A response to Robert Spencer and others
Robert Spencer of Jihadwatch has argued that the terrorist/jihadees/takfeerees are acting according to Islam while other Muslims are just either ignoring these arguments or reinterpreting them. Essentially, one can not be a good practicing Muslim and not be a Jihadee.
Islam is not about just picking up the Quran and Hadith or even the writings of scholars of the past (in different circumstances) and making our own interpretation and acting upon it, but it is about listening to the scholars who can look at things in light of contemporary times and give us guidance on matters be it jihad or mundane issues.
While the Jihadees are claiming to follow Quran and Sunnah, they are following their own desires and not following the guidance of the scholars. For example, Mr Spencer argues that Muslims are allowed to be deceitful, and I will submit that the jihadists do use this argument, but this is not something that is from our deen as explained by our scholars. In light of this, I have posted the following article by Shaykh ‘Abdul-Muhsin al-‘Ubaykaan regarding this:
Those who travel to and enter non-Muslim lands under a pact of safety (Visas), how could they then prove treacherous and betray it!?
How can a Muslim not realise this?
Do you not see that if a man enters a non-Muslim country and is given a pact of safety (a visa), that this is a betrayal? Every betrayer of a trust will have a banner raised over him on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said: “This is the treachery of so and so” – by name. This would be publicized on the Day of Resurrection, because he is treacherous.
The Messenger of Allaah (sall-Allaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:
“Do not betray even those who betray you.”
Even the person who betrays you, you mustn’t betray him! But these people, how is it that they enter with a pact of safety (a visa) and then prove treacherous? This is not the way of the believers, nor is treachery a characteristic of the Prophet, may the Salaat and Salaam be upon him, or his companions, and we seek refuge with Allaah from that.
Taken from: http://www.madeenah.com/article.cfm?id=1241
Mr Spencer has also argued that Muslims are not refuting the jihadists on Islamic grounds, but I present to him this article that rejects the Muslim Brotherhood’s (and Syed Qutub’s) teachings and by extension the evil of the terror groups Hamas, Hezbollah and other groups of evil.
Further there are many admonitions against the actions of the jihadists to include the following:
Devil’s Deception of Abdullah Faisal
And he can find here a comprehensive Islamic refutation of the jihadists and these scholar’ debates have caused terrorists to leave behind their evil ways
We say to Mr Spencer and others that we reject the jihadists and mischief makers and their ideology a thousand times over and hate them more than you do. We are outraged and humiliated by their murderous and vile actions. Many scholars have even instructed us to work with and inform the Western authorities of the evil plots of these people should we become aware of them.
You say that you have not seen the refutations, we offer to you to read the links we have provided
Interesting links.
A military intervention is just one tool of government. There are also economic sanctions and diplomacy, for which Sullivan’s model doesn’t account.
The challenge for the government is maintaining support for a conflict when people don’t perceive a threat – of a failed state falling into the hands of extremists, for instance – particularly as Canadian deaths are rising, says Delaney.
It may well be that the key to bolstering Western resolve is another terrorist attack like 9/11 or the London transit bombings of two years ago, he says.
“If nothing happens, it will be harder still to say this is necessary.”
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/233617
Martial Law in USA ? !
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=6875
July 13, 2007
It states that because of “growing popular unrest in the United States, caused by the prolonged war in Iraq .coupled with obvious Congressional inaction,” the U.S. military has drawn up plans for combating domestic U.S. civil insurrections. This is not a theoretical study but a very specific one. Units to be used domestically are listed in detail as are detention centers, etc.
As a result of this, plans are now in train to segregate, retrain and reequip certain anti-insurgent U.S. military units now serving in Iraq and to prepare them for quick transfer back to the United States for use “as needed” The Pentagon command believes that such civil insurrections are not only a possibility but a very real probability in the event that the President and his advisors maintain their present course vis a vis the Iraqi war.
May Allah reward you,
This was an excellent response to racists like Spencer and LGF
I spent about 4 months corresponding with Spencer, showing him close to 4,000 Muslim scholars, political and religious leaders, teachers, imams, mullahs, muftis, authors, journalists, and all level of learned Muslims who clearly condemned terrorism, including extensive details of why AQ is wrong, how UBL is perverting the Qur’an and hadiths as an excuse for his own agenda, hundreds of fatwas against violence, suicide, and terrorism. Spencer rejected every single one of them, claiming they were either taqiya, or that they weren’t detailed enough. He has his mind set to refuse facts.
There is a very detailed report on Mr. Spencer and why he hates Islam (he’s getting rich from it) and why Spencer frequently writes that Usama is using the correct interpretation of the Qur’an, you can find the main article at http://hatewatchhallofshame.blogspot.com/2007/06/spencers-spin.html . There are actually 13 articles about Spencer on the site, you can find them all by using http://hatewatchhallofshame.blogspot.com/search/label/Spencer
Spencer wants war between Islam and the West, because it makes him rich. He does not want peace, and he is part of a group that will do anything to keep peace from happening.
BTW, you can find a multitude of Muslim scholars and authorities who condemn terrorism at http://facts-not-fear.blogspot.com
Rev Sputter
Thank you very much for the informative posts. I will link to them and spread them
[...] Posted August 12, 2007 Another thorn in the throats of those who claim that the Muslims are in league with the terrorists/takferees/jihadees. Read and once again see the truth for [...]
[...] out this site Jump to Comments This brother has put together a series of nice refutations of the attacks of Robert Spencer - who claims that OBL’s Islam IS Islam. I encourage all of [...]
Honestly there’s no use to even hold a dialogue with a close-minded bigot as Spencer. It’s a lost cause.
[...] this site out Jump to Comments I had to re-post this because some white supremacist Spencer/LGF supporters hacked the site and spam bombed the last [...]
many Muslim fail to realize that spencer is a strong christian fundamentalist, and he is widely popular among evangelists especially in the ‘bible belt’. The idea that Islam is considered a Abrahamic religion infuriates him. he recently publish a book titled “why christianity is a religion of peace and Islam isn’t”. Most of his Supporters tend to be strong conservative christians, who believe 1.3 billion infidels are evil. He calls the crusades a ‘defensive war’, and he probably hopes to start another one soon. He will try do to anything to discredit Islam whether it be theology, or muslims through lies and deciet. He also a hardcore christian apologist, and the growing population of muslims in the u.s angers him, he’s worried that the u.s will no longer be called what he see as a judeo-christian nation. so don’t matter how much you disprove him, he will just ignore everything because his hatred for Islam blinds him and prevents him from seeing the truth. and the fact that he makes a lot of $$$ form his bigotry proves he has no interest in channging his opinion.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=na7ofI4MoLA
You prolly realize that CAIR pulled their page with Sutter libelous “expose” on Spencer. Even CAIR realized what a fraud Sutter is.
Lady Predator:
I haven’t used anything by Sutter in my arguements. I still hold that Spencer and others are racists and held that position since before I knew of him
Brother Jalal Abualrub has accepted a challenge to debate Spencer.
Should be interesting … .
More info: http://www.islamlife.com/news.php?readmore=187
[...] Posted October 10, 2007 To this day the bigot Robert Spencer has not responded to this fact filled post, but still claims that no Muslim wants to debate him or refute his erroneous claims that the [...]
You wrote:
“For example, Mr Spencer argues that Muslims are allowed to be deceitful, and I will submit that the jihadists do use this argument, but this is not something that is from our deen as explained by our scholars.”
So your scholars preach against it but many others do not, like the impetus the jihadusts are getting, to which you conceded. So the argument you put forth is that if you don’t do it, nobody does?
Fact-filled post?
Laughable.
@ awake
the KKK make arguments that whites are superior based on biblical principle. What is your point?
Can you not see that Muslims are indeed refuting these people and many of us do NOT agree with them
Stop trying to lump us all into the same bag. This is the mistake you all make
Sameer, you will not be able to satisfy people like that. They hate you because of your religion and they despise your skin color.
I am with you all. It is horrible to portray all of a certain population as evil. I just can’t stand with that at all
awake
please take a look at this site
http://whitewatch.wordpress.com/
tell me that the author doesn’t do the EXACT SAME thing that Robert Spencer does? Can you not see that anyone can take a bunch of news about bad behavior to “prove” that these ‘people’ are dangerous?
Stormfront does it all the time with blacks and Latinos. How is Robert Spencer different?
Robert Spencer wholeheartedly endorsed Oriana Fallaci who openly stated she hates all Muslims and that they ‘breed like rats’. Robert Spencer also has links to groups like ‘SANE’ that are open white supremacists and openly call to deny blacks the right to vote
Sameer -
Your arguments are on a weak wicket. While Muslims have condemned terror, Spencer is arguing by going to the holy book while you are quoting people in the Muslim world. Apples and Oranges methinks.
You need to refute him with reference to the Quran and only then will you be taken seriously.
@ Shrek
Did you read any of the links that I provided? They are littered with references from the Qur’an, the hadith and statements of scholars of the past. Please take a look at the links and read them all. You can even listen to the lectures.
Sameer,
You wrote:
“the KKK make arguments that whites are superior based on biblical principle. What is your point?”
My point was refuting your argument that because you and many Muslims condemn terror, that Islamic textually driven terror does not exist or should not be commented on.
OK, I’ll bite. Which passage or passages from the Bible do the KKK use to justify racial supremacy?
“Can you not see that Muslims are indeed refuting these people and many of us do NOT agree with them”
Yes, we see them. Spencer’s position however is that since Islam is supposedly hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists, implying the overwhelming pool of peaceful moderates, why is the movement not so much bigger and so much louder?
Unfortunately all to often, we here “moderates” complain about Islamophobes and bigots instead. These people want to be sincerely accepted as a Islamic reformer, but deny any correlation between Islamic terror and Islamic doctrine. They also tend to slant examples of Islamic terror incidents as bad, but also include the comdemnation of people like Spencer who report on them.
“Stop trying to lump us all into the same bag. This is the mistake you all make”
The mistake is the intentional false assumption on your part. This is also typical of the Islamist or Islamist apologetic, playing the eternal victim. I personally have never done that. Robert has not either. I mean c’mon guys, Spencer has been posting for years at Jihad Watch. Can’t you guys google one example from his archives supporting your statement about Spencer hating all Muslims, and provide the link?
Just ONE EXAMPLE?
Taylor,
I went to that site and I must say that was the most feeble attempt to show equivalency with Robert Spencer that I have ever seen.
Spencer taklks about Jihadism being derived from Islamic texts and supported as such.
Whoever maintains that site you referenced, very recently I might add, attributes bad behavior of certain incidents by white people simply to their, being white.
@ awake
Spencer’s position however is that since Islam is supposedly hijacked by a tiny minority of extremists, implying the overwhelming pool of peaceful moderates, why is the movement not so much bigger and so much louder?
Awake, please read the links that I provided and you will see that people have been condemning the terrorists continuously for years BEFORE 9/11. Please read the “we hate the khawaarij” section.
It is patently FALSE to claim that we are not refuting the terrorists *on Islamic grounds*. If you look at this site you will see that. What else would you like for us to do short of leaving Islam?
Sameer,
I read all the links hours ago. I am not doubting your claims or those to whom you linked. I am doubting your estimation of Robert Spencer, the messenger, as part of this problem.
If you can get past the condemnation of the messenger, then I believe that you will become a valuable asset in finding a solution to the common problem we estimate.
Leave Islam? I would never suggest that, and it is not feasible for anyone to suggest that, nor do I believe that the measure is necessary.
What’s your take on M. Zuhdi Jasser? He’s the closest to a true Muslim reformist that I have encountered so far.
Your thoughts?
The proof of one concrete example from Robert’s work still stands. Convince me that I and many others have been a dupe for Spencer.
I read all the links hours ago. I am not doubting your claims or those to whom you linked. I am doubting your estimation of Robert Spencer, the messenger, as part of this problem.
I don’t think that Robert Spencer is a part of the problem of the khawaarij. They do a lot of stupid things and make Islam look bad.
The problem with Spencer (and many others) is that - as Taylor alluded to - they present a very skewed view of Muslims by presenting all this bad behavior as the norm. I see it as similar to what stormfront does with blacks. Stormfront will post daily examples of bad behavior of blacks and present this as the norm and ‘evidence’ that blacks are inferior. Some of the sites that Robert links to does this very thing with blacks. I personally just feel that Mr Spencer is more polished version of the same thing since he endorses many of these people.
Similarly, the readers of jihadwatch, LGF et al only read about Muslims when they are burning an effigy or generally acting stupid and do not see the other side and even refer to it as ‘dhimmitude’ when someone non-Muslim refers to something good a Muslim does. A constant barrage of only one side of the news will give a skewed view. Do you agree with that?
If you can get past the condemnation of the messenger, then I believe that you will become a valuable asset in finding a solution to the common problem we estimate.
Part of my point here is that Muslims ARE refuting the khawaarij. Why will Robert Spencer (and others) not recognize these efforts are being made instead of continuing to say that we are silent? This is why I feel that he is disingenuous. This on top of the fact that he often quotes (and endorses) people like Oriana Fallaci who have made many dehumanizing statements about Muslims and expressed open hatred without ever denouncing such a thing.
What’s your take on M. Zuhdi Jasser? He’s the closest to a true Muslim reformist that I have encountered so far.
I don’t know him or what he teaches. But generally speaking, any effort to take on the extremists will have to be spearheaded by a true Islamic scholar (one who has memorized the Qur’an, and several thousand hadith *along with the correct understanding*) and not someone just speaking and not backed up with any Islamic texts. If they are not backed with Islamic texts they are essentially making up a new religion. They can do what they want, but they will have no affect on the problem.
Fair enough. Thanks for answering.
you wrote:
“A constant barrage of only one side of the news will give a skewed view. Do you agree with that?”
Yes I do. It is intentional no doubt. Before 9/11, JihadWatch did not exist. Six years later and those who understand the correlation between jihadist action and the Islamic doctrinal texts are still so few.
There are undoubtably many good Muslims and aspects of Islam that exist. However, Spencer’s agenda is clearly stated on his own site. He does not feel compelled to report on the good in Islam.
In that regard, he is no different than the evening news in the US. All of it is problematic, yet no one accuses them of being bigoted.
This site “stormfront” is not linked by Robert on his site and I must ask you to be specific on what site Robert does lik that can validate your statement that Robert is a, or supports, racist sites.
I agree with your estimation about a reformist having an intimate knowledge of the Qur’an and respected Ahadith. Robert has proven to me that he does and usually attributes words and actions of Jihadists to parts of the texts. He is constantly accused of cherry-picking, yet never are specific examples of where he is wrong offered to support such a statement.
Roberts books are exhaustively researched and the lion’s share of his references are from Muslim sources. Being critical of aspects of Islam that promote Jihadism does not make on a religious bigot.
You wrote:
“If they are not backed with Islamic texts they are essentially making up a new religion.”
I believe that most Muslims believe this for the Qur’an is believed to be divine by many, many Muslims. It is in this fact that I concur with Robert that meaningful reform is not likely.
Robert has clearly pointed out the passages of intolerance towards Jews and Christians in the Qur’an. He has also presented the evolution in tone of Qur’anic passages during Muhammad’s time which were, initially pluralistic and more peaceful as seen in the passages revealed during his time in Mecca as opposed to the more intolerant verses revealed when he lived in Medina.
This concept of abrogation, or naskh, when one understands that the 9th sura, arguably the most intolerant chapter in the Qur’an, was penultimately revealed by Muhammad historically, is key to the discussion.
Understanding how to deal with conflicting directives in the Qur’an is paramount to any genuine attempt at reform.
Unfortunately, at the current time, for every “moderate” voice you hear, there are ten pure Islamist voices available to off-set them.
Just yesterday, 138 or so Muslims issued a “conditional” decree to the Pope and other calling for peace between Christians and Muslims in order to maintain a peaceful world order. That effort should be applauded, if genuine. (link below)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,2188742,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront
However, what was conspicuously missing was the same call or offer to Jews. Additionally, the excert that I am providing below also seems a bit problematic on a few levels
“We say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them - so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes,” the letter says.
First, the Pope has no stake in shaping US foreign policy, and quite frankly, the mere existence of the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan essentially means that we have reneged on the offer.
Second and most importantly, the vague term of Christian “oppression” is not even remotely defined and can be interpreted individually to justify any would-be Jihadist’s actions.
It appears that we have a long way to go if we are ever to achieve that goal.
Spencer is correct to say he is only stating what Muslim clerics have stated. Many Muslims are not aware what Sunni doctrine teaches. Real Islam is only in Koran. Sunni speak for themselves.
Ubaykan believes apsotates should be killed. Lets look at what Koran say about freedom of thought and religion:
The Quran(Koran) Concerning freedom:
2:256 There is no compulsion in religion, for the right way is clearly from the wrong way. Whoever therefore rejects the forces of evil and believes in God, he has taken hold of a support most unfailing, which shall never give way, for God is All Hearing and Knowing.
16:82 But if they turn away from you, your only duty is a clear delivery of the Message .
6:107 Yet if God had so willed, they would not have ascribed Divinity to aught besides Him; hence, We have not made you their keeper, nor are you a guardian over them.
4:79-80 Say:’Whatever good betides you is from God and whatever evil betides you is from your own self and that We have sent you to mankind only as a messenger and all sufficing is God as witness. Whoso obeys the Messenger, he indeed obeys God. And for those who turn away, We have not sent you as a keeper.”
11:28 He (Noah) said “O my people! think over it! If I act upon a clear direction from my Lord who has bestowed on me from Himself the Merciful talent of seeing the right way, a way which you cannot see for yourself, does it follow that we can force you to take the right path when you definitely decline to take it?°
17:53-54 And tell my servants that they should speak in a most kindly manner. Verily, Satan is always ready to stir up discord between men; for verily; Satan is mans foe …. Hence, We have not sent you with power to determine their Faith.
21:107-109 (O Prophet?) ‘We have not sent you except to be a mercy to all mankind:” Declare, “Verily, what is revealed to me is this, your God is the only One God, so is it not up to you to bow down to Him?’ But if they turn away then say, “I have delivered the Truth in a manner clear to one and all, and I know not whether the promised hour is near or far.”
22:67 To every people have We appointed ceremonial rites which they observe; therefore, let them not wrangle over this matter with you, but bid them to turn to your Lord. You indeed are rightly guided. But if they still dispute you in this matter, `God best knows what you do.”
24.54. Say: “Obey God, and obey the Messenger. but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger’s duty is only to preach the clear (Message).
88:21 22; And so, exhort them your task is only to exhort; you cannot compel them to believe.
48:28 He it is Who has sent forth His Messenger with the Guidance and the Religion of Truth, to the end that tie make it prevail over every religion, and none can bear witness to the Truth as God does.
36:16 17 (Three Messengers to their people) Said, “Our Sustainer knows that we have indeed been sent unto you, but we are not bound to more than clearly deliver the Message entrusted to us.’
39:41 Assuredly, We have sent down the Book to you in right form for the good of man. Whoso guided himself by it does so to his own advantage, and whoso turns away from it does so at his own loss. You certainly are not their keeper.
42:6 48 And whoso takes for patrons others besides God, over them does God keep a watch. Mark, you are not a keeper over them. But if they turn aside from you (do not get disheartened), for We have not sent you to be a keeper over them; your task is but to preach ….
64:12 Obey God then and obey the Messenger, but if you turn away (no blame shall attach to our Messenger), for the duty of Our Messenger is just to deliver the message.
67:25 26 And they ask, “When shall the promise be fulfilled if you speak the Truth?” Say, “The knowledge of it is verily with God alone, and verily I am but a plain warner.”
10.99-100. If it had been thy Lord’s will, they would all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe! No soul can believe, except by the will of God, and He will place doubt (or obscurity) on those who will not understand
28.55-56 And when they hear vain talk, they turn away therefrom and say: “To us our deeds, and to you yours; peace be to you: we seek not the ignorant,” It is true thou wilt not be able to guide whom thou lovest; but God guides those whom He will and He knows best those who receive guidance.
109.1-6 Say : O ye that reject Faith,! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship, And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship, To you be your Way, and to me mine.
74.11-17 Leave Me with whom I created alone!, To whom I granted resources in abundance, And sons to be by his side, To whom I made (life) smooth and comfortable, Yet is he greedy-that I should add (yet more);- By no means! For to Our Signs he has been refractory!, Soon will I visit him with a mount of calamities!
“So have We appointed for every Prophet an enemy - devils of men and Jinns; who inspire each other with seductive, deceptive speech which leads astray; but had thy Lord willed they would not have done so. So leave them with what they do devise. And let the hearts of those who believe not in the Hereafter listen to it; and let them be well pleased with it; and let them gain what they can gain!” 6:113-114
“And when you see those who meddle with Our revelations, withdraw from them until they meddle with another topic. And if the devil causes you to forget, sit not, after the remembrance, with the congregation of wrongdoers. 6:68
Islam is peace. Real Islam is only in Koran.
9:5
But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
9:29
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
9:111
Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur’an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.
5:32-33
On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.
The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;
3:28
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, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.
2:216
Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not.
4:74
Let those fight in the cause of Allah Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of Allah,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value).
4:76
Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan.
4:89
They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-
8:12
Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.”
8:55
For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are those who reject Him: They will not believe.
47;4
Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah’s Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.
Peace and tolerance indeed. Unfortunately there are just so many protocols of war in the Qur’an, that message is inevitably lost amongst the jihadists.
And right of him to do so, as that’s Islamic law according to what’s authentically narrated from Prophet Muhammad. One thing many polemicists fail to mention is that this law is implemented by the governing body of an Islamic state, much like capital punishment is legislated by various states in the US against those guilty of treason.
Yes, real Islam is found in the Qur’an, and in the Qur’an it explicitly tells you, «whatever the Messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he prohibits you from, then cease.» It also explicitly tells you, «your companion has not gone astray or erred. Nor does he speak from desire, but it is only revelation revealed.» I.e., the reports and narrations authentically attributed to him are to be accepted and belived in. They are divine revelation from Allah, just as the Qur’an is; and just like the numerous verses you quoted from the Qur’an, are to be understood in the proper contexts.
Senor Gonzalez wrote: (after an initial quoting)
Ubaykan believes apsotates should be killed.
“And right of him to do so, as that’s Islamic law according to what’s authentically narrated from Prophet Muhammad.”
Narrated in the Hadiths or in the Qur’an? Your position of the penalty of death for apostacy certainly does not support or toe the “Islam is the religion of peace line”. nor does it fall in line with the initial intent of 2:256 of the Qur’an which states that there is NO compulsion in religion.
Senor, if you think you are assisting your brethren in this discussion about Islam being a religion of peace and tolerance, yau are gravely mistaken.
You also proclaim that you fully invest in the Qur’anic mantra of:
and in the Qur’an it explicitly tells you, «whatever the Messenger gives you, take it; and whatever he prohibits you from, then cease.
I agree. That was certainly Muhammad’s intent in creating Islam. Establishing himself as the point of emulation for all of his ideological slaves. It is ironic how the Hadiths seemed to bend to fit Muhammad’s actions and will historically.
It seems you and “Koranist” have a lot to argue about so I will not get in your way any further.
Thanks for contributing. It was most enlightening. I look forward to your “contextual” arguments.
Firstly,
“awake”, I’m not Hispanic, so please don’t try to patronize me by addresssing me as señor. It would also be nice if you could at least have the decency to spell my name correctly. It’s Gonzales, not Gonzalez.
Secondly,
If you truly knew anything about Muslims and Islam, my statement, “according to what’s authentically narrated from Prophet Muhammad,” should answer your question.
Regarding verse 2:256, it would benefit you to understand this verse in its correct context i.e., that it pertains to forcing non-Muslims to to become Muslim. It does not pertain to a Muslim who wishes to commit the capital offense of apostasy; this is the verse’s “initial intent”, and not what you misunderstand it to be. You can verify this by referring to the proper exegeses e.g., Tafsîr al-Qur’an al-’Adhîm, Taisîr al-Karîm ar-Rahman, Jâmi’ al-Bayân ‘an Ta’wîl Âyi al-Qur’ân, etc. You can find them here:http://www.almeshkat.net/books/list.php?cat=6 (if you’re able to read Arabic, otherwise, you’re out of luck).
As for Islam being a religion of peace and tolerance. Peace is the final outcome and result of the implementation of Islam’s laws; the safety and security of the community, the self, and the wealth and honour of all who live under Islamic rule, Muslim or non-Muslim. These things are protected via divine laws that carry punishments for those who violate them e.g., amputating the thief’s hand, stoning the adulterer, and killing the apostate.
As for tolerance, this comes from the fact that Muslims are not permitted to force non-Muslims to become Muslims; this comes from Muslims being prohibited from insulting the false gods of non-Muslims (as explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an); this comes from the fact non-Muslims are permitted to live within Muslim lands as citizens of that state or as visitors to it, privy to the same right to protection and safety of self, wealth and honour provided to its Muslim citizens.
As for your assertions about Prophet Muhammad’s intent, obedience to the Prophets and Messengers is an obligation for their followers. So just as Muslims are obligated to follow and obey Prophet Muhammad, the Muslims during the times of Abraham, Jacob/Israel, Hud, Sâlih, Moses, Jesus, etc., were obligated to follow and obey them (e.g., “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”).
Rasheed,
My apologies for the typo.
You wrote:
“As for Islam being a religion of peace and tolerance. Peace is the final outcome and result of the implementation of Islam’s laws; the safety and security of the community, the self, and the wealth and honour of all who live under Islamic rule, Muslim or non-Muslim.”
Is there an acceptable situation where Muslims perchance live in a society that is not under Islamic rule, for if your answer is no then I hear you loud and clear. So, in your estimation under Islam, peace is only achieved under Islamic law and that non-Muslims are obliged to exist in dhimmitude?
Apology accepted for the typo. I noticed no apology for the patronizing, however. But that’s ok. It’s expected.
Of course there is. Study of the Prophet’s biography shows us that.
Islamic laws are to be adhered to and implemented by all Muslims, whether they live under Islamic rule or not. There are laws that pertain to the community that are enforced by the state (e.g., collection of the various zakâh taxes, carrying out the legislated punishments for crimes committed, ensuring the rights and honours of citizens are maintained) and there are laws that pertain to the individual Muslim’s daily life (e.g., performing religious duties such as prayer, fasting, paying the zakâh tax, performing the pilgrimage to Mecca; adhering to the prohibitions for lying, injesting intoxicants, fornication/adultery, etc.).
Among the Islamic laws and injuctions pertaining to individuals which they must adhere to and implement in their daily lives are being good to one’s neighbours and not harming them, not causing mischief in the land, honouring one’s covenants and treaties (and this includes obeying the laws you promised to obey when becoming citizens of the lands you live in, so long as they don’t entail disobedience to Allah).
No, not at all. This is your reading into my words what isn’t there.
As for “dhimmitude”, do you even know what it means? Or are you going by the distorted takes provided by Spencer and his likes?
“Peace is the final outcome and result of the implementation of Islam’s laws; the safety and security of the community, the self, and the wealth and honour of all who live under Islamic rule, Muslim or non-Muslim.”
Methinks I hear some double speak. Peace is “The FINAL outcome AND result of the implementation of ISLAM’s laws.”
So you would have me believe that Muslims living in countries not governed by Islamic law are perfectly happy to do so and have no directive to bring these non-Islamic governments unto Islamic law?
you also wrote:
“Islamic laws are to be adhered to and implemented by all Muslims, whether they live under Islamic rule or not.”
Let us use your example of death as the penalty for apostasy, to which you acknowledged and agreed with.
But then followed it up with:
“and this includes obeying the laws you promised to obey when becoming citizens of the lands you live in, so long as they don’t entail disobedience to Allah”
Hmmm, the obligatory call to obey laws outside of Islamic jurisprudence except when they are against Allah.
So for example, Muslims living in the US, who have administered and are required to adhere to Islamic law amongst themselves, who encounter an apostate from Islam, and are prohibited from killing him/her on the basis of US law, can then transgress that US law because it entails disobedience to Allah?
I really wish you would explain that one to me.
Regarding dhimmi status, I believe I am well aware of it’s meaning and origin, but since you proclaim that Spencer has distorted it’s meaning, I would also ask you to define it in it’s proper context for me.
Some Muslims may have these desires, but for Muslims living their lives according to the correct understanding of the religion, the desire should be to migrate to the lands where Islamic law is implemented in full (or at least as close to full as possible in comparison to the rest) rather than to try to bring non-Islamic governments into implementing it themselves–especially when they are not able to outwardly practice their religion.
Revolt and rebellion are generally prohibited in Islam and as Imam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah mentioned in I’lâm al-Muwaqqi’în, “Surely [rebelling against the kings and governors] is the basis of every evil and tribulation, until the end of time.” And with respect to Muslim rulers in particular, the only time when rebelling against them becomes permissible is when actions of clear disbelief are witnessed on their part, and even then it is subject to ability and weighing the benefits and harms of the situation.
Oops. Sorry about that Sameer. Could you please edit my above comment and fix the mistake with the tags? Jazakallah khaira.
Correction:
“Dhimmitude” as Spencer and his like portray it, is all about oppression and injustice, when in reality, it’s not.
Rasheed,
Believe me, I HAVE been listening.
Your definition of Dhimmis is synonomous with Spencer’s and my interpretive definition.
So, the protected peoples of the book, Christians and Jews and I believe Zoroastrians as well, can enjoy a modicum of protection and freedom in Muslim conquered lands, or course paying additional taxes well beyond the Muslim Zakat, cannot practice their religion freely and openly, cannot erect churches and generally are forced to live as second-rate citizens as subjugates, with a “certain amount” of communal autonomy. It is a very pretty picture to paint a slave in my estimation. So what part of Qur’an 9:29 did I misinterpret?
That sounds exactly like the definition I know.
as far as your attempted back-track of offering specifics that Muslims cannot do even in non-Muslim, secular run countries was a weak attempt. I believe you referred to:
“are laws such as swearing on the Bible when giving testimony, pledging unconditional allegiance to non-Muslim countries, commiting acts of polytheism, and things of this sort–if they even exist.”
Indeed, if they even exist. I find the example of the death fatwa against Salmon Rushdie to directly refute that point. When he fled to a non-Islmaic run country, the fatwa did not end, nor was the disclaimer uttered that he cannot be touched because the governing body where he resides does not support that punishment for heresy and/or apostasy. Nice try though. I guess the Islamist who stabbed Van Gogh didn’t get that memo either.
Your words reek of taqiyya, but I do appreciate them. They are more upfront and honest from so called “moderates” I usually encounter. You actually use Islam to validate your points as opposed to the push to separate Islam from itself. I believe you are following what you deem to be true Islam, and I agree with your assessment, though most “moderates” or “reformists” won’t.
I will say that you are a poster child for the need for a moratorium on Muslim immigration to the US. Since we know that conquering can be achieved through demographics as well as military means, as is becoming all too evident in Europe, using the very same democratic system you and your ilk desire to supplant with Sharia.
I did not think I would ever find a better example to validate the exiatence of Robert Spencer and Jihad Watch.
Sunni are you then, I take it?
Your words AFTER your definition:
“Dhimmitude” as Spencer and his like portray it, is all about oppression and injustice, when in reality, it’s not.”
preposterous.
Rasheed wrote (on Umar Lee’s blog recently):
“Spencer is a bastard and the worst type of liar there is. He takes aspects of the truth and twists it enough to present it in the most sinister of ways.”
Of course Rasheed, you have a single example to validate that claim, right?
As “Flanstein” simply put, reading Jalal’s posting of the internet exchange, I fail to see Spencer’s refusal to debate Jalal immediately, albeit in print.
I posted the same thing at Umar’s blog, but the last one and I assume this one won’t make it through either, for Umar doesn’t promote free speech, just propoganda.
At least Sameer allows my comments without moderation. He reserves the right to delete them if they are offensive, but offensive is not my style.
I welcome repectful debate.
This is an example of the spin and slant I was referring to. Free citizens are not slaves. There’s quite a difference between the two and your likening one to the other is nothing short of being dishonest. Another example of such is the fact that you people usually fail to mention that when the early Muslim conquerers imposed the jizyah tax on their non-Muslim citizens, the tax was lower than the taxes they were paying under the previous rulers.
There was no backtracking on my part. You can’t read properly. You brought forth an example of a state enforced penalty asking if a Muslim could enforce it in non-Muslim lands. Muslims cannot even enforce these penalties themselves in Islamic states, they must take the case to the proper authorities and have them deal with it.
This is another perfect example how people like you take incidents that go against Islamic law and teachings and try to portray them as the 100%, unadulterated true teachings as found in Islamic texts. The person who stabbed Van Gogh did so on his own accord; he had no sanction from Islamic law to do so. And the so-called “Ayatollah” is no where close to being regarded as an authentic source of Islamic knowledge, let alone an authority on (true) Islam.
Typical from your type; accuse me of lying and then try to patronize me at the same time. Nice.
Ha! I don’t even hold it permissible to vote in elections, let alone elections to appoint non-Muslim leaders to non-Muslim lands. Heck, I’m not even from (or live in) the US. But thanks for bringing to light your bigotry and prejudice.
To answer your question, yes. But that should have been obvious from the start.
Rasheed,
It was obvious, but not necessarily from the start. Thank you for giving Spencer ammunititon.
Trust me. No one who is not a Muslim wants ANYTHING to do with you and your ilk in the US.
Your statement:
“Ha! I don’t even hold it permissible to vote in elections, let alone elections to appoint non-Muslim leaders to non-Muslim lands. Heck, I’m not even from (or live in) the US.”
This just re-affirms my earlier posting. Sometimes it takes awhile to get the truth from an Islamist, but I am a patient man.
I appreciate you FINALLY calling me prejudiced and bigoted. It was long overdue from where I stand. No debate between a Muslim and a non-Muslim is complete without it.
Your embarrasing example that taxes were lower under newly imposed Muslim conquered ruled lands are just that…embarassing.
Jizya, as it were, and is, is still Jizya. A tax imposed on those who solely do not conform to Islam, but in your opinion, not oppresive nor unfair.
God bless you sir. Your honesty speaks volumes. It is because of people like yourself, that Robert Spencer will continue to grow in voice, and comprehension by the West.
The internet record of this exchange, unless Sameer chooses to wipe it, is near eternal.
Just a small example. You wrote:
“The person who stabbed Van Gogh did so on his own accord; he had no sanction from Islamic law to do so.”
Sure he did. You will offer Qur’an 5:32 as a rebuttal, but I will offer Qur’an 5:33 as a counterpoint.
5:33
The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;
Did not Van Gogh wage war against Islam by putting out that movie and was not his punishment justified by the Qur’an??
The West is not nearly as ignorant to Islam as in the past, not nearly as ignorant as true Islamists depended on in the past anyway.
Islam is simply a vehicle for Arab supremacy. Always was, always will be. Only the most elementary aware or asleep non-Islmaic souls are not privy to that reality.
They are many. Spencer intends to offset that. I understand your disdain for him, but your attempt to silence him is futile.
Reaffirms what? That I hold the opinion that democracy is against Islamic law? I believe the person best fit to lead should lead, not the one who gets the most votes.
Much like your accusations of dishonesty and deceitfulness against me, right?
I’m sure John Esposito and even Bernard Lewis would agree with you, after all, they’re the ones who affirmed that fact.
The jizyah tax is just as oppressive as income tax collected by most Western governments. I don’t consider income tax to be oppressive because it pays for the services I’m provided by the government. Likewise, the jizyah tax is used by the Islamic state to pay for services provided to its citizens.
Again, another example of a penalty that is to be enforced by the state and the autorities assigned to carry it out and portray it to be something that can be done by any Joe Blow. This is distortion and deceit. Please learn the difference between the laws which are to be enforced by the state and proper authorities and those which are to be upheld by normal everyday Muslims. The person who murdered Van Gogh did so without sanction from Islamic law, and he will be held accountable for it on Judgement day.
Raheed,
You wrote:
“The jizyah tax is just as oppressive as income tax collected by most Western governments.”
With the noted exception that western income tax is NOT collected on the basis of adherence to a particular religious ideology.
You as a Muslim and me as a Christian would pay the same in a western secular society, assuming we made realtively eqivalent salaraies from our employers.
What kind of nonsense is this proclamation to offset the reality of religious descrimination in Islamic theocratic countries??
Where are you from, Rasheed?
Typo:
Rasheed.
My apologies.
Robert Spencer tells the truth about Islam using the Koran and Hadiths to back up his points. When Muslims refuse to see that there is a need to reform and instead put their heads in the sand, in the long run it will not help their cause. When most acts of terrorism are caused by Islamists, the West wakes up to the facts, and if Muslims do not clean out their house, they will not like what the West will do their house. btw, Islam is not a race, but an ideology, calling Mr.Spencer a “racist” does not work on an informed nonMuslim.
I can see that Rasheed’s “taqiyya” skills are quite honed. But, awake, you’re right, of course. Comparing the jizya tax to income tax is comparing apples to brussels sprouts! - there’s no similarity! And, concerning Theo Van Gogh’s murder and your reference to 5:33 as proof that Islam sanctions such a murder - is spot-on. Rasheed knows this. Good Going, awake!
Muhammad worshippers need to sort themselves out, not seek fault with others. The belief-system of Islam has produced a billion nutbags who are mostly illiterate, stupid and poor because of Islam, not for any other reason.
The idea to conquer infidel lands, strike terror in the hearts of these infidels and drive them out of their homes in order to take their wealth and women as ‘booty’ is preposterous and insane.
This will end badly. So far the West has acted deliberately stupid and let many of you get away with mischief of all sorts, but its only a matter of time and you’ll be on your way to the deserts of your choice. Many of you will have no choice…
awake,
Canada; with a little bit of clicking from your mouse, you could have found that out yourself.
Louise,
If you read the other posts about Spencer, on this blog and on others like Umar Lee’s, you’ll find that they’re calling him a racist for other reasons, not because of his distortions of Islam. I think Muslims more than anyone else would know that Islam is a religion, not an ethnicity or race.
Stephanie,
I can see that Rasheed’s “taqiyya” skills are quite honed.
You can accuse me of deceit all you want. I do not practice taqiyyah, nor do I have any “‘taqiyya’ skills”. I do not deem it permissible to lie or be deceitful except in instances of dire need (i.e., fearing for my life, just as is mentioned in the Qur’an), and I do not include defending my beliefs or religion on the internet from bigots like you to be included in that.
As for verse 5:33, see my earlier comment about the punishment described in that verse being one that is carried out by the authorities, not just any Joe Blow.
Rasheed your attempts to soften the obbious double speak is quite charming. We (non-Muslims) often hear the “race card” used in describing Muslims in general. Robert Spencer has used quotes directly from the Koran,Hadiths when comparing what the Islamists use when they attack other Muslims (for not being Muslim enough) and non Muslims. You need to be honest with youself and either reform your religion or it will be done by the rest of the world and l promise you it will not be pretty.
Rasheed,
I posed the question to Sameer originally on this thread about Spencer’s supposed racism. I am STILL waiting for example one to support that statement.
Umar posted a picture of a historical 1950’s lynching awhile back on his blog attributing it to recreation for the likes of LGF and Robert Spencer. They were and continue to be, baseless slander. Just empty words that cannot be substantiated.
I have tried to debate that issue with him, but he doesn’t allow my comments through and has rendered himself merely a propogandist.
So be it.
I see you still have not addressed my repsonse to your ridiculous statements about dhimmitude and Jizya. I can understand why, however.
@ awake
First of all, all of this talk of jiziya and dhimmis are only theoretical because we are not trying to implement Islamic law in the West.
Secondly, this is the best example I can give to explain the Van Gogh murder is NOT sanctioned by Islam.
It is written on the books that murder is against the law here in the West, but can a person take the law into his own hands and kill the person he/she THINKS did the murder? Can a regular person demand a fine from a speeder?
Likewise, a muslim can not just pick up the Qur’an and THINK that they are doing the “right thing” and go act like a nut. Again, we are talking about under an Islamic government here when we speak of all these things. None of us can implement these things you are speaking of EVEN IN AN ISLAMIC country. So all of this - to me - is like talking about whether or not I can stop speeders or thieves. We just don’t live our lives thinking about these things.
As for Spencer, I mentioned earlier that he links to and praises racist individuals. I already gave Oriana Fallaci (who admitted to hating Latinos) and Mr Spencer links to an organization called SANE (Society of Americans for National Existence) that has said that blacks do not deserve the right to vote as well as propagate the racial inferiority of blacks (saying they have lower IQs) and that they are naturally prone to criminal behavior. Why would Mr Spencer link to an organization like that?
Thirdly, I think even you all have to admit that many of the people who hate Muslims do so on a racial basis (they see them as a non-white people). Muslim bloggers including me (and non-Muslim ones that defend Muslims) have gotten so many racist comments to prove this fact beyond any reasonable doubt in our minds. Tariq Nelson for one has gotten HUNDREDS of racist emails and comments filled with the n-word and other racist slurs.
I have gotten quite a few comments that I have deleted because of the BLATANT racial bigotry. So this is why we see an overlap
Other anti-Muslim bloggers are not as blatant, but the implications are clear such as their claim that the “angry” blacks accept Islam because they are less intelligent and less discerning.
Points about the jizyah tax that these people seem to either ignore or be completely ignorant of include the fact that this tax is levied on non-Muslims who choose to remain as citizens of lands that have been conquered by the Muslims; invading Muslim armies are required to give their opponents the choice between accepting Islam, surrendering and paying the jizyah tax, or fighting. These non-Muslims could easily have been subject to other outcomes; one of such being slavery (which is a route many other non-Muslim societies and cultures would have probably taken). Instead, they are allowed to remain in the conquered land as free citizens. Other possibile outcomes include being killed or exiled from the land (again which other non-Muslim societies and cultures wouldn’t hesitate to do).
Another point either ignored or unknown to these people is the fact that the jizyah tax is not levied upon residents who are non-citizens (i.e., musta’minūn - those seeking protection and safety) which include those who enter Muslim lands on vistors visas, work visas, student visas, etc.; these people pay no taxes.
One brother brought two nice articles on the jizyah to my attention. You can refer to them if you wish:
The Jizyah – A Tax on Non-Muslims?
Jizya in Islam
from what l have read here posted by Muslims not one has admiited that there is a need to reform. Rasheed and Sameer who seem to be “westernize” somewhat would not last living among a country where there was a majority of Muslims. Sameer you can talk all about Muslims not being able to murder and have it sanctioned by the Koran. Of course to the Western mind it does not make sense and is against laws, but that does not stop “Pious Muslims” from taking quotes from the Koran and Hadiths to kill non Muslims and Muslims not Muslim enough. Dont you see all the contradictions in the Koran and Hadiths?
\I have one question for you to think over and ask yourselves to answer. Mohummad said in so many words about how the Jews and Christians failed their religion and that he got it right from your Allah, What is wrong with the “Ten Commandents”? How could the Ten Commandents be corrupted? how are those laws sent down by God be eve changed by Mohammad? Why do they need changing? You just have to read more in the Koran and know it has so many contradictions? to those born Muslim it would be very difficult to see the flaws, but my God how can any person become a Muslims when reading such a violent book and think it esposes peace?
Reform of what, Islam or Muslims? If you mean reform of Islam, then there is no need for it as the religion is complete and perfect. On the other hand, if you mean reform of Muslims, then yes. There is a need for it as many Muslims today are ignorant of their religion and its true teachings. Having Orientalist-wannabes like Spencer and his distortions doesn’t help.
And you know this how? Based on your unfounded assumptions, no doubt.
The Qur’an does not sanction murder or unjust killings.
There is no contradiction between the Qur’an and authentic hadîths.
You want to read a book with tons of contradictions and plenty of violence, read the Bible. As for the Ten Commandments, Christians don’t even follow the first two and most important commandments from them: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (i.e., Jesus and for Catholics Mary as well), and “Thou shalt not make for thyself an idol” (the cross, the images and statues of Jesus, Mary, saints and other righteous people).
Btw, brother Sameer, there should be a msg I posted that’s awaiting moderation.
.
The Qur’an does not sanction murder or unjust killings.
ok there is deception in this statement,, what is considered unjust “killings” from the actions of Muslims, they can kill all Jewish children in Israel, its bee done and sanctioned. oh yest dont forget Twin Towers in NYC sanctioned by your common “pious Muslim” .
btw Christians follow the New Testament, and the Cross and other images are part of the Christian religion and not considered another God. Muslims walk have plenty of shrines they go for their ritual hommages, including btw the black rock in Mecca. Again, Muslims do the majority of killings among themselves and its sanctioned in the Koran. No where in the Bible does it sanction killings of certain peoples for all times, such as in the Koran, when rocks and trees talk to Musims about killing Jews hiding behind them. The Kora also states not to keep friend with Jews or Christians even if your family are one of them. If you do not think these are aspects of a dark deadly cult, then keep on saying that Islam is about peace.
oh l will not wait for any specifics about any charges of false statements from Robert Spencer, you just keep on playing the race card, victim card.. l can go on.. wake up man, the Koran tells you to murder when someone writes or does a film about Islam.. aka VanGogh. now do you think Islam needs to be reformed.. but done say it out loud in some Islamic country.. your wont last too long. yeah safe in Western lands to say what you want.. and you still think Islam is for peace? mmm
Robert Spencer also supports racist groups like the JTF. See the following link
http://hallofhaters.wordpress.com/2007/10/15/joe-kaufmans-group/
test
Sameer,
Thanks for the reply. Rasheed parrots the same line about obeying the laws of the land in which one resides, but he is more specific in that Islamic law is to be practiced within the Muslim community and the community should seek to increase the sphere of influence of Sharia. He also spoke of being able to obey laws of the country as along as they are not against Allah, which is pretty ambiguous and open-ended for interpretation.
The lack of a unifying voice in the Islamic world allows for many to interpret what is the correct path of Islam. The jihadists employ this built-in excuse regularly, since the Qur’an has differeing verses in meaning on what appears to be the same subject. A good example of this is the two postings by Koranist and then by me, which appears to paint two completely different intents of the Qur’an.
Dhimmitude and Jizya, while theoretical because they are not manifest here in the West, IF attained, as they heve been implemented in other countries, are not conducive to the welfare of non-Muslims, regardless of how rosy and fair Rasheed tried to frame them as. Listening to his words simply re-affirmed my beliefs and compel me and many others to reject Islam at every turn.
Racism exists worldwide, but in the context of Spencer’s writing it would be more appropriate to call him a religious bigot instead of a racist, though personally, I believe he is neither, but he certainly is critical of Islam, more specifically Islamic Jihad. He made no apology for the perpetrators when he reported on the “Fort Dix Six”, who were ethnic Albanian Muslims, hence, white.
I see that Spencer does link the SANE site, but I cannot find the link you spoke of denigrating blacks and proclaiming that they not have the right to vote. If this is true, it is important that someone let Robert know for I am all but assured he would disassociate himself from them.
Do you have a link?
Thanks in advance.
awake
Louise,
The deception is a figment of your imagination. Key words: “sanctioned by the Qur’an”. The killing of Jewish children, who sanctioned this, the Qur’an or extremists passing their twisted verdicts? The WTC attacks on 9/11, who sactioned these, the Qur’an or by “your common ‘pious Muslim’” (as you yourself proclaim)? F.y.i., your common everyday Muslim does not equal the Qur’an. The Qur’an has not and does not sanction these actions. So where is the deception?
Take note, I said “the first two and most important commandments.” Your worship of a god besides Allah is your worship and veneration of Jesus (and for the Catholics, like Spencer, their worship and veneration of icons like Mary and the various other saints they pray to). The graven image thing, that should be self-evident and self-explanitory.
Unfortunately, yes there are Muslims who commit polytheistic acts, which is one of the reasons other Muslims are trying to educate their fellow brothers and sisters the tenets and fundamentals of their religion. None of these polytheistic acts, however, are sanctioned or encouranged by Islamic law (i.e., the Qur’an and authentic Sunnah). Instead, these acts are declared heretic innovatory practices and they are to be shunned and abolished.
You must not read the OT, I take it.
Funny. I’ve read the Qur’an front to back several times (in English and in Arabic) and I’ve never come across such a verse in the Qur’an.
More twistings from anti-Islamic polemic, I see. Perhaps you should try learning the Arabic language and learning what the term “walî” and its plural “awliyâ’” really mean, as that’s the only way you’ll rid yourself of the compound ignorance you have on the matter. After all, any attempts at explaining it by a Muslim will most likely be met by accusations of deceit and dishonesty on your part.
Funny. Again, I’ve read the Qur’an several times, and I haven’t come across this verse either.
@ awake
As for SANE, then you will see in their mission you will see that they call for:
A return to the original U.S. Constitution and the principles of limited government for which it stood.
Note that the “original U.S. Constitution” does not contain the 13th amendment.
They also said:
they said:
There is a reason the founding fathers did not give women or black slaves the right to vote. You might not agree or like the idea but this country’s founders, otherwise held in the highest esteem for their understanding of human nature and its affect on political society, certainly took it seriously. Why is that? Were they so flawed in their political reckonings that they manhandled the most important aspect of a free society – the vote? If the vote counts for so much in a free and liberal democracy as we “know” it today, why did they limit the vote so dramatically?
Thus their call for a return to the “original U.S. Constitution” is explained. They believe that blacks are inherently inferior :
Is there something unique about the Black American (or, at least the Black New Yorker) that leads him to murder so disproportionately and to most often kill and victimize his own? Do we see patterns of Black culture that arise out of Africa and the wanton murder of blacks by blacks there? Why have the colonized blacks of the African continent, after having acquired their freedom and independence, so willingly slaughtered their own and live in despicable disease and squalor despite a land of enormous riches while Indians of the Indian sub-continent have successfully moved from British rule to democracy and relative civility even in a country that still maintains social inequalities as a fact of their culture?
They also say that blacks are a murderous people
I have seen such language from several other anti-Muslim people such as American Renaissance, Stormfront and others who often link to jihadwatch and LGF.
Sameer,
Thanks for the response. Robert cannot control who links to him, but he can control who he links to.
Those posts above are certainly dubious, but I must ask for the link to determine if they are site sponsored comments or merely commentary from the community. There is a big difference. Do you have any links?
awake, Sameer provided the links to the articles on the SANE site. They’re embedded in his post.
That is some lengthy “moderation” delay my comment is residing in.
What gives Sameer?
Sameer,
I have read the posts on Sane’s site and forwarded our collective concern to Robert Spencer. He has given me permission to print his response:
“I’ve removed the SANE link. I didn’t look too closely, but I just don’t need the distraction from my efforts at JW. This is not a racist site, but a site calling for a broad coalition of all peoples against jihadist and Islamic supremacist violence. Had I known this material was there, I wouldn’t have linked SANE in the first place.”
“Umar Lee and Sameer Parker (whose alleged “refutations” don’t come close to establishing what he claims they establish, but that’s another matter) can’t find anything inaccurate about Islam in what I actually say, so they (especially Lee) resort to defamation and lies about some secret attachment I supposedly have to white supremacism — which is especially ironic since, as I’ve shown at Jihad Watch, actual white supremacist groups such as the Aryan Nations like what they see in the global jihad, and are quite well disposed to it and to Islam in general.”
“Lee, Parker and the rest are liars, pure and simple. They also share the Leftist/Islamist malady of believing their opponents to be morally evil and in bad faith, which is not a useful stance from which to begin a debate.”
“Feel free to print this.”
Cordially
Robert Spencer
I think Robert’s response and the subsequent removal of the link to SANE based on your posted links is an act of good-faith on Spencer’s part. Spencer’s position against the global Islamic Jihad and it’s impetus at least in some part to Islamic teachings and Islamic texts is no secret, and is openly professed by him as his agenda. In all fairness, Robert cannot be responsible to monitor daily each site he has linked to.
With regards to Robert’s comments on white supremacists, I believe his position is best supported by his written words. Please see the below links for his commentary on articles related to this subject as a form of explicit clarification of his position:
I have links, but it seems it holds up my comments. I can and will provide them if you allow me.
I think you can understand my point. Calling Spencer a racist is easy. It is just a phrase and requires no substantiation to make that claim, But it certainly does not make it one bit true.
It is easier to dismiss him with false claims than to address the substance of his work. This type of slanderous discourse benefits no one.
Regards,
awake
Sameer,
Please disregard the two posts “in moderation”. I cut the comment in half and removed the links and they went through.
The links to Spencer’s words however, are integral for me to validate my point about him and the accusations that he is a white supremacist.
I hope you allow them in the near future.
According to Spencer, the white supremacists and the jihadists are natural allies and Spencer’s well-documented disdain for the jihadists would render his support of supremacists an illogical contradiction on his part.
Regards,
awake
More twistings from anti-Islamic polemic, I see. Perhaps you should try learning the Arabic language
This is another form of deception by some Muslims, that because one cannot read Arabic, those books with translations from Arabic to English are all wrong? How much BS can one blurb out before it hits the fan. What ever you say it matters not much as the “actions” of militant islamsits are able to parrot their Koran talking points. The Hammas monsters can kill with impunity even fellow Muslims, and l do not hear an outcry but its blame the Joos for all things in the ME. Robert Spencer should be hailed as a great aid to the peace and law abiding Muslims who want to make a change in their daily lives. But what he gets from Islamists appologists is quite different, they blame it all on others, but never their faults. Islamist appologists cannot even say my we do need reform if we are going to live in a free democratic society where freedoms are the norm. It seems you rather have dictators and submit to some monstrous clergy.
Ah, as expected, your mantra of “deception by some Muslims”.
All wrong? No, but some inaccurate or blatantly mistranslated, yes. Translating “walî” and its plural as “friend” and “friends” is just one example (another is the translation Spencer used for verses 2:191 & 2:217, “persecution is worse than slaughter” (source); translating “fitnah” and “qatl” as “persecution” and “slaughter” respectively is not only inaccurate, it’s wrong, especially considering the exegeses for the verses).
Typical from you bigotted types. “Who cares what the Muslims say about the Qur’an and its true teachings, or even what they say about extremist Muslim groups and organisations. The actions of these extremist groups and organisations is proof enough that Islam is evil and violent.”
The Hammas monsters can kill with impunity even fellow Muslims, and l do not hear an outcry but its blame the Joos for all things in the ME. Robert Spencer should be hailed as a great aid to the peace and law abiding Muslims who want to make a change in their daily lives. But what he gets from Islamists appologists is quite different, they blame it all on others, but never their faults. Islamist appologists cannot even say my we do need reform if we are going to live in a free democratic society where freedoms are the norm. It seems you rather have dictators and submit to some monstrous clergy.
Don’t be self-deluded into thinking that your ignorance is any type of evidence and proof that Muslims don’t speak out about the ideologies and misguided actions of extremist Muslims, or that they don’t call for Muslims to reeducate themselves about the foundations and fundamentals of their religion and beliefs.
Oops. Mistake with the tags again. Last two paragraphs should read:
Don’t be self-deluded into thinking that your ignorance is any type of evidence and proof that Muslims don’t speak out about the ideologies and misguided actions of extremist Muslims, or that they don’t call for Muslims to reeducate themselves about the foundations and fundamentals of their religion and beliefs.
ok Rasheed what is your take on the murderous Hammas and Hiz boys, do you think they are justified with their tactics? so far you seem to be a mouthpiece for CAIR,, and btw what do you think about CAIR? and about Sharia? Oh and btw,
how do you explain the joyous celebrations on the Arab street in the ME? And Rasheed l will go by my instincts