Desecrate the dead and deal in their body parts

The Muslim Hezbollah leader and mass murderer, Hassan Nasrallah, says his armed group has body parts of Israeli soldiers killed in Lebanon during the 2006 conflict. The mass murderers are just doing what they're told:

"...When Allah spake unto the angels, ‘I will be with you: therefore stablish ye the faithful. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels.’ Strike off their heads then, and strike off from them every limb!..."
Sura 8 - THE SPOILS, MEDINA - 76 verses

"...When ye encounter the infidels, strike off their heads till ye have made a great slaughter among them, and of the rest make fast the fetters. And afterwards let there either be free dismissals or ransomings, till the war hath laid down its burdens..."
Sura 47 – MUHAMMAD, MEDINA - 40 VERSES

Via BBC:

Nasrallah said they had the "heads, the hands, the feet and even a nearly intact cadaver" in a speech marking his first public appearance in more than a year.

He addressed Shia Muslim supporters at a rally in southern Beirut to celebrate the holy Shia commemoration of Ashura.

Body parts of Israeli soldiers have previously been used in prisoner exchanges between the two sides.

Surrounded by bodyguards as he walked through a Shia neighbourhood in southern Beirut on Saturday, the Hezbollah leader was greeted by supporters chanting "God protect Nasrallah," and "Death to America, Death to Israel".

Sheikh Nasrallah told the crowds: "Our fighters were fighting and confronting these Zionists. They were killing them and collecting the remains of their bodies.

"I am not talking about insignificant bodily remains. I tell the Israelis we have heads, hands, legs of your soldiers. We also have a nearly intact cadaver from the head down to the pelvis."

What are the causes of Muslim Israelophobia?

Muslims believe that destroying the Jewish Holy Temple Mount promotes and expedites the Islamic goal to ethnically cleanse Jews from the Middle East. By invalidating claims to the historic Jewish presence of the Holy Jewish Temple Mount and by destroying any trace or any artifacts of the Jewish Holy Temple Mount, Muslims can declare supremacy over Judaism. We hear that desire all the time. We consistently hear Muslims invoke, demand, command, preach and pray that Israel "should not exist", "will not exist", "never existed", "does not exist", "can't exist".

Let's say Israel doesn't exist in an imaginary scenario. Israel is not here, there are no Jews, the legitimate and sovereign nation of Israel is gone. Let's explore what this imaginary non-existent Israel provides to Islam's baseline of thought: what does Israel - this piece of land and its Jewish inhabitants therein - represent to Muslims that Muslims simply cannot tolerate? We have all heard the propaganda that Israel is a virus, Israel is a cancer, etc, but we have not heard what the actual threat is that Israel represents to Muslims.

A cause to rule out is Jews offend Muslims while proselytizing to them - but Jews don't do that. They don't ask others to convert to Judaism. Besides, if a Muslim's faith in his god is anchored, there should be no logical basis to feel threatened, so if Israel does exist, then the existence of Judaism would not be a threat because Muslims would be secure in faith in Allah, so there would be no impetus to destroy Judaism. So, clearly the source of Muslim Israelphobia is not faith based.

Maybe the source of Muslim Israelphobia is racism. But since Jews come in every color and race, we have to reject attempts to legitimize racial causes for Muslims to eliminate Jews because of race. Besides, racism refers only to racial issues, not to views on culture, religion, or ideology.

So maybe the reason why Muslims want to eliminate Israel is because it is a territory. Let's imagine, then that in this imaginary scenario of a Middle East without an Israel, Muslims would have more territory and therefore, Muslims would occupy what once was Israel. Perhaps this is all about land. Perhaps Muslim Israelphobia is just a case for a land grab. In political economics, lots of land is a good thing. The more land owned by Muslims allows for the spread of more Muslim supremacy. But is any of this true according to the Koran?

According to the Koran, no person, people or religious community can claim a permanent right of possession over a certain territory, since the earth belongs exclusively to God, Who is free to entrust sovereign right to everyone He likes and for as long as He likes:

Say: O God, King of the kingdom, Thou givest the kingdom to whom Thou pleasest, and Thou strippest off the kingdom from whom Thou pleasest. Thou endurest with honor whom Thou pleasest, and Thou bringest low whom Thou pleasest. All the best is in Thy hand. Verily, Thou hast power over all things. (Koran, Sura 3:26, "The Imrans")

From this verse one can filter a basic principle of the monotheistic philosophy of Judaism and Christianity, both which preceded Islam: God can control relationships between people and countries. Sometimes God gives a land to a people, and sometime He takes land back and gives it to another people.

Maybe Muslims hate Jews simply because Muslims politically identify with others who look, act and behave like Muslims. It's hard to ignore the parts of the Koran which asks Muslims to kill or abduct all those who refuse to become members of their belief. This is the precise and official text given by Mohammed:

"So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." (Koran, surat IX, 5)

But then it's just too difficult to ignore the racism one finds in the Koran. Islam officially encourages racism and discrimination which is contrary to Human Rights and democratic laws:

"O you who believe! Do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people." (Koran, surat V, 51)

As Shaykh Prof. Abdul Hadi Palazzi writes,

"The idea of Islam as a factor that prevents Arabs from recognizing any sovereign right of Jews over Palestine is quite recent and can by no means be found in Islamic classical sources. To see anti-Zionism as a direct consequence of Islam is a form of explicit misunderstanding which implies the transformation of Islam from a religion into a secularized ideology."

So it does come down to ideology. Palazzi says the most common argument against Islamic acknowledgement of Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem is that, since al-Quds is a holy place for Muslims, they cannot accept it being ruled by non-Muslims, because such acceptance would be a betrayal of Islam.

Yet, Muslims seek to convey to non-Muslims that Islam is a tolerant religion.

So how does one explain this intolerance when the Muslim Hamas terror organization is planning a radio broadcast Wednesday from the Temple Mount – Judaism's holiest site –while the Israeli government has completely banned Jews and Christians from ascending the Mount that same day for fear of offending Muslims?

Wednesday marks the Muslim holiday of Ein ul-Adhaa, which commemorates the Islamic belief of Abraham's willingness to sacrificehis son Ishmael for Allah. The Torah says Abraham nearly sacrificedhis son Isaac, not Ishmael.

Wednesday is also the Jewish fast day of the Tenth of Tevet, which commemorates the start of the siege of Jerusalem leading up to the destruction of the First Jewish Temple during the reign of the Babylonian ruler Nebuchadnezzar. The fast also was proclaimed to mourn the First Temple's destruction.

The Islamic Jihad terror organization exclusively broadcast daily Ramadan prayers from the Mount on their official station, the Al Quds Network. The radio network regularly features Iranian and anti-Semitic propaganda and death threats against Jews.

This is not tolerance. This is a crapstorm.

Professor Moshe Sharon writes:

"There is no Fundamental Islam. Fundamentalism is a word that came from the heart of the Christian religion. It means faith that goes by the word of the Bible. Fundamental Christianity, or going with the Bible, does not mean going around and killing people. There is no fundamental Islam. There is only Islam full stop. The question is how the Koran is interpreted."

Muslim Israelphobia is clearly a matter of how the Koran is interpreted. The more one studies the Koran, the more clear the idea becomes that by removing Israel, the whole Middle East world would become a Muslim world, and moreso, that the whole world would be subdued under the rule of Islam.

But the most dificult content to digest regarding Muslim hatred of Israel is the way in which it is to be fulfilled. The Koran teaches Muslims to give their lives in exchange for assurances of paradise. Suicide bombings is one example. Suicide bombings are condoned by major authoritative Muslim voices whereas suicide bombings are absolutley unacceptable in Judaism and Christianity.

The accounts of Muhammad's actions and personal statements (hadith) elaborate on the Koran, providing specific dictations regarding treaties, pay, booty, prisoners, tactics, and much else. During his years in power, Mohammed engaged in an average of nine military campaigns a year, or one every five to six weeks.

Conquering and humiliating non-Muslims was a main feature of the Mohammed and his jihad. We can say for sure that Islam is not at all like Judaism and Christianity. Evidently there is more than one reason why Muslims share such pronounced Israelphobia and no, the Koranic texts were not taken out of context. The Koranic quotes mentioned in this post were made in context. Perhaps the answer is best described here:

"Jerusalem is a symbol for every Muslim in the world. The claim of the Jews to the right over it is false, and we recognize nothing but an entirely Islamic Jerusalem under Islamic supervision..." --- PA Mufti Ikrama Sabri, Al-Bilad, July 31, 1997

Although the Koran never mentions Jerusalem once, and regardless of the fact that the Torah mentions Jerusalem over 600 times, these will just be more documented facts relegated to the back alley of Muslim ignorance and blood libel, to be used as a religious rationale for Muslim imperialism, supremacy and Jewicide.

Resource: Refuting the claim that the Koran doesn’t teach violence any more than the "Bible or Torah"

Excellent talking points are identified below for readers who are in a situation where you have to debate someone who proclaims that the Koran doesn’t teach violence any more than the "Bible or Torah". Excerpted from Jihad Watch, written by the expert Robert Spencer:

I discuss this very common argument at length in my book Religion of Peace?; suffice it to say here that van der Galiën's statement, that the Qur'an doesn’t teach violence any more than the "Bible or Torah" is flatly false. For while the Bible contains descriptions of violent acts committed in the name of God, nowhere does it teach believers to imitate that violence. Where people are commanded to commit acts of violence, these are commands directed to specific individuals or groups in particular situations; they are not universal commands.

The Qur'an, on the other hand, quite clearly does teach believers to commit acts of violence against unbelievers -- see 2:190-193, 9:5, 9:29, 47:4, etc. There are no equivalents to such open-ended and universal commands, addressed to all believers to fight unbelievers, in the Bible.

Unfortunately for van der Galiën, there is not a single traditional school of Islamic jurisprudence that would agree with his assessment here, for all of the schools that are considered orthodox teach, as part of the obligation of the Muslim community, warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers.

Shafi'i school: A Shafi'i manual of Islamic law that was certified in 1991 by the clerics at Al-Azhar University, one of the leading authorities in the Islamic world, as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy, stipulates that “the caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians...until they become Muslim or pay the non-Muslim poll tax.” It adds a comment by Sheikh Nuh ‘Ali Salman, a Jordanian expert on Islamic jurisprudence: the caliph wages this war only “provided that he has first invited [Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians] to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya)...while remaining in their ancestral religions.” ('Umdat al-Salik, o9.8).

Of course, there is no caliph today, and hence the oft-repeated claim that Osama et al are waging jihad illegitimately, as no state authority has authorized their jihad. But they explain their actions in terms of defensive jihad, which needs no state authority to call it, and becomes "obligatory for everyone" ('Umdat al-Salik, o9.3) if a Muslim land is attacked. The end of the defensive jihad, however, is not peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims as equals: 'Umdat al-Salik specifies that the warfare against non-Muslims must continue until "the final descent of Jesus." After that, "nothing but Islam will be accepted from them, for taking the poll tax is only effective until Jesus' descent" (o9.8).

Hanafi school: A Hanafi manual of Islamic law repeats the same injunctions. It insists that people must be called to embrace Islam before being fought, “because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the infidels to the faith.” It emphasizes that jihad must not be waged for economic gain, but solely for religious reasons: from the call to Islam “the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the troubles of war.”

However, “if the infidels, upon receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax [jizya], 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.” (Al-Hidayah, II.140)

Maliki school: Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), a pioneering historian and philosopher, was also a Maliki legal theorist. In his renowned Muqaddimah, the first work of historical theory, he notes that “in the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.” In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with “power politics,” because Islam is “under obligation to gain power over other nations.”

For this to end, peaceful Muslims around the world would have to confront the fact that bin Laden and other jihad terrorists are regularly justifying their violence by reference to passages of the Qur’an and the words and deeds of Muhammad. If they don’t acknowledge this and formulate new and non-literalist ways of understanding this material, it will continue to be used to incite violence. In other words, the use that jihadists make of elements of the Qur’an and Muhammad’s teaching makes it incumbent upon peaceful Muslims to perform a searching reevaluation of how they understand those elements, so as to neutralize their capacity to set Muslims against non-Muslims.

People will do evil in all kinds of circumstances, and use all manner of justification for it; but the violent passages in the Bible are not equivalent to those in the Qur’an in content, in mainstream interpretation, or in the effect they have had on believers through the ages. The fact that in Islam violence against unbelievers has divine sanction in a way that it does not in Christianity makes religious violence more prevalent and harder to eradicate in Islam than it has ever been in Christianity. To equate it to a jumble of passages from the Bible to which no one would otherwise be paying any attention at all, at least as direct marching orders for twenty-first century warriors, is specious and dangerously misleading.

Koran Commentary for Children Published in Egypt Features Incitement to Fight Christians and Jews

In an investigative article in the Egyptian weekly Roz Al-Yousef, journalist Asma Nassar revealed that a popular Koran commentary for children published in Egypt contains virulent incitement against Christians and Jews, and calls on both children and adults to fight them. Nassar's critical article presents excerpts from the book and comments from Muslim scholars who participated in its writing and from senior Al-Azhar figures.

The following are excerpts from the article:(1)

How Could Al-Azhar Approve This Book for Publication?

The article stated: "This Koran commentary, intended for children, includes erroneous ideas which incite against the followers of the [other] monotheistic religions. For instance, the interpretation of the Al-Fatiha Sura [the first Sura of the Koran], states that [the expression] 'those who earn Thine [i.e., Allah's] anger' refers to the Jews, and [the expression] 'those who go astray' refers to the Christians.(2) This [rendering] contradicts the tenets and the tolerant character of the Islamic faith.

"We wished to find out who was behind these inciting interpretations, especially since they are intended for children and teach them notions of hatred and extremism. It should be noted that the Muslim scholar Gamal Al-Bana was the first to call attention to this book, in his critical article about various Koran commentaries which contradict the principles of shari'a...(3)

"We discovered that the book was first published 10 years ago by Dar Al-Sahaba Lil-Turat in Tanta, and was edited by Sheikh Magdi Fathi Al-Sayyed. Since then, there have been five more editions, and the book has been translated into several languages, including Indonesian, Malaysian, and Turkish. The question arises: How could the [Al-Azhar] Academy of Islamic Research allow the publication of such ideas? After all, [one of its] duties is to monitor [publications] that misrepresent Islam and disparage the [other]monotheistic religions. Considering [the Academy's] involvement in cultural conflicts, and its persecution of anyone who has innovative ideas in areas of thought, culture and philosophy, its [scholars] ought to revert to their original role.

"The hidden poison [of extremism] has seeped into the pages of this book, which was approved [for publication] by the Al-Azhar Academy of Islamic Research... [after being] examined by four of its scholars. [One of the authors] of the introduction is the president of Egypt's Koranic schools, and a hadith expert at Al-Azhar University, Dr. Ahmad 'Issa Al-Ma'sarawi..."

Deliberate Inculcation of Extremist Ideas

The article continued: "Overall, the book is characterized by incitement to extremism and by extremist interpretations that do not reflect the true meaning of the verses... [For example,] the book divests Islam of its most fundamental principle - [the principle of] peace - and even incites against this [notion] in its interpretation of the [following] verses: 'Forgive them, and overlook [their misdeeds], for Allah loveth those who are kind [5:13]'; 'And if the enemy inclines towards peace, then incline towards it and trust in Allah, for He is all-hearing and all-knowing [8:61].' [The book states that] these verses are abrogated by the 'Verse of the Sword,' which descended later, and which says: 'Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the Latter Day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book [i.e. among the Christians and Jews], until they pay the jizya [the Islamic poll tax on non-Muslims] and they are in a state of subjection [9:29].' [According to the book], peace and reconciliation agreements [with Christians and Jews] have been forbidden since this verse was revealed.

"In its interpretation of this verse, [the book] says: 'Allah commands the believers to fight all the infidels who do not believe in Allah and in the Latter Day [i.e. in the Day of Judgment], who do not follow His instructions regarding what is allowed and prohibited, and who do not believe in the true faith, which is Islam - i.e. the Jews and the Christians'...

"One of the most appalling parts of the book is a section quoting several verses from the Al-Maida Sura ['The Table Spread'], which the book labels as 'proof of the heresy of the Christians.' The ideas planted [by this section] in the children's minds are like a time bomb that will lead to civil war, since the children learn by heart [verses that indoctrinate them] to accuse the Copts of heresy. This is totally inexplicable, and also contradicts [the spirit of] the Egyptian constitution...
"In its interpretation of verse [9:41] - 'Go forth light and heavy, and strive hard in Allah's way with your property and your persons; this is better for you, if you know' - the book says: 'Allah the Almighty told the believers - both young and old - to set out and fight for the sake of Allah.

"In explaining verse [9:66] - 'O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end' - the book says: 'Allah commanded the believers to wage jihad against the infidels by [fighting them] with the sword, and to wage jihad against the hypocrites by imposing upon them the punishments and constraints mandated for those who violate the commands of Islam..."

The article further stated: "The expected consequence of this [book] is that, in future, thousands of young children will be willing to blow themselves up [in terrorist operations] against [non-Muslims]. This is the danger [that this book represents]. [The book's aim] is not to interpret verses, but to deliberately instill children with ideas that incite [to extremism]. This is evident from its deliberate ignoring of other verses... that reflect the true [face of] Islam, which does not discriminate among the followers of the monotheistic religions but [calls for] brotherhood among them..."

Senior Al-Azhar Scholar: This is Ignorance, Taken from Outdated and Erroneous
Commentaries

Nassar's article also elicited various responses to its criticism of the book. Former Al-Azhar vice-president Dr. Mahmoud Zalat Al-Qasbi, who co-authored the book's introduction, said: "I never saw the interpretations [quoted in Nassar's article]. I was asked to write the introduction, and that was my only involvement with the book." Al-Qasbi added that, had he seen these interpretations, he would have requested to have them changed, since he believed that offensive references to other religions were contrary to the principles of Islam. He also said that, in his opinion, the Al-Fatiha Sura had nothing to do with the Christians or Jews, since 'those who go astray' can also refer to many Muslims.

Dr. 'Abd Al-Mu'ti Bayoumi, member of the Al-Azhar Academy for Islamic Research, likewise expressed reservations about the book, saying: "It is ignorance on our part [to rely on] old and erroneous [Koran] commentaries without examining and contemplating [the verses anew]. Islamic thought needs to be reformed..." Bayoumi went on to warn against instilling these poisonous ideas in the younger generation.

Nassar also presented statements by Islamic scholar Gamal Al-Bana, who exposed the book in August 2007. He said: "The interpretations [found in the book] are generally similar to commentaries by [the Muslim Brotherhood theorist] Sayyed Qutub and other [Islamic scholars] of his ilk, who harmed the image of Islam with their erroneous interpretations of the Koran. Islam is pluralistic by nature, and does not aim to judge other religions or accuse others of heresy - that [role] is reserved for Allah on the Day of Judgment..." On the interpretation of the "Verse of the Sword," Al-Bana commented:

"Conciliation, tolerance and peace are principles of the Islamic faith, and whoever rejects them, rejects the postulates of that faith... Children must not be exposed to these commentaries, just as they should in general be left out of arguments they cannot understand, since [religious disputes] concern only the experts."

Endnotes:
(1) Roz Al-Yousef (Egypt), September 21, 2007.
(2) Verses six and seven of the Al-Fatiha Sura say: "Show us the straight path - the path of those whom Thou [i.e. Allah] hast favored, not the [path] of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray."
(3) Al-Bana's article appeared August 1, 2007 in the Egyptian daily Al-Masril-Yawm.

*********************
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent, non-profit
organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East. Copies of articles and documents cited, as well as background information, are available on request.

MEMRI holds copyrights on all translations. Materials may only be used with proper attribution.

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)
P.O. Box 27837, Washington, DC 20038-7837
Phone: (202) 955-9070
Fax: (202) 955-9077
E-Mail: memri@memri.org
Search previous MEMRI publications at www.memri.org

The Islamic duty to respect Israel

Via Melanie Phillips:

A reader wonders why more is not made of the fact that in several verses the Koran declares that Israel is the divinely appointed homeland of the Jews. The relevant verses are provided on the Arabs for Israel website and read thus:

2:47 Children of Israel! call to mind the favour which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all other nations.

2:122 O Children of Israel! call to mind the favor which I bestowed upon you, and that I preferred you to all other nations.

7:137 And We made the children of Israel, who were considered weak (and of no account), inheritors of lands in both east and west, - lands whereon We sent down Our blessings. The fair promise of thy Lord was fulfilled for the Children of Israel, because they had patience and constancy, and We leveled to the ground the great works and fine buildings which Pharaoh and his people erected (with such pride).

17:104 And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, "Dwell securely in the land of promise":

10:93 We settled the Children of Israel in a beautiful dwelling-place, and provided for them sustenance of the best: it was after knowledge had been granted to them.

20:80 O ye Children of Israel! We delivered you from your enemy, and We made a Covenant with you to give you the right side (the blessed side) of Mount Sinai, and We sent down to you Manna (special food) and quails.

26:59 Thus it was, but We made the Children of Israel inheritors of such things (the promised land)

45:16 We did aforetime grant to the Children of Israel the Book the Power of Command, and Prophet hood; We gave them, for Sustenance, things good and pure; and We favored them above all other nations.

44: 32 And We have chosen them (the Children of Israel) above the 'Alamîn (mankind, and jinns) and our choice was based on a deep knowledge.

32.23] And certainly We gave the Book to Moses, so be not in doubt concerning the receiving of it, and We made it a guide for the children of Israel.

[32.24] And We made of them Guiding Lights and leaders to guide by Our command as they were patient, and they were certain of Our communications.

[17:104] And we said to the Children of Israel afterwards, " scatter and live all over the world.and when the end of the world is near we will gather you again into the Promised Land".

The interpretation of these verses, which is believed by a handful of Muslims around the world, is that no Muslim can interfere with the ingathering of the Jews to Israel since this is the word of the Almighty himself.

Curious indeed that we don't hear anyone else referring to this particular interesting theological insight.

24 Koranic verses

24 Koranic verses that command the believers (Muslims) to fight against followers of other faiths. From USC-Muslim Student Association Compendium of Muslim Texts, Pickthall Translation:

(9:5) Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.;

(9:28) O ye who believe! The idolaters only are unclean. So let them not come near the Inviolable Place of Worship after this their year. If ye fear poverty (from the loss of their merchandise) Allah shall preserve you of His bounty if He will. Lo! Allah is Knower, Wise.;

(4:101) And when ye go forth in the land, it is no sin for you to curtail (your) worship if ye fear that those who disbelieve may attack you. In truth the disbelievers are an open enemy to you.;

(9:123) O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him).;

(4:56) Lo! Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment. Lo! Allah is ever Mighty, Wise.;

(9:23) O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers.;

(9:37) Postponement (of a sacred month) is only an excess of disbelief whereby those who disbelieve are misled; they allow it one year and forbid it (another) year, that they may make up the number of the months which Allah hath hallowed, so that they allow that which Allah hath forbidden. The evil of their deeds is made fairseeming unto them. Allah guideth not the disbelieving folk;

(5:57) O Ye who believe! Choose not for guardians such of those who received the Scripture before you, and of the disbelievers, as make a jest and sport of your religion. But keep your duty to Allah if ye are true believers.;

(33:61) Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter.;

(21:98) Lo! ye (idolaters) and that which ye worship beside Allah are fuel of hell. Thereunto ye will come.;

(32:22) And who doth greater wrong than he who is reminded of the revelations of his Lord, then turneth from them. Lo! We shall requite the guilty.;

(48:20) Allah promiseth you much booty that ye will capture, and hath given you this in advance, and hath withheld men's hands from you, that it may be a token for the believers, and that He may guide you on a right path.;

(8:69) Now enjoy what ye have won [in war], as lawful and good, and keep your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.;

(66:9) O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end.;

(41:27) But verily We shall cause those who disbelieve to taste an awful doom, and verily We shall requite them the worst of what they used to do.;

(41:28) That is the reward of Allah's enemies: the Fire. Therein is their immortal home, payment for as much as they denied Our revelations.;

(9:111) Lo! Allah hath bought from the believers their lives and their wealth because the Garden will be theirs: they shall fight in the way of Allah and shall slay and be slain. It is a promise which is binding on Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur'an. Who fulfilleth His covenant better than Allah? Rejoice then in your bargain that ye have made, for that is the supreme triumph.;

(9:68) Allah promiseth the hypocrites, both men and women, and the disbelievers fire of hell for their abode. It will suffice them. Allah curseth them, and theirs is lasting torment.;

(8:65) O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there be of you twenty steadfast they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be of you a hundred (steadfast) they shall overcome a thousand of those who disbelieve, because they (the disbelievers) are a folk without intelligence.;

(5:51) O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.;

(9:29) Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.;

(5:14) And with those who say: "Lo! we are Christians," We made a covenant, but they forgot a part of that whereof they were admonished. Therefore We have stirred up enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection, when Allah will inform them of their handiwork.;

(4:89) They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them;

(9:14) Fight them! Allah will chastise them at your hands, and He will lay them low and give you victory over them, and He will heal the breasts of folk who are believers.

More Muslim mythology

Keep moving folks, nothing to see here but more mendacity and stupidity from the Arab world.

What is it this time?

Sudan's defense minister, Abdel Rahim Mohamed Hussein, has accused "24 Jewish organizations" of "fueling the conflict in Darfur" last week in an interview with a Saudi newspaper. Hussein was interviewed during an official state-visit to the Saudi kingdom last week. "The Darfur issue is being fuelled by 24 Jewish organizations, who are making the largest amount of noise over the issue, and using the Holocaust in their campaigning," the Sudanese defense minister replied. We already know that lying is not prohibited in Islam and in fact, may be used as a weapon in order to defeat one's enemy.

The Arabic word, "Takeyya", means "to prevent," or guard against. The principle of Al Takeyya conveys the understanding that Muslims are permitted to lie as a preventive measure against anticipated harm to one's self or fellow Muslims. This principle gives Muslims the liberty to lie under circumstances that they perceive as life threatening. They can even deny the faith, if they do not mean it in their hearts. Al-Takeyya is based on the following Quranic verse:

"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution (prevention), that ye may Guard yourselves from them (prevent them from harming you.) But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah." Surah 3: 28

Regardless of this verse, the fact of the matter is that the International Criminal Court recently issued warrants for the arrest of Ahmed Haroun, the minister for humanitarian affairs of Sudan, and Ali Kosheib, a leader of that country’s notorious janjaweed militia. The Sudanese government has refused to hand over the two for prosecution. Charges include murder, rape, torture and "imprisonment or severe deprivation of liberty." Severe deprivation of liberty is a euphemism for slavery. Egypt’s Al-Ahram Weekly observed not long ago that in Sudan, "slavery, sanctioned by religious zealots, ravaged the southern parts of the country and much of the west as well."

The government of Sudan and allied Arab militia, called Janjaweed, are implementing a strategy of ethnic-based murder, rape and forcible displacement of civilians. The victims of the ongoing war crimes are non-Arab African people who have lived in the Darfur region for centuries.

To be sure, there is no doubt that Islam's selective indignation and projection (mostly toward Israel) on the matter of terror and mass murder is hypocritical. The same Muslims that complain that Arabs are victimized by Israel are totally silent with regard to the Arab Muslim extermination of mostly indigent Africans in Sudan.

Maybe because there are no Westerners or Israelis to be blamed, the crisis in Darfur, in northwestern Sudan, has commanded little international attention - until now. But the proof is in the pudding because the latest word out is that Ahmed Haroun and Ali Kosheib didn't work for any Jewish organizations and they are Janjaweed inspired Muslims and - well, 'nuff said.

For more information on what else Islam says, see this.

The unexpected profile of the modern terrorist: 26, from a caring family, married, with children, graduate

Via Jihad Watch.

The mainstream continues to awaken to the fact that jihad terrorism is not a product of poverty, and that it is ideologically driven. The Times mentions in this article that it is just now picking up on a three-year-old study; you might have read about it at this site when it first came out.
By Andrew Norfolk in The Times:

...If someone hates us so much that he is prepared to sacrifice his own life in order to commit mass murder, then we want to find a rational explanation in his personality or his background to separate him from the rest of us.
He would ideally have grown up in deprivation, with a dysfunctional family, few friends, minimal education, a poverty of expectation and a world view that can be easily moulded by the Islamist zealots whose nihilistic creed offers a simple, deadly solution to all of life’s problems.

The reality, disturbingly, is very different. A study of 172 al-Qaeda terrorists conducted four years ago by Marc Sageman, a forensic psychiatrist and former CIA case officer in Pakistan, found that 90 per cent came from a relatively stable, secure background.

Three quarters were from middle-class or upper-class families, two thirds went to college and two thirds were professionals or semi-professionals, often engineers, physicians, architects or scientists. The average age for making an active commitment to violent jihad was 26, and three quarters of the terrorists were married, most of them with children. Only one in a hundred had shown any form of psychotic disorder. Two thirds became drawn towards a terror group while living in a country that was not their homeland.

Dr Sageman’s findings, published in 2004 in Understanding Terrorist Networks, led him to conclude that “most of these men were upwardly and geographically mobile”. He wrote: “Because they were the best and brightest, they were sent abroad to study. They came from moderately religious, caring, middle-class families. They spoke three, four, five, six languages.”

Unlike the lone serial killer, these men functioned well in groups. Indeed they depended, isolated as they were in a foreign country, on a close circle of friends who reinforced and legitimised their beliefs. “You could almost say that those least likely to cause harm individually are most likely to do so collectively,” Dr Sageman wrote. Yesterday he told The Times that the existence of a terror plot involving foreign doctors should surprise no one.

[...]

Those searching for an identity that is neither Western, nor the passive Islam of their parents, are presented with a seductive call to duty, and a ready-made sense of belonging, by those espousing the Manichean tenets of radical Islam.

Here is a black and white world of good, the global ummah, and evil, in the form of everyone and everything nonMuslim. Because the West is seen as engaged in a global war against Islam, jihad in the name of Allah is seen as the duty of every Muslim.

That jihadist terrorism is abhorrent to the vast majority of Muslims, and Muslim doctors, living in Britain was emphasised yesterday when a coalition of groups calling itself Muslims United took out advertisements in national newspapers to condemn the car bomb attacks.

“Not in our name,” they said, quoting a verse from the Koran: “Whoever kills an innocent soul, it is as if he killed the whole of mankind. And whoever saves one, it is as if he saved the whole of mankind.” Your educated, middle-class jihadist will point out that the full verse actually prohibits the killing of another human being “except as a punishment for murder and other villainy in the land”.

The Koran’s fifth chapter continues: “Those that make war against God and his apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be slain . . .” For some Muslims, especially those who have lived in or near Iraq, it does not demand a great leap of faith, whatever their profession, to include the United States and Britain among those “that make war against God”.

Astonishing to see a mainstream publication quote Qur'an 5:33, which in full is rather gruesome, even in part, after noting the misleading use of 5:32 by self-proclaimed moderate groups.

Anyway, read it all.

One Islam?

Is Islam in Tehran the same as the Islam in the Phillipines? Is Islam in India different from Arab Islam? Via FrontPageMagazine:

What are the differences between Arab Islam and Islam elsewhere -- such as in India, Indonesia and in Africa? What do these differences signify? To discuss these questions with us today, Frontpage Symposium has assembled a distinguished panel, including:

Mike Ghouse, a Muslim thinker, speaker and writer, and president of the Foundation for Pluralism. He is a frequent guest on talk radio, discussing interfaith issues. He also founded the World Muslim Congress. His articles can be found at http://www.foundationforpluralism.com/ and http://mikeghouse.blogspot.com,

Dr. Timothy Furnish, a Ph.D in Islamic History (Ohio State), former U.S. Army Arabic interrogator, and college professor. He is the author of Holiest Wars: Islamic Mahdis, their Jihads and Osama bin Laden (Praeger/Greenwood, 2005), as well as a number of articles on Islamic messianism and fundamentalism,

Dr. Hans-Peter Raddatz, a scholar of Islamic Studies and author of two books on the subject of women in Islam, Allahs Schleier - die Frau im Kampf der Kulturen (Allah's Veil - Women in the Clash of Civilization) and Allahs Frauen - Djihad zwischen Demokratie und Scharia (Allah's Women - Jihad Between Democracy and Sharia). His next book, Allah and the Jews, will be published next month in Berlin,

Robert Spencer, a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law and the director of Jihad Watch. He is the author of six books, seven monographs, and hundreds of articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism, including Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World’s Fastest Growing Faith and the New York Times Bestseller The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). He is the author of the new book, The Truth About Muhammad.

and

Thomas Haidon, a Muslim commentator on legal issues involving counter-terrorism measures and Islamic affairs, he also serves as an advisor to the International Qur'anic Centre in Washington DC and the Free Muslim Coalition. He has provided guidance to several governments on counter-terrorism issues and his works have been published in legal periodicals, and other media. Mr. Haidon has also provided advice to and worked for United Nations agencies in Sudan and Indonesia.

Clich here to read about how Islam is practiced - and interpreted - around the world. An excerpt:

Furnish: Mr. Haidon’s warning about “over-emphasising the role of Wahhabism” is well-taken, and I think I have been careful about not doing so. Wahhabi Islam has only existed for two centuries, and the martial trends of Islam long pre-date it.

I do find it interesting that he also cautions me about “put[ing] words in other people’s mouths”—when I predicted that he and Mr. Ghouse would argue that “jihad means being a good Muslim,” and not expanding the Dar al-Islam at the expense of the rest of us—but then Mr. Ghouse, at any rate, proceeds to say exactly what I predicted: that after 9/11 Muslims “felt a sense of betrayal to learn that the aggression part of jihad was not in their religion, but was developed as a political tool, just as much as the crusades,” and that “it is unfortunate that the word Jihad has taken the meaning of holy war against the infidels.”

Indeed, it is unfortunate: but the word has meant that going back to Muhammad’s time, and Mr. Ghouse is woefully ignorant of Islamic history when he states that jihad as holy war "crystallized as an outcome against the crusades." Please. In this ahistorical view, Islamic rule was spread from the border of France to the Indus River in a little over a century by what—handing out brochures? Note that I am not saying Islam spread only by the sword; there were peaceful da`is, or "missionaries," especially among the Sufi orders. And Islam also spread across the Sahara, and the Indian Ocean, via traders on camels and ships. But it takes a massive ignorance, or misrepresentation, of history to argue with a straight face that jihad—bringing the non-Muslim Dar al-Harb under the political sway of the Dar al-Islam—had nothing to do with the spread of Islam as a religion and a civilization.

Video: Hamas tells Arabs: Genocide of Jews still on

While Hamas courts favor internationally, an Arabic sermon on Palestinian TV showed the ruling party continues to call for the genocide of Jews.

Hamas spokesman Ismail Radwan, quoting the hadith – the oral tradition of Muhammad – declared to the Palestinian audience: "The Hour [of Resurrection] will not take place until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them, and the rock and the tree will say: "Oh, Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, kill him!"

A video excerpt of the March 30 sermon can be viewed here.

Radwan concluded with a prayer for Allah to "take" Israel and the U.S., reported the Israel-based media monitor Palestinian Media Watch.

Islamic pro-terrorism hate film gets PG rating in Australia

I can understand how the Brits have allowed Islam to become their moral authority, but I had thought Australians had much more sense. From Sunday Telegraph:

A pro-terror hate film that urges children to martyr themselves in Islam's war on the West and calls Jews "pigs" has been rated PG by Australia's censors.

Sheik Feiz Mohammed's DVD box set, which also calls for the murder of non-believers, was initially seized by Federal anti-terror policeb but the Office of Film and Literature Classification has ruled that The Death Series is suitable to be bought and watched by children.

Symposium: Apes, Pigs and Anti-Semitism

A wide-held belief prevails in the Arab Middle East that Jews are literally apes and pigs. What engenders this mindset and psychology?

A distinguished panel joins Jamie Glazov of Frontpage, featuring:

Kenneth Levin, a clinical instructor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, a Princeton-trained historian, and a commentator on Israeli politics. He is the author of The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People Under Siege,

Nancy Kobrin, an affiliated professor to the University of Haifa, Arabist, psychoanalyst and author of the upcoming book, The Sheikh's New Clothes: The Naked Truth About Islamic Suicide Terrorism (which was pulled from publication by Looseleaf Law because they feared retaliation by Muslims following the Pope's comments),

Peter Raddatz, a German scholar of Islamic Studies and the co-author of the renowned “Encyclopaedia of Islam.” He is the author of many books, including From Allah to Terror? Jihad and the Western Deformation, Allah's Veil and The Turkish Danger. His new book is Allah and the Jews,

David Gutmann, Emeritus professor of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences at North-Western university Medical School, in Chicago. As a clinician, he has practiced and taught intensive psychotherapy. As a researcher, he has conducted psychological studies of the Galilean and the Golan Heights Druse, as well as the Bedouin of the Negev and Sinai deserts and,

Robert Spencer, a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law and the director of Jihad Watch. He is the author of six books, seven monographs, and hundreds of articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism, including Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World’s Fastest Growing Faith and the New York Times Bestseller The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). His latest book is the New York Times Bestseller The Truth About Muhammad.

Click here to read Symposium: Apes, Pigs and Anti-Semitism.

From the Pandering to Muslims Dept: British School Changes Name of Play to 'Three Little Puppies' to Avoid Offending Muslims

Now if only Muslims would cease calling Jews the "sons of monkeys and pigs" which they do in the Koran in Suras 2:62-65, 5:59-60, and 7:166, things would begin to look up. From FoxNews:

That's what one British school renamed the traditional Three Little Pigs story for a school play, so as not to offend Muslims in the community, London's Daily Mail reported. Organizers of the children's musical theater performance changed the lyrics' character's names in a move some — including Muslims — are saying went too far. "The vast majority of Muslims have no problem whatsoever with the Three Little Pigs. It's always been the traditional way of telling the story and I don't see why that should be changed," Shaykh Ibrahim Mogra from the Muslim Council of Britain told the Daily Mail, saying the name change was "bizarre."

Gill Goodswen, head teacher of Stile Common Junior School, defending the move. She said: "We have to be sensitive if we want to be multicultural. It was felt it would be more responsible not to use the three little pigs."

The Perception of the Jew in Muslim Arab Society

This essay appears in the Fall 2005 issue of the Jewish Political Studies Review, the first and only journal dedicated to the study of Jewish political institutions and behavior, Jewish political thought, and Jewish public affairs. An excerpt:

The Palestinian religious, academic, and political elites teach an ideology of virulent hatred of Jews. The killing of Jews is presented both as a religious obligation and as necessary self-defense for all humankind.

Palestinian Authority elites have built a three-stage case against Jewish existence, much as a prosecutor might build a case demanding a death sentence. As their expert witness, they bring Allah Himself, Who is said to have sent a message through the Prophet Muhammad that killing Jews is a necessary step to bring Resurrection. Stage 1 is characterized by collective labeling of Jews as the enemies of Allah, possessing an inherently evil nature. Stage 2 teaches that because of their immutable traits, Jews represent an existential danger to all humanity. Stage 3 presents the necessary solution predetermined by Allah: the annihilation of Jews as legitimate self-defense and a service to God and man.

"It was always my wish to turn my body into deadly shrapnel against the Zionists, and to knock on heaven's doors with the skulls of Zionists."

-- Reem Riyashi, 13 January 2004

The day after twenty-one-year-old Palestinian terrorist Reem Riyashi read these words for her farewell video, she murdered four Israelis in a suicide terror attack. She, or those who wrote the statement for her, believed that her act would guarantee her entry into heaven.

It will be demonstrated here that Palestinian religious, academic, and political elites are teaching an ideology of virulent hatred of Jews. The killing of Jews solely because they are Jews is presented as a religious obligation, necessary not only for Muslims and Arabs but as self-defense for all humankind.

Palestinian Authority (PA) elites have systematically built a three-stage case against Jewish existence, much as a prosecutor might build a case in court to demand a death sentence. As their expert witness they bring Allah2 Himself, Who is said to have sent a message through the Prophet Muhammad that killing Jews is a necessary step to achieve world redemption through Resurrection.

Stage 1 is characterized by collective labeling of Jews as the inherently evil enemies of Allah. Jewish traits are portrayed not as negative behavior that can be improved, but as the unchangeable Jewish nature. Stage 2 teaches that because of these immutable attributes, Jews represent an existential danger to all humanity. Stage 3 presents the necessary solution predetermined by Allah: the annihilation of Jews as legitimate self-defense and a service to humankind.

This inculcation began well before the outbreak of violence in September 2000, and continues in 2005 under the new Palestinian leadership.

These findings are based on eight years of analysis of teachings and statements by PA elites through television, radio, and newspapers and are representative of a much greater body of similar material conveyed in the PA-operated or strictly controlled media. This constitutes the Palestinian leadership's message to its populace. Numerous arrests and disciplinary beatings of Palestinian journalists by the PA's security forces have been documented. It is too early to judge whether the Mahmoud Abbas regime will permit press freedom. So far, on no issue has there been an exchange of a broad range of opinions that is indicative of change.

Islam: Beating Your Wife is Legal

In his sermon broadcast on Qatar TV, a Muslim cleric claims some wives, due to their nature, must be beaten.

"We must know that [wife] beating is a punishment in Islamic religious law," the cleric stated. "No one should deny this because this was permitted by the Creator of Man, and because when you purchase an electric appliance or a car you get instructions – a catalogue, explaining how to use it. The Creator of Man has sent down this book [the Quran] in order to show man which ways he must choose."

"We shouldn't be ashamed before the nations of the world who are still in their days of ignorance, to admit that these [beatings] are part of our religious law," he said. "We must remind the ignorant from among the Islamic Nation who followed the [West] that those [Westerners] acknowledge the wondrous nature of this verse," he said, noting that there are three types of women "with whom life is impossible without beatings."

He continued: "In America, 6 million women are beaten by their husbands every year. These are their own official statistics. Four-thousand to six-thousand women die as a result of their husbands' beatings. London police, every year, answer 100,000 phone calls and complaints of attacks against wives. In France, their slogan is, 'Beat the wife morning, noon and night, and don't ask her why – she knows the reason.'"

The cleric then defends the practice but qualifies his approval, saying Islam forbids beating anyone, even animals, on the face.

Claiming women naturally want to be controlled by men, the cleric declared, "Allah has created woman, whether Muslim or infidel, so she is happy under a strong man who will protect her and lives with her."

Concluding his message, the preacher explains to his listeners the three types of women who must be beaten:

"[The Koran says:] 'and beat them.' This verse is of a wondrous nature. There are three types of women with whom a man cannot live unless he carries a rod on his shoulder. The first type is a girl who was brought up this way. Her parents ask her to go to school and she doesn't – they beat her. 'Eat' – 'I don't want to' – they beat her. So she became accustomed to beatings; she was brought up that way. We pray Allah will help her husband later. He will only get along with her if he practices wife beating.

"The second type is a woman who is condescending toward her husband and ignores him. With her, too, only a rod will help. The third type is a twisted woman who will not obey her husband unless he oppresses her, beats her, uses force against her, and overpowers her with his voice."

The cleric's Aug. 27 message to the faithful was translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute TV Monitor Project, or MEMRI TV. The video of the sermon can be viewed on MEMRI's website