are viewed
as a cancerous growth to be violently removed, i.e., murdered. And,
note that the Muslim writer basically agrees with the "Western
Scholars" who say that Islam is indeed "in a state of perpetual
war", with non-Muslims. In viewing what has happened in Algeria,
Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Nigeria, Sudan, etc. it appears the
reverse is true, viz., Islam is actually the cancerous growth that
has caused so much death and terror in the world.
Top of Page
There are a number of web sites that document the actions and
intentions of the many Islamic terrorist groups operating throughout
the world today. As true Muslims, these people will use violence
against anyone who hinders their aims or offends their religious
beliefs. This is a partial listing of a number of web sites that are
on the Internet.
Confronting Terrorism
Institute for
Counter-Terrorism
U.S. State
Department, Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism
The
Terrorism Research Center, Terrorist organizations
Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2003
Country Reports on Terrorism, 2006
Jane’s IntelWeb, Terrorism
Watch Report and Intelligence Watch Report
South
Asia Terrorism Portal
Emergency Net,
Counter-Terrorism
Osama bin Laden
Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the
Two Holy Places.
Top of Page
Review
Most Muslims are not terrorists. Many of them reject the actions
of their Muslim brethren around the world. Unfortunately, since
Islam teaches world domination, these moderate Muslims rarely raise
their voices in protest. If Israelis bomb a Hezbollah camp in
Lebanon, Muslims in Western countries will organize vocal
demonstrations. Israel has never killed as many Muslims as Saddam
Hussein has, but Muslims generally turn a blind eye to violent acts
when it is Muslim on Muslim violence. But getting Muslims to condemn
the terrorist actions of their brethren, say of those in Sudan,
Egypt, Algeria, Afghanistan, or Iraq is like pulling teeth. While
the Muslims world wide continually condemn Israel, few Muslims have
ever raised their voices in protest over Saddam Hussein's genocidal
war upon the Kurds. Why has Bin Laden failed to help the Kurds?
Instead, reports on Bin Laden have shown that he has worked together
with Saddam Hussein. Furthermore, why did the Muslim nations of Iran
and Iraq oppose Western military action to stop the genocide of
Muslim Kosovars?
Muslims condemn Western sanctions of Iraq. But, they forget that
Western nations were their saviors when Iraq conquered Kuwait and
made threats toward Saudi Arabia. These Muslim countries appealed to
non-Muslim nations to free Muslim Kuwait from Muslim conquest and to
halt Iraq’s military advance upon the land of Mecca and Medina. If
Western countries were so evil, why did Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, the
land of Muhammad, have to appeal to the West to protect them from
their own Muslim brethren? Why did non-Muslims have to stop the
fighting between Muslim brethren and to protect the land of Mecca
from Saddam Hussein, a Muslim despot? Was not Allah able to protect
them? Even though all these events are historical facts, Muslims
freely criticize Western involvement in the Middle East.
What does the future hold for Islam in Western countries? One
thing I am certain of; it holds terrorism. I've studied Islamic
viewpoints on the Western world, especially America.
The majority of Muslims today view America as the last great wall
that stops Islam. In their mind, America must be destroyed or
brought down, by any means necessary. This is what
motivated Sheik Rahman to blow up the New York towers. This is what
motivates Muslims throughout America to speak of a day when America
will fall to Islam's power. Make no mistake
about it, Muslims have murdered Americans in America, and will
continue to do so. It is not a question of "if", it is a question of
"when."
Once again I say, most Muslims in America are not terrorists.
Many of them are good people. But the seeds
of terrorism are planted deep within the theology and psyche of
Islam. This theology, when free to grow and blossom, will
show itself in the actions of Muslims who are faithful to the
example of Muhammad. And as was
demonstrated in "Not Without My Daughter", who knows when a
peaceful, liberal or moderate Muslim will turn to fundamentalism and
embrace the violence of Islam?
Often there is a strange transformation in the viewpoint of some
Muslims who seek to immigrate to a Western nation. At first, these
Muslims complain to immigration officials about their native country
and its lack of opportunities, human rights, religious liberties,
and intellectual freedom. However, once they settle in a Western
nation and enjoy its liberties, some turn against their host nation
and begin to praise the virtue’s of an Islamic state. They seem to
have forgotten their pleadings with immigration officials to accept
their application. They would be upright, and certainly more honest,
if they would strive for human and religious rights for the
non-Muslim minorities who suffer under Islamic rule. And, if they
truly believed that Islam is the answer, why didn't they seek asylum
in Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, or Pakistan?
Top of Page
Muhammad intimidated and murdered people to propagate his
ideology. His actions are the actions of ideological and religious
terrorism. Since Muslim look to Muhammad as a source of inspiration
and model behavior, Muslims find support for Islamic terroristic
activity in the life and teachings of their prophet Muhammad. Today,
Muslims use that justification to attack and murder those who differ
from them. When Muslim terrorists do this, they follow in Muhammad's
footsteps. Jesus condemned those who murder, and Muhammad falls into
this category.
"Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the
sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who
loves and practices falsehood" Revelation 22:15.
Jesus said in John’s gospel that Satan was a murderer from the
beginning, and that those who sought to murder Him were Satan's
children.
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out
your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not
holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he
lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the
father of lies. John 8:44
As soon as he rose to power, Muhammad began to have people
murdered. Today, Muhammad's children do the same evil deeds. Jesus
taught that one day people would murder Christians thinking they
would be doing service to God.
...a time is coming when anyone who kills you will think he is
offering a service to God. John 16:2 (NIV)
Today, in Muslim countries, like Iran for instance, Muslims
murder ex-Muslims who have become Christians. And in other
countries, they attack and threaten others. Jesus taught to love
your enemies, to pray for those that persecute you. Jesus didn't
send his disciples out to murder people in the night, Muhammad did.
Take the example of Christ and the Samaritans opposition to Jesus.
"As the time approached for Him to be taken up to heaven, Jesus
resolutely set out for Jerusalem. And he set messengers on
ahead, who went into a Samaritan village to get things ready for
him; but the people there did not welcome him, because he was
heading for Jerusalem. When the disciples James and John saw
this, they asked, "Lord, do you want us to call fire down from
heaven to destroy them?" And he said, "You do not know what kind
of spirit you are of, for the Son of Man did not come to destroy
men's lives, but to save them." And they went to another
village." Luke 10:51-56
Muhammad would have ordered his men to attack the Samaritan
village, then kill or enslave the people, and take all their
possession as plunder. After Muhammad gained power, he sent his
armies out to attack non-Muslims. Who then really brought God's
message of His love for mankind? Who really taught peace? Surely,
this man Muhammad was not from God. Instead, Muhammad is one of the
false prophets Jesus warned his disciples about in Matthew gospel,
And many false prophets will appear and deceive many people.
Matthew 24:11
Top of Page
1 "The Life of Muhammad", by A. Guillaume, pub. by Oxford
Univ. Press.
2 "Muhammad and the Jews of Medina", by Weinsnick, page
113:
3 Tabari's History, page 97 of volume 7
4 "Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir", (Book of the Major
Classes), by Ibn Sa'd, translated by S. Moinul Haq, published by the
Pakistan Historical Society.
5 "23 Years: A Study of the Prophetic Career of
Mohammad", by Ali Dashti, pub. by Mazda. Translated by F.R.C.
Bagley.
6 "Sunan Abu Dawud", translated by Ahmad Hasan, pub by
Al-Medina Publications.
Last edited 05-20-2001
Published by permission
Top of Page |
Muhammad