Muslims often claim that Islam is better religion for black people because Islam is against slavery. Unfortunately, this is a lie and brasen hypocrisy. Muhammad kept slaves and even had female sex slaves. Also, the Islamic god allah promises Muslims that they will have slaves for eternity, by the thousands, in the Jenna:

FROM QUR’AN:

Qur’an (33:50) – “O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee…”

Qur’an (23:5-6) “..who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess…”

Qur’an (4:24) – “And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess…”

Qur’an (8:69) – “But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good…”

Qur’an (24:32) – “And marry those among you who are single and those who are fit among your male slaves and your female slaves…”

Qur’an (2:178) – “O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered; the freeman for the freeman, and the slave for the slave, and the female for the female.”

Qur’an (16:75) – “Allah sets forth the Parable (of two men: one) a slave under the dominion of another; He has no power of any sort; and (the other) a man on whom We have bestowed goodly favours from Ourselves, and he spends thereof (freely), privately and publicly: are the two equal? (By no means;) praise be to Allah.”

FROM HADITH:

Bukhari (80:753) – “The Prophet said, ‘The freed slave belongs to the people who have freed him.’”

Bukhari (52:255) – The slave who accepts Islam and continues serving his Muslim master will receive a double reward in heaven.

Bukhari (41.598) – Slaves are property. They cannot be freed if an owner has outstanding debt, but can be used to pay off the debt.

Bukhari (62:137) – An account of women taken as slaves in battle by Muhammad’s men after their husbands and fathers were killed. The woman were raped with Muhammad’s approval.

Bukhari (34:432) – Another account of females taken captive and raped with Muhammad’s approval. In this case it is evident that the Muslims intend on selling the women after raping them because they are concerned about devaluing their price by impregnating them. Muhammad is asked about coitus interruptus.

Bukhari (47.765) – A woman is rebuked by Muhammad for freeing a slave girl. The prophet tells her that she would have gotten a greater heavenly reward by giving her to a relative (as a slave).

Bukhari (34:351) – Muhammad sells a slave for money. He was thus a slave trader.

Bukhari (72:734) – Some contemporary Muslims in the West, where slavery is believed to be a horrible crime, are reluctant to believe that Muhammad owned slaves. This is just one of many places in the Hadith where a reference is made to a human being owned by Muhammad. In this case, the slave is of African descent.

Muslim 3901 – Muhammad trades away two black slaves for one Muslim slave.

Muslim 4112 – A man freed six slaves on the event of his death, but Muhammad reversed the emancipation and kept four in slavery to himself. He cast lots to determine which two to free.

Bukhari (47:743) – Muhammad’s own pulpit – from which he preached Islam – was built with slave labor on his command.

Bukhari (59:637) – “The Prophet sent Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated Ali, and Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, ‘Don’t you see this (i.e. Ali)?’ When we reached the Prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, ‘O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?’ I said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumlus.’”

Abu Dawud (2150) – “The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Qur’an 4:24) ‘And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.’” This is the background for verse 4:24 of the Qur’an. Not only does Allah grant permission for women to be captured and raped, but allows it to even be done in front of their husbands. (See also Muslim 3432)

Abu Dawud 1814 – “…[Abu Bakr] He then began to beat [his slave] him while the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) was smiling and saying: Look at this man who is in the sacred state (putting on ihram), what is he doing?” The future first caliph of Islam is beating his slave for losing a camel while Muhammad looks on in apparent amusement.

Ibn Ishaq (734) – A slave girl is given a “violent beating” by Ali in the presence of Muhammad, who does nothing about it.

Ibn Ishaq (693) – “Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu’l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons.” Muhammad trades away women captured from the Banu Qurayza tribe to non-Muslim slave traders for property. (Their men had been executed after surrendering peacefully without a fight).

Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller) (o9.13) – According to Sharia, when a child or woman is taken captive by Muslims, they become slaves by the mere fact of their capture. A captured woman’s previous marriage is immediately annulled.

Related articles

• Islamic Slavery, Part 1 (usapartisan.com)
• Bill Warner: The Principles of Islam is Submission and Dualism Based on the Concepts of Slavery (americandefenseleague.wordpress.com)
• Multiple Arabic Language Koran Versions Explained (paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com)
• Uncorrupted Bible Questions (paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com)
• Muslim Prostitution (paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com)
• Multiple ARABIC Quran Versions (paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com)
• Proofs the Holy Bible is uncorrupted (paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com)
• Women in Islam (paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com)
• Safiyah the Jewish Wife of Muhammad (paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com)

Muhammad ‘Abd al-Haqq

The audio is very hard to hear over the shouting and jeering and clapping of the West supporters. But believe me, I live here in Florida(we have a strong CAIR presence here), and Nezar Hamze certainly does not have a lack of Islamic knowledge. He was merely being shouted down by an arrogant demagogue in a hostile environment. When he tried to respond, did you hear the women say “We don’t wanna hear it!”?. Or Allen West shouting “put your mic down and go home!” at the end? Real classy.

Let me break it down if I can, and if you can bear reading info you may already be aware of.

Hamze won the “debate” from the beginning, when he asked, after pointing out that West blames certain violent attacks on American citizens on Islam by saying they were following Islam and the Qur’an.

Hamze: “You recently told a Marine that uh, the terrorists that attacked the United States and the people that are attacking America are following Islam, are following the instruction of the Qur’an. So, very simple question…Can you show me in this Qur’an where it says attack Americans, attack America, or kill innocent people?

Basically he was asking, “Show me in the Qur’an justification for killing innocents or killing people simply for not being Muslims”.

West: very sarcastically, to the delight of the crowd,

“Well of course it doesn’t say attack America or attack Americans, the book(the Qur’an) was written somewhere around the 8th or 9th century. America wasn’t even around..”

Besides the very simplistic reasoning,

Here is Factual error number ONE from West: The Qur’an was written down during the lifetime of the Prophet(alayhi salatu wasalam). It was compiled for the sake of accuracy and canonization, after the death of the Prophet, as his death ended the revelation of the Qur’an. Sounds like a Cook and Crone Orientalist revisionist history.

Then he goes on to list violent incidents involving Muslims, police blotter style.

West: “You do have the verse of the sword in there…and there is talk about killing infidels”.

Factual error number TWO: There is no “verse of the sword” as there is no mention of a sword anywhere in the verse. It is an appellation given to it by Western critics.

Factual error number THREE: There is no talk about killing infidels. “Infidels” is a word that comes from Catholicism whose meaning has broadened over the centuries, and which has no one-to-one correlation with the Arabic word mushrikeen. The verse is about mushrikeen, variously translated as “idolaters”, “those who associate partners with Allah”, polytheists, and/or “pagans”. And the quranic references are not to all mushrikeen. The word kafir may be translated as “infidels”, but this is not completely accurate, as kafir means “one who covers up(the truth)” or “one who rejects Faith after realizing its Truth”. Something is definitely lost in translation.

After a very hard to make out exchange because of people talking over each other,

West: “628, battle of the Trenches, 3,000 Jewish people slaughtered..”

Factual error number FOUR and FIVE: Now I have heard that anywhere from 400-900 Jews of the Banu Qurayza were executed. But based on the sources themselves we know how unreliable these numbers are. But, “3,000 Jewish people were slaughtered”? Perhaps Hamze couldn’t “blow sunshine up West’s butt” because he was blocked by the ridiculous figure West was pulling out of there? Also, the Battle of the Trench did not occur on 628 AD. In reality the battle took place a year before on 627 AD. It seems that the more “educated” Islamophobes rely on their distortions vis a vis Islam to go unchecked by the mass of Islamophobes who cannot be bothered to do their own research. Along with his recitation of the police blotter of violent events related to Muslims(not necessarily Islam) it is obvious that the usual Islamophobic talking points are mere regurgitation. West obviously could not be bothered to research the statistics that he blindly parrots.

After thunderous applause and cheers for West’s police blotter tirade listing of “events in Islamic history”,

West:After mentioning Khadijah(radhi Allahu anha)…., “But something happened after Muhammad enacted the hijra,…it(Qur’an) became violent”

Factual error number SIX: It is a common misconception that all of the “peace verses” of the Qur’an came/were revealed in the “Meccan period”, and all the “sword verses”, came after the hijra in the “Medinan period”. Chronological and historical analysis makes it impossible to make that blunder. People who bolster their hate of Islam by legitimizing the narrative of Extremists and talk about abrogation in the Qur’an without knowledge, make this ridiculous argument. Islamophobes and Muslim Extremists seem to be two sides of the same coin. Both delight in the idea of an abrogation that allows Muslims to allegedly be prescriptively violent and in the idea of murdering 3,000 Jews for no good reason other than their Jewishness.

Now that’s six factual errors in less than FIVE minutes of video, and that only because I could only hear six errors. There could be more. And there are Islamophobes all over the net “shouting” about how West “schooled” Hamze about Islam! Here is the video again, if you haven’t already seen it:

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/22/video-cair-confronts-allen-west/comment-page-2/#comments

In the comments section we can see how much people idolize this pompous demagogue. People want him to be President some day! The same type of people who want Palin in office! Scary stuff!Judge for yourself, but..

Buddha, Jesus and Mohammed: prophets of peace to slavery, jihad and Sharia

Lee Jay Walker

Modern Tokyo Times

The revamping of Mohammed throughout the world continues because of Islamic kitman but what is mystifying is that non-Muslim religious leaders, secularists and liberals appear to be giving the Islamic faith a helping hand.  Therefore, it is essential to get to the heart of Islam and see the reality of what happened under Mohammed.

If Buddha and Jesus were alive today then clearly they would not break any laws in democratic nations because they taught peace and supported the poor by their actions and deeds. Therefore, while people in modern societies may reject their different messages, it is abundantly clear that both individuals never killed, never supported war and nor did they support power and authority.

However, the prophet of Islam is very different and it is over simplistic to claim that he was a man of his time, after all, he is meant to be a holy religious leader and both Buddha and Jesus go further back in history.  Yet Mohammed married more than nine women at the same time, supported killing apostates, married a child, had sex with female slave concubines, and ordered the killing of many people by his concept of jihad and dhimmitude.

Not only this, but unlike the holy scriptures of the Christians and the New Testament or Buddhists and their holy scriptures based on what Buddha preached; then Mohammed is clearly obsessed by war, jihad, enslaving his enemies, jizya and other violent deeds.

Also, Mohammed, unlike Buddha and Jesus, is extremely contradictory and it appears that his thinking was based on power concentration.  In the early period when he was weak he was more open-minded but once he obtained power then he was ruthless and he implanted ideas which were brutal towards non-Muslims.

Therefore, while Buddha and Jesus did not seek power concentration, enforcing laws on their enemies, developing military armies and implementing a draconian legal system in order to preserve power; the same can’t be said about Mohammed because he was driven by power concentration policies and taxing the dhimmis (non-Muslims) or enslaving them if they did not accept the superiority of Islam.

The Buddha rejected the caste system and Jesus went to the lepers and outcasts in society.  It is clear that they were against discrimination and the victimization of others and their respective message was based on humanity and turning away from power concentration and enforcing laws on people who were already downtrodden.

Mohammed, however, was very different because if people accepted Islam then he also cared for the poor within his followers and he told people to give one sixth of their income to the poor.  However, it was non-Muslims who would be taxed heavily in order to redistribute their wealth and give it to the new masters. Therefore, some Muslim political leaders were also concerned by mass conversions once a political system based on Islam had been set up because this reduced their fiscal power.

After all, they faced the contradictions of an Islamic state which wanted Islamization but understood that the dhimmis tax was much needed.  Not surprisingly, the revenue of an Islamic state suffered by mass conversions and for this reason Islamic slavery was ongoing from the 7^th century and up until recent times.

It must be remembered that it was only outside pressure which forced Saudi Arabia to abolish slavery in the 1960s.  Unlike the anti-slavery movement which emerged within the Christian world of its day you never had a Muslim anti-slavery movement and this was because of the static nature of nations which had become Islamized.

In time they lost their taxation power because Islamic law and Islamic zealots desired Islamization and once the coffers of the dhimmis had dwindled because of religious discrimination, pogroms and apartheid laws – then the last option was enslaving non-Muslims outside of their control. This factor meant that Islamic armies entered into Africa, other parts of Asia and Europe became a House of War was declared. Therefore, Islamic rulers would expand their power based on jihad, enslaving the people of their newly expanding state and so forth.

Also, Mohammed during his lifetime enslaved people who were free during numerous wars and clearly he had no qualms in taking wives or concubines from men he had killed.  Not only this, he also supported Muslim armies to enslave non-Muslims and he gave Muslims the right to take non-Muslim females and use them for sex during jihad.

Ironically, all the negatives about Mohammed are stated clearly in the Koran and the Hadiths.  Therefore, when people talk about anti-Islamic writers it is strange because the sources of what happened and the evil deeds of Islam are documented openly in the Hadiths and Koran.

Buddha and Jesus were revolutionary because they challenged the conventions of the day and they did this by spreading messages of peace and inner-purification.  However, Mohammed who had been faithful to his first partner then appears to have gone the wrong way because after her death he lusted after more women, concubines and even married a child.

However, why didn’t Muslims hide all the negatives of Mohammed and this even applies to visiting a Muslim place of worship in Jerusalem on an animal which does not exist and all at the speed of light.  Yet, it is factual that the mystical night journey never happened because at the time you had no mosque in Jerusalem and even his loyal followers found it difficult to accept.

Despite this, they remained loyal to Mohammed and ignored the fact that Allah allowed him more than 4 wives and having sexual concubines.  However, for other Muslims they were bound to take no more than 4 wives according to Islamic Sharia law but history tells us that many Muslim rulers had countless numbers of women in harems and so forth.

Of course you can find dark passages in all religious books if you desire or people can manipulate language or different meanings.  However, religions throughout history have reformed themselves and modernized and by doing this they have rejected the harshness of aspects of some of their teachings and accepted religious freedom.

This does not apply to Islam and the more a nation is ruled by Islamic Sharia law then the more brutal the nation happens to be.  In the modern world only Islamic states still support killing apostates, killing homosexuals, cross amputation, apartheid marriage laws which both discriminate against women and non-Muslims, and other draconian factors like stoning to death for adultery and allowing old men to marry children.

In my article called Prophet Mohammed, the Banu Qurayza, Kashmir, and Mansuur Mohammed I highlight many disturbing realities.  Therefore, I comment that “…the Banu Qurayza tribe who followed Judaism and the Muslim convert to Christianity in Somalia in modern times, Mansuur Mohammed; represent the reality and barbarity of Islam and the same applies to the destruction of Hinduism in Kashmir.  In these three events, we can see what happened to ancient Christianity in Nubia, what awaited the Zoroastrians of Persia, what awaited the fate of Buddhists and Hindus in Afghanistan, and what awaited so many other faiths by the sword of Islam.”

I continued in this article by referring to the Banu Qurayza tribe and stated that Matthias Kuntzel, the author of Jihad and Jew-hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the roots of 9/11 comments on page 65 that “In 627 the Qurayza tribe was exterminated following a siege of Medina by the Meccans.  Mohammed went to the marketplace in Medina and had graves dug there.  Then the Jews were brought to him and beheaded at the gravesides – between 600 and 900 men in all.  The executions lasted the whole day…..Most of the women and children were sold into slavery in Medina, the remainder in Syria and Najad.”  (Johan Bouman, op. cit., p.86)

This reality can’t be ignored and I commented in the same article that “…..the prophet of Islam supported the entire massacre of all Jewish males who followed the religion of Judaism and who were over puberty. Mohammed just sat back and watched this gruesome act and did nothing, apart from divide the spoils afterwards.  This barbaric act took place under the rule of Mohammed in the 7th century and in this sense the beheading of Muslim apostates to Christianity in Somalia can be linked to the deeds of Mohammed.”

“Given this, Mansuur Mohammed who was beheaded in Somalia for being an apostate in the 21st century, joins the Islam of Mohammed and the 7th century because he met the same barbaric fate.   Koranic prayers would have been recited while beheading the Banu Qurayza and the same applies to the al-Shabaab (al-Shabab) in Somalia who were reciting the Koran and shouting in joy while cutting the head off a Christian convert.”

“Mohammed clearly approved of the entire slaughter of all Jewish males over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza and he just sat back and watched the beheadings, one after one, into the hundreds, and eventually every Jewish male over puberty was killed for remaining loyal to Judaism.” 

“The mind of Mohammed was clearly violent because at no time did he try to stop his followers from doing this brutal crime.  In direct contrast to Jesus who stopped the prostitute from being killed by stoning to death we have the prophet of Islam who endorses such barbaric methods.  Mohammed not only watched this brutal genocide of all male followers of Judaism over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza; for this was not enough because he also enslaved the Jewish women and children of this tribe and plundered all their wealth which was to be shared by the victorious Muslims.”

“Mohammed now “set in stone the brutality of Islam” and this applies to jihad, dhimmitude, jizya, killing apostates, stoning people to death for adultery (despite doing adultery himself), plundering the wealth of the vanquished and enabling the forces of evil to kill in the name of God.”

Again, I repeat once more that all this violence was endorsed by Mohammed and is documented by Islamic scholars. Therefore, the Hadiths and Koran provides this information openly despite some English versions of the Koran being manipulated in order to soften the hatred which is espoused in parts of the Koran.  Ironically, the same Koran never says anything negative about Jesus and on the contrary the Koran shows Jesus in a much more favorable light than Mohammed.

It is also clear that the mindset of Islamists and Mohammed are the same because jihad is implied many times in the Koran and in the Hadiths.  Therefore, how can you associate peace with Mohammed after the reality of what happened to the Banu Qurayza and the fact that he enslaved, supported and did jihad, took slave concubines, and implemented a system based on utter fear for non-Muslims because they would face persecution if they spoke out openly.

Religion can be abused by individuals, ethnic groups, political leaders and so forth and throughout history many brutal deeds have been done under the name of every religion or radical ideology.  However, Karl Marx did not support killing individuals and he can’t be blamed for the deeds of Stalin and others. 

The same applies to dark periods within the Buddhist and Christian world where evil was justified by using and abusing the words of both individuals who supported peace.

However, “the heart of Mohammed was dark” and the reality of what happened to the Banu Qurayza can’t be ignored.  The same applies to his teachings because you have no Islamic reformation.

On the contrary, since the rise of Mohammed and continuing in modern day Saudi Arabia, you have no change and all apostates face the death penalty.  Therefore, the pluralistic reality of Arabia was destroyed by Mohammed and once he obtained power all religions would be annihilated in Arabia in a short period of time because his early followers would continue the Islamic inquisition.

Therefore, in the land of Mecca and Medina not one Buddhist temple or Christian church is allowed and all Muslim apostates face the death penalty.  Also, brutal laws which support cross amputation and allowing old men to marry young children are still ongoing in Saudi Arabia and this is all based on the life of Mohammed.

Leaders in democratic societies can ignore history, Islamic sources which support hatred of non-Muslims and the ongoing living history of Islam whereby non-Muslims face Islamization in Kashmir, Pakistan, southern Thailand and in other parts of the world in the 21^st century.

Mohammed once he obtained power carried the sword and the same sword and Islamic legal system is crushing non-Muslims in the modern world. The sword of Islam is still killing and persecuting where the faith is either fighting another faith or desires to maintain an Islamic inquisition whereby every apostate faces death.

At the same time Islamic kitman and stealth jihad remains potent and history and the modern world tells us many things. However, the political correct brigade and moral relativism, alongside non-Muslim religious leaders and political leaders who are bending over backwards, is extremely worrying because Islamists and Islamic kitman leaders only dream about usurping power from within.

Buddha and Jesus spread new thinking and ideas and people can freely rebuke or not care about either.  After all, it is your democratic right to reject all religion.  However, apostates in “the Islamic heart of the Islamic world” face death and prison and these two competing thought patterns are not compatible in any period of history.

Either the democratic world stands up for what is right and this applies to the civil liberties of others or it can embolden an encroaching Islam by allowing Islamic kitman and stealth jihad.  This is a deadly game and democracy and Marxism could not co-operate in a pluralistic society based on freedom and obviously democracy and Nazism were ideological enemies; therefore, the last barrier is Islamism and Sharia in its entirety but do democratic leaders and other institutions have the moral decency to speak out against the draconian reality of political Islam?

Matthias Kuntzel: Jihad and Jew-Hatred; Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11

leejay@moderntokyotimes.com

http://moderntokyotimes.com

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-qurayza.htm

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-qaynuqa.htm part one

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-nadir.htm part two

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-qurayza.htm part three

http://global-security-news.com/2011/04/14/prophet-mohammed-the-banu-qurayza-kashmir-and-mansuur-mohammed/

Lee Jay Walker

Modern Tokyo Times

The revamping of Mohammed throughout the world continues because of Islamic kitman but what is mystifying is that non-Muslim religious leaders, secularists and liberals appear to be giving the Islamic faith a helping hand.  Therefore, it is essential to get to the heart of Islam and see the reality of what happened under Mohammed.

If Buddha and Jesus were alive today then clearly they would not break any laws in democratic nations because they taught peace and supported the poor by their actions and deeds. Therefore, while people in modern societies may reject their different messages, it is abundantly clear that both individuals never killed, never supported war and nor did they support power and authority.

However, the prophet of Islam is very different and it is over simplistic to claim that he was a man of his time, after all, he is meant to be a holy religious leader and both Buddha and Jesus go further back in history.  Yet Mohammed married more than nine women at the same time, supported killing apostates, married a child, had sex with female slave concubines, and ordered the killing of many people by his concept of jihad and dhimmitude.

Not only this, but unlike the holy scriptures of the Christians and the New Testament or Buddhists and their holy scriptures based on what Buddha preached; then Mohammed is clearly obsessed by war, jihad, enslaving his enemies, jizya and other violent deeds.

Also, Mohammed, unlike Buddha and Jesus, is extremely contradictory and it appears that his thinking was based on power concentration.  In the early period when he was weak he was more open-minded but once he obtained power then he was ruthless and he implanted ideas which were brutal towards non-Muslims.

Therefore, while Buddha and Jesus did not seek power concentration, enforcing laws on their enemies, developing military armies and implementing a draconian legal system in order to preserve power; the same can’t be said about Mohammed because he was driven by power concentration policies and taxing the dhimmis (non-Muslims) or enslaving them if they did not accept the superiority of Islam.

The Buddha rejected the caste system and Jesus went to the lepers and outcasts in society.  It is clear that they were against discrimination and the victimization of others and their respective message was based on humanity and turning away from power concentration and enforcing laws on people who were already downtrodden.

Mohammed, however, was very different because if people accepted Islam then he also cared for the poor within his followers and he told people to give one sixth of their income to the poor.  However, it was non-Muslims who would be taxed heavily in order to redistribute their wealth and give it to the new masters. Therefore, some Muslim political leaders were also concerned by mass conversions once a political system based on Islam had been set up because this reduced their fiscal power.

After all, they faced the contradictions of an Islamic state which wanted Islamization but understood that the dhimmis tax was much needed.  Not surprisingly, the revenue of an Islamic state suffered by mass conversions and for this reason Islamic slavery was ongoing from the 7^th century and up until recent times.

It must be remembered that it was only outside pressure which forced Saudi Arabia to abolish slavery in the 1960s.  Unlike the anti-slavery movement which emerged within the Christian world of its day you never had a Muslim anti-slavery movement and this was because of the static nature of nations which had become Islamized.

In time they lost their taxation power because Islamic law and Islamic zealots desired Islamization and once the coffers of the dhimmis had dwindled because of religious discrimination, pogroms and apartheid laws – then the last option was enslaving non-Muslims outside of their control. This factor meant that Islamic armies entered into Africa, other parts of Asia and Europe became a House of War was declared. Therefore, Islamic rulers would expand their power based on jihad, enslaving the people of their newly expanding state and so forth.

Also, Mohammed during his lifetime enslaved people who were free during numerous wars and clearly he had no qualms in taking wives or concubines from men he had killed.  Not only this, he also supported Muslim armies to enslave non-Muslims and he gave Muslims the right to take non-Muslim females and use them for sex during jihad.

Ironically, all the negatives about Mohammed are stated clearly in the Koran and the Hadiths.  Therefore, when people talk about anti-Islamic writers it is strange because the sources of what happened and the evil deeds of Islam are documented openly in the Hadiths and Koran.

Buddha and Jesus were revolutionary because they challenged the conventions of the day and they did this by spreading messages of peace and inner-purification.  However, Mohammed who had been faithful to his first partner then appears to have gone the wrong way because after her death he lusted after more women, concubines and even married a child.

However, why didn’t Muslims hide all the negatives of Mohammed and this even applies to visiting a Muslim place of worship in Jerusalem on an animal which does not exist and all at the speed of light.  Yet, it is factual that the mystical night journey never happened because at the time you had no mosque in Jerusalem and even his loyal followers found it difficult to accept.

Despite this, they remained loyal to Mohammed and ignored the fact that Allah allowed him more than 4 wives and having sexual concubines.  However, for other Muslims they were bound to take no more than 4 wives according to Islamic Sharia law but history tells us that many Muslim rulers had countless numbers of women in harems and so forth.

Of course you can find dark passages in all religious books if you desire or people can manipulate language or different meanings.  However, religions throughout history have reformed themselves and modernized and by doing this they have rejected the harshness of aspects of some of their teachings and accepted religious freedom.

This does not apply to Islam and the more a nation is ruled by Islamic Sharia law then the more brutal the nation happens to be.  In the modern world only Islamic states still support killing apostates, killing homosexuals, cross amputation, apartheid marriage laws which both discriminate against women and non-Muslims, and other draconian factors like stoning to death for adultery and allowing old men to marry children.

In my article called Prophet Mohammed, the Banu Qurayza, Kashmir, and Mansuur Mohammed I highlight many disturbing realities.  Therefore, I comment that “…the Banu Qurayza tribe who followed Judaism and the Muslim convert to Christianity in Somalia in modern times, Mansuur Mohammed; represent the reality and barbarity of Islam and the same applies to the destruction of Hinduism in Kashmir.  In these three events, we can see what happened to ancient Christianity in Nubia, what awaited the Zoroastrians of Persia, what awaited the fate of Buddhists and Hindus in Afghanistan, and what awaited so many other faiths by the sword of Islam.”

I continued in this article by referring to the Banu Qurayza tribe and stated that Matthias Kuntzel, the author of Jihad and Jew-hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the roots of 9/11 comments on page 65 that “In 627 the Qurayza tribe was exterminated following a siege of Medina by the Meccans.  Mohammed went to the marketplace in Medina and had graves dug there.  Then the Jews were brought to him and beheaded at the gravesides – between 600 and 900 men in all.  The executions lasted the whole day…..Most of the women and children were sold into slavery in Medina, the remainder in Syria and Najad.”  (Johan Bouman, op. cit., p.86)

This reality can’t be ignored and I commented in the same article that “…..the prophet of Islam supported the entire massacre of all Jewish males who followed the religion of Judaism and who were over puberty. Mohammed just sat back and watched this gruesome act and did nothing, apart from divide the spoils afterwards.  This barbaric act took place under the rule of Mohammed in the 7th century and in this sense the beheading of Muslim apostates to Christianity in Somalia can be linked to the deeds of Mohammed.”

“Given this, Mansuur Mohammed who was beheaded in Somalia for being an apostate in the 21st century, joins the Islam of Mohammed and the 7th century because he met the same barbaric fate.   Koranic prayers would have been recited while beheading the Banu Qurayza and the same applies to the al-Shabaab (al-Shabab) in Somalia who were reciting the Koran and shouting in joy while cutting the head off a Christian convert.”

“Mohammed clearly approved of the entire slaughter of all Jewish males over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza and he just sat back and watched the beheadings, one after one, into the hundreds, and eventually every Jewish male over puberty was killed for remaining loyal to Judaism.” 

“The mind of Mohammed was clearly violent because at no time did he try to stop his followers from doing this brutal crime.  In direct contrast to Jesus who stopped the prostitute from being killed by stoning to death we have the prophet of Islam who endorses such barbaric methods.  Mohammed not only watched this brutal genocide of all male followers of Judaism over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza; for this was not enough because he also enslaved the Jewish women and children of this tribe and plundered all their wealth which was to be shared by the victorious Muslims.”

“Mohammed now “set in stone the brutality of Islam” and this applies to jihad, dhimmitude, jizya, killing apostates, stoning people to death for adultery (despite doing adultery himself), plundering the wealth of the vanquished and enabling the forces of evil to kill in the name of God.”

Again, I repeat once more that all this violence was endorsed by Mohammed and is documented by Islamic scholars. Therefore, the Hadiths and Koran provides this information openly despite some English versions of the Koran being manipulated in order to soften the hatred which is espoused in parts of the Koran.  Ironically, the same Koran never says anything negative about Jesus and on the contrary the Koran shows Jesus in a much more favorable light than Mohammed.

It is also clear that the mindset of Islamists and Mohammed are the same because jihad is implied many times in the Koran and in the Hadiths.  Therefore, how can you associate peace with Mohammed after the reality of what happened to the Banu Qurayza and the fact that he enslaved, supported and did jihad, took slave concubines, and implemented a system based on utter fear for non-Muslims because they would face persecution if they spoke out openly.

Religion can be abused by individuals, ethnic groups, political leaders and so forth and throughout history many brutal deeds have been done under the name of every religion or radical ideology.  However, Karl Marx did not support killing individuals and he can’t be blamed for the deeds of Stalin and others. 

The same applies to dark periods within the Buddhist and Christian world where evil was justified by using and abusing the words of both individuals who supported peace.

However, “the heart of Mohammed was dark” and the reality of what happened to the Banu Qurayza can’t be ignored.  The same applies to his teachings because you have no Islamic reformation.

On the contrary, since the rise of Mohammed and continuing in modern day Saudi Arabia, you have no change and all apostates face the death penalty.  Therefore, the pluralistic reality of Arabia was destroyed by Mohammed and once he obtained power all religions would be annihilated in Arabia in a short period of time because his early followers would continue the Islamic inquisition.

Therefore, in the land of Mecca and Medina not one Buddhist temple or Christian church is allowed and all Muslim apostates face the death penalty.  Also, brutal laws which support cross amputation and allowing old men to marry young children are still ongoing in Saudi Arabia and this is all based on the life of Mohammed.

Leaders in democratic societies can ignore history, Islamic sources which support hatred of non-Muslims and the ongoing living history of Islam whereby non-Muslims face Islamization in Kashmir, Pakistan, southern Thailand and in other parts of the world in the 21^st century.

Mohammed once he obtained power carried the sword and the same sword and Islamic legal system is crushing non-Muslims in the modern world. The sword of Islam is still killing and persecuting where the faith is either fighting another faith or desires to maintain an Islamic inquisition whereby every apostate faces death.

At the same time Islamic kitman and stealth jihad remains potent and history and the modern world tells us many things. However, the political correct brigade and moral relativism, alongside non-Muslim religious leaders and political leaders who are bending over backwards, is extremely worrying because Islamists and Islamic kitman leaders only dream about usurping power from within.

Buddha and Jesus spread new thinking and ideas and people can freely rebuke or not care about either.  After all, it is your democratic right to reject all religion.  However, apostates in “the Islamic heart of the Islamic world” face death and prison and these two competing thought patterns are not compatible in any period of history.

Either the democratic world stands up for what is right and this applies to the civil liberties of others or it can embolden an encroaching Islam by allowing Islamic kitman and stealth jihad.  This is a deadly game and democracy and Marxism could not co-operate in a pluralistic society based on freedom and obviously democracy and Nazism were ideological enemies; therefore, the last barrier is Islamism and Sharia in its entirety but do democratic leaders and other institutions have the moral decency to speak out against the draconian reality of political Islam?

Matthias Kuntzel: Jihad and Jew-Hatred; Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11

leejay@moderntokyotimes.com

http://moderntokyotimes.com

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-qurayza.htm

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-qaynuqa.htm part one

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-nadir.htm part two

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-qurayza.htm part three

http://global-security-news.com/2011/04/14/prophet-mohammed-the-banu-qurayza-kashmir-and-mansuur-mohammed/

Muhammad, the prophet of Islam and the apostle of Allah, had ordered at least 60 raids and wars often involving massacres and personally participated in 27 of them. The exemplary example and the perfection of humanity and the prototype of the most wonderful human conduct that he was—Muhammad massacred, beheaded, tortured, terrorized, raped, and looted in the name of God. Described below are three of his massacres and a partial listing of his sex-slaves from the Muslim holy books and Islamic writings.
In the Massacre of Banu Quraiza, Muhammad order the beheading of 600 to 900 adult men (determined by pubic-hair growth) and he himself chopped off a few heads. He enslaved all the women and children of the Jewish tribe. The women were kept as sex-slaves with Muhammad himself taking a beautiful Jewish woman as his own sex-slave and sold the rest of the captives into slavery.

He also looted the property of the murdered Jews and took possession of all their wealth and properties. Allah, like a godfather and mafia chieftain of the Muhammad’s criminal gang, rejoiced this barbarous and heinous acts of slaughtering the Jews and enslavement of their women and children by creating 5 teachings in the Koran as the Eternal Laws of God.
At the Massacre of Khaybar, Muhammad brutally tortured a Jewish chieftain for extracting information about where he had hidden his treasures. When the treasure was uncovered, the chieftain was beheaded. This chieftain was the husband of the most beautiful Jewish woman of Khaybar, the 17-year-old Safiyaah. Safiyaah’s family members had been annihilated by Muhammad at the Banu Qurayza massacre.

Now having beheaded her husband, the Prophet took Safiyah as his sex-slave and copulated on the same night.
In the massacre of the Jewish Settlement of Bani Mustaliq, Muhammad captured their women and took twenty-year-old Jewish girl, Juwayriya as his sex-slave.

The Massacre of Banu Quraiza
Angel Gabriel Appears To Muhammad And Orders Him To Attack The Rich Jewish Settlement Of Banu Quraiza
Sahi Bukhari :Volume 5, Book 59, Number 443:
Narrated ‘Aisha:
When the Prophet returned from the battle of Al-Khandaq (i.e. Trench) and laid down his arms and took a bath, Gabriel came and said (to the Prophet), “you have laid down your arms? By Allah, we angels have not laid them down yet. So set out for them.” The Prophet said, “Where to go?” Gabriel said, “Towards this side,” pointing towards Banu Quraiza. So the Prophet went out towards them. (Book 019, Number 4368)
Sahi Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 444:
Narrated Anas:
“As if I am just now looking at the dust rising in the street of Banu Ghanm (in Medina) because of the marching of Gabriel’s regiment when Allah’s Apostle set out to Banu Quraiza (to attack them).”
These traditions about Gabriel’s leadership are designed to give divine support for the atrocity that Muhammad was about to be unleashed upon Banu Qurayza. Today, we may see this as fanciful, but to millions of Muslims this is real and divine.

Muhammad Besieges Banu Quraiza For 25 Days. After The Jews Unconditionally Surrender All Men Are Beheaded, Women and Young Girls Raped and Sold into Slavery. Their Property was Looted.
Sahi Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 448
So Allah’s Apostle went to them (i.e. Banu Quraiza) (i.e. besieged them). They then surrendered to the Prophet’s judgment (unconditionally after 25 days of fierce resistance) but he directed them to Sad (ally) to give his verdict concerning them. Sad said, “I give my judgment that their warriors should be killed, their women and children should be taken as captives, and their properties distributed.”
The Prophet said, “You have judged according to the King’s (Allah’s) judgment.” (Hadith No. 447, Vol. 5)
The sentence was Death by decapitation for around 300—600 men and pubescent boys, and enslavement for the women and children. Ibn Ishaq says that the number may have been as high as 800—900 (p. 464).
The text of Sirat [Ibn Ishaq, page 464]:
Then they surrendered, and the apostle confined them in Medina in the quarter of d. al-Harith, a woman of B. al-Najjar. Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy b. Akhtab and Ka`b b. Asad their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900. As they were being taken out in batches to the apostle they asked Ka`b what he thought would be done with them. He replied, ‘Will you never understand? Don’t you see that the summoner never stops and those who are taken away do not return? By Allah it is death!’ This went on until the apostle made an end of them.
Huyayy was brought out wearing a flowered robe in which he had made holes about the size of the finger-tips in every part so that it should not be taken from him as spoil, with his hands bound to his neck by a rope. When he saw the apostle he said, ‘By God, I do not blame myself for opposing you, but he who forsakes God will be forsaken.’ Then he went to the men and said, ‘God’s command is right. A book and a decree, and massacre have been written against the Sons of Israel.’ Then he sat down and his head was struck off.
Muhammad ordered and participated in the digging of the trench into which the massacred Jews were to be thrown. He STRUCK OFF the heads of at least two of those captives.
How Did The SS Jihadist Executioners Decide on Which Jewish Boys To Slaughter Or Leave Alive To Be Sold Into Slavery
To separate the young Jewish men from the minors, Muhammad ordered that their pants be pulled down and the youngsters genital area examined SS style for pubic hairs and if they had grown any pubic hair, it was enough to behead them.
Book 38, Number 4390:
Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi:
I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.

Aisha’s Description of the Only Woman Murdered: She was Delirious Because Her Husband Had Just Been Beheaded. She was taken by the SS Jihadist and Beheaded.
Book 14, Number 2665:
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin:
No woman of Banu Qurayzah was killed except one. She was with me, talking and laughing on her back and belly (extremely), while the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) was killing her people with the swords. Suddenly a man called her name: Where is so-and-so? I asked: What is the matter with you? She said: I did a new act. The man took her and beheaded her. I will not forget that she was laughing extremely although she knew that she would be killed.

Muhammad Took One Of The Jewish Women As His Sex-slave
The apostle had chosen one of their women for himself, Rayhana bint Amr . . . one of the women of . . . Qurayza, and she remained with him until she died, in his power. The apostle had proposed to marry and put a veil on her, but she said: “Nay, leave me in your power, for that will be easier for me and for you.” So he left her. She had shown repugnance towards Islam when she was captured and clung to Judaism. (Ibn Ishaq p. 466)

The Looted Property And The Jewish Women And Children Were Divided Among the Muslims
More specifically, Ibn Ishaq says the spoils were divided among the Muslims thus:
Then the apostle divided the property, wives, and children . . . among the Muslims, and he made known on that day the shares of horse and men, and took out the fifth. A horseman got three shares, two for the horse and one for the rider. A man without a horse got one share (p. 466). Then the apostle sent Sa’d b. Zayd al-Ansari brother of b. ‘Abdu’l-Ashhal with some of the captive women of B. Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons. [page 466]
Allah Allows Muhammad and His Jihadists To Have Sex With Their Sex-slaves
Allah also allows jihadists to have sex with female slaves. Sources: Ibn Ishaq, pp. 464-66; Tabari, vol. 8, pp. 27-41.
Muhammad Enriches Himself
Muhammad had captured huge spoils from his “final solution” of Jews of Banu Qurayza. Muhammad gets one-fifth of the Jewish property (movable, immovable and human), and his jihadist followers get the rest. The tribe of Banu Qurayza likely consisted of about 500 families, who were wealthiest in Medina. Therefore, Muhammad enriched himself with the wealth of about 100 rich families as well as their women and children from this single act of successful Jihad.
Here is how Allah sanctions the enrichment of Muhammad and his Jihadist followers from his expedition:
Quran-8:41— “And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah,- and to the Messenger, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer,- if ye do believe in Allah and in the revelation We sent down to Our servant on the Day of Testing,- the Day of the meeting of the two forces. For Allah hath power over all things.

Why Does Muhammad Not Show Mercy?
It is Allah who guides Muhammad into committing these heinous, barbaric cruelty against the people of Arabia. Below are a list of Allah’s commands to Muhammad to carry out those acts of carnage:
Allah celebrates this slaughter and enslavement of the Jews in the Koran:
Quran-33:25- “Allah turned back the unbelievers [Meccans and their allies] in a state of rage, having not won any good, and Allah spared the believers battle. Allah is, indeed, Strong and Mighty.”
Quran-33:26- “And He brought those of the People of the Book [Jewish people of Banu Qurayza] who supported them from their fortresses and cast terror into their hearts, some of them you slew (beheaded) and some you took prisoners (captive)”
Quran-33:27- “And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things.” [Merciful Allah asked Prophet Muhammad to confiscate entire properties of surrendered Jews]
Quran-8:67—“It is not fitting for an Apostle that he should have prisoners of war until He thoroughly subdued the land….” (Allah insisting Prophet to kill all the prisoners, and should not keep any surrendered prisoners alive until He (Prophet) occupied entire Arabia.”
Quran-8:17—It is not ye who Slew them; it is God; when thou threwest a handful of dust, it was not Thy act, but God’s…..” (Allah said, the killing of surrendered soldiers were done by the wish of Allah)
These above Quranic verses revealed some unpleasant truths:
The verses: 33:25-27 were revealed to describe Banu Qurayza incident and clearly talking about the unbelievers (Quresh pagans, and their allies Jews of Banu Quraiza). Specifically, verse-33:27 talks of ow by the judgement of Sa’d ibn Muaz all the men were slaughtered and women and children were captivated. And Jewish land and property were taken as Booty….Sa’d delivered his justice according to Bible; hence Muhammad said—“your judgement was like God.”
Allah permitted the enslavement and beheading of Jews, so any Muslim familiar with the background of this verse knows that beheading as such has been assimilated into the Quran.
What is so troubling about the verse 33:26 is that Allah (Himself) celebrates the “terror” that He threw into the Jews’ hearts. Indeed, when Abu Lubabah the mediator approached the Jews during negotiations, the women and children were crying. Allah of course had heavily terrorized them.
The Prophet Muhammad had already expelled two other Jewish tribes (Qaynuqa and Nadir) from Medina, and the Banu Qurayza Jews begged for for the same punishment to them. But the Islam’s prophet of peace and mercy declined this relatively more merciful and humane option.
Such a heartless, evil incarnate was the prophet of Islam!

The Conquest And Massacre of Khaybar
Muhammad Attacks The Rich Jewish Settlement of Khaybar Without Warning and Takes Safiya As His Sex Slave After Murdering Her Husband
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 512:
Narrated by Anas:
The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaybar when it was still dark and then said, “Allahu-Akbar! Khaybar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.” Then the inhabitants of Khaybar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives, She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet . The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr’. Muhammad was sixty (60) when he married Safiyyahh, a young girl of seventeen. She became his eighth wife.

Distribution Of War Booty In Khaybar:
Sahi Buchari Hadiths #143, page-700:
Sulaiman Ibne Harb…Aannas Ibne Malek (ra) narrated, “in the war of Khayber after the inhabitants of Banu Nadir were surrendered, Allah’s apostle killed all the able/adult men, and he (prophet) took all women and children as captives (Ghani mateer maal).. Among the captives Safiyya Bint Huyy Akhtab was taken by Allah’s Apostle as booty whom He married after freeing her and her freedom was her Mahr.”
At first Dihyah al-Kalbi, a Muslim Jihadist asked for Safiyyah. But when Muhammad saw her exquisite beauty, he chose her for himself and gave her two cousins to Dihyah.
Muhammad Horribly Tortured Safiya’s Husband To Get Information About His Hidden Gold Treasure. He Was Beheaded After He Refused To Give Up The Treasure.
Prophet Muhammad accused Safiyyah’s husband Kinanah of hiding wealth, which he had received during his marriage with Safiyyah. A renegade Jew divulged the secret of Kinanah’s hidden gold treasures to Muhammad. Kinanah and his cousin were captured and tortured by Muhammad to extract information about the whereabouts of his treasures. He was tormented by branding his chest with a heated stake and then he was beheaded in Islamic style.
Sourcing Ibn Ishak, Tabari writes:
‘Kinanah b. al-Rabi b. al-Huqyaq who had the treasure of B. Nadir was brought to the Messenger of God, who questioned him; but he denied knowing where it was. Then the messenger of God was brought a Jew who said to him, “I have seen Kinanah walk around this ruin every morning.” The Messenger of God said to Kinanah: “What do you say? If we find it in your possession, I will kill you.” “All right,” he answered. The Messenger of God commanded that the ruin should be dug up, and some of the treasure was extracted from it. Then he asked him for the rest of it. Kinanah refused to surrender it; so the Messenger of God gave orders concerning him to al-Zubayr b. al-’Awwam, saying, “torture him until you root out what he has.” Al-Zubayr kept twirling his firestick in his breast until Kinanah almost expired; then the Messenger of God gave him to Muhammad b. Maslamah, who beheaded him to avenge his brother Mahmud b. Maslamah.”‘

The Looted Property And Women And Children Were Distributed Among The Jihadists:
Muhammad now allowed the Muslim Jihadists to take possession of the women and children of the Jews of Khaybar.
Allah’s Messenger occupied the Jewish land:
Sahih Muslim writes:Book 010, Number 3759:
Ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with them) reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) handed over the land of Khaibar (on the condition) of the share of produce of fruits and harvest, and he also gave to his wives every year one hundred wasqs: eighty wasqs of dates and twenty wasqs of barley. When ‘Umar became the caliph he distributed the (lands and trees) of Khaibar, and gave option to the wives of Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) to earmark for themselves the land and water or stick to the wasqs (that they got) every year. They differed in this matter. Some of them opted for land and water, and some of them opted for wasqs every year. ‘A’isha and Hafsa were among those who opted for land and water.
Enjoying special Booty (Gani-maater-maal): Muhammad Takes Safiya As Booty To Be His Sex Slave
Safiya bint Huyai/Huyayy was a captive Mohammed married after slaughtering her father, brother, husband and the men at Khaibar, according to Bukhari vol.2 book 14 ch.5 no.68 p.35; vol.4 book 52 ch.74 no.143 p.92; vol.4 book 52 ch.168 no.280 p.175 and Tabari vol.39 p.185.

Muhammad at 60 Takes 17-Year-Old Safiyah as Sex-slave
After securing beautiful Safiyaah daughter of Huyayy for himself, Prophet Muhammad bedded her in his tent on the same night. Here is the story: Merciful Prophet asked Bilal, the Negro crier of prayer to fetch Safiyyah to his (Muhammad’s) camp. Bilal brought Safiyyah and her cousin straight across the battlefield strewn with dead-bodies, passing by the corpses of Kinana and his cousin. The two cousins of Safiyyah shrieked in horror when they witnessed the gruesome scene of the dead-bodies of their dear and near relatives. When brought to his presence, Muhammad cast his mantle around Safiyyah indicating that she was to be his own. Muhammad consoled a frustrated Dhiya by giving him Safiyyah’s cousin sisters. According to Ibn Sa’d Prophet Muhammad purchased Safiyyah from Dhiyah for seven camels. On the same night, Muhammad took Safiyyah to bed. This was, of course, an exemplary character of the holy Prophet of Islam!
Here is what Ibn Sa’d writes:
“-.when it was night, he entered a tent and she entered with him. Abu Ayyub came there and passed the night by the tent with a sword keeping his head at the tent. When it was morning and the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him.”
To hide the lascivious character of Muhammad, Muslim biographers often mention that he married Safiyyahh before he slept with her. But they forget to mention that Muhammad did not follow the rule of waiting period (three monthly periods) to sleep with Safiyyahh. He slept with her the same day she was captured.

Islamic Intolerance: Kill All The Jews: The First Final Solution
Book 019, Number 4366:
It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: “I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.” [This single sahi hadiths tells everything about Islamic intolerance]

Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 176 Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar:
Allah’s Apostle said, “You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, ‘O ‘Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.’ “

“the Apostle of Allah said, ‘Kill any Jew that falls into your power.” [Ibn Ishaq, Siratul Rasul, v. 553]

The Massacre of Banu Mustaliq
Muhammad Attacks The Jewish Settlement of Banu Mustaliq: He Captures And Rapes A Twenty Year Old Jewish Girl – Juwairiya
Bukhari yol 3,Book46, No. 717
“Narrated Ibn Aun:
Prophet had suddenly attacked Banu Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day and raped her.
Juwairiya bint Harith/al-Harith was a captive in this raid, [Bukhari 3.46.13.717, p431-432]. Sahih Muslim 2.2349, p.520 says that Mohammed attacked the Banu Mustaliq tribe without any warning while they were heedlessly grazing their cattle. Juwairiya was a daughter of the chief. Sahih Muslim 3.4292, p.942 and Abu Dawud 2.227, p728 and al-Tabari 39, p.182-183 also say Juwairiya/Juwairiyyah was captured in a raid on the Banu Mustaliq tribe. She had been married to Musafi’ bin Safwan, who was killed in battle.
Juwayriyyah bint al-Harith bin Abi Birar bin Habib, great grandson of Jadhimah al-Mustaliq of the Khuza’ah group, was taken as booty when Muslims raided the al-Mustaliq tribe. Her husband, Musafi’ bin Safwan Dhu al-Shuir bin Abi Asrb bin Malik bin Jadhimah was killed in the battle. She was a prisoner of war who agreed to marry Mohammed. al-Tabari 39:p182-183; al-Tabari 9:p133.
Juwayriyya married Mohammed when she was 20 years old. al-Tabari 39:p184.

Sex Slaves: Muhammad And Those His Right Hand Possesses
Sahih Bukhari: Volume 9, Book 93, Number 506:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
That during the battle with Bani Al-Mustaliq they (Muslims) captured some females and intended to have sexual relation with them without impregnating them. So they asked the Prophet about coitus interrupt us. The Prophet said, “It is better that you should not do it, for Allah has written whom He is going to create till the Day of Resurrection.” Qaza’a said, “I heard Abu Sa’id saying that the Prophet said, ‘No soul is ordained to be created but Allah will create it.”

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 337:
Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-’azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.
Sunan Abu Dawud Book 11, Number 2166:
Narrated AbuSa’id al-Khudri:
A man said: Apostle of Allah, I have a slave-girl and I withdraw the penis from her (while having intercourse), and I dislike that she becomes pregnant. I intend (by intercourse) what the men intend by it. The Jews say that withdrawing the penis (azl) is burying the living girls on a small scale. He (the Prophet) said: The Jews told a lie. If Allah intends to create it, you cannot turn it away.
From Quran, “…abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess – for (in their case) they are free from blame,” Sura 23:5-6. See also Sura 4:24
“He [Mohammed] replied, ‘Conceal your private parts except from your wife and from whom your right hands possess (slave-girls).’” [Abu Dawud vol.3, no.4006, p.1123.]
Abu Dawud vol.3 no.4443-4445 p.1244 shows that having sex with a slave-girl a man owns is fine.
As was typical of wealthy Arab men, Mohammed apparently had need of a few slave girls too. See Bukhari vol.7 book 64 ch.6 no.274 p.210.
Mohammed briefly had a “very beautiful” captive before he gave her to Mahmiyah b. Jaz’ al-Zubaydi. al-Tabari vol.8 p.151
One of the slave girls belonging to Mohammed house committed fornication with someone else. It is the “someone else” part that was a problem. Abu Dawud vol.3 no.4458 p.1249
Mohammed called a black slave-girl to come and conceal Abu Dharr behind a curtain while he was taking a bath. Abu Dawud vol.1 no.332 p.87
Mention Umm Ayman (=Barakah), a client (slave-girl) of the prophet. al-Tabari vol.39 p.287
In general, Abu Dawud vol.3 no.4443-4445 p.1244 teaches that having sex with a slave-girl a man owns is OK.
But, having sex with a wife’s slave girl is OK if the wife made her lawful for him. Note that he did not have to be married to the slave girl. Ibn-i-Majah vol.4 no.2551 p.12
Mohammed “had intercourse with her [Mary] by virtue of her being his property.” al-Tabari vol.39, p194. Footnote 845 explains, “That is, Mariyah was ordered to veil herself as did the Prophet’s wives, but he did not marry her.”

Conclusion
Muhammad’s unprovoked, murderous attacks of Jewish tribes described above are acts of utter barbarity. His extermination and genocide of the whole community, such as that of Banu Qurayza, makes it worse.
His institution of slavery as a divine order of society was one of the worst curse that could happen to humanity. Allowing sex with slave-girls made it worse. His trading of slaves, such as selling some Banu Qurayza captives in Nejd, was another evil institution.
Muhammad engaged in all these cruel, dehumanizing and horrible acts with the divine sanctions of Allah. Muhammad and his brainchild Allah were the worst evils to befall humankind, the detriment of which continues to afflict humanity with no end in site.

Related articles

• Muhammad’s Massacres and Sex-slaves (samhindu.wordpress.com)

Again, this was a thoroughly interesting episode detailing the crucial stories that Muslims believe and how they affect the modern beliefs and attitudes of Muslims. The episode started strong looking at historical evidence for the claims about Mohammed’s life, like that of the Constitution of Medina. Did this agreement between the inhabitants of Medina (Jewish, pagan, Christian as well as Muslims) actually exist or was it written into history afterwards? It is a nice thought, nonetheless, that the first Ummah was a multicultural one. Nowadays the Ummah only seems to refer to the widespread community of believers.

It was nice to see Rageh point out that Mohammed’s night journey seems implausible to modern, rational ears. But that was about all the critical examination this purported miracle got. In all honesty,what was I expecting? But I guess just broadcasting the claims should stir something in the modern viewer. The story is just simply barmy. The laws of nature are broken like they’re suddenly going out of fashion.

The story goes that one night when Mohammed was at the Ka’bah in Mecca he was visited by the Angel Gabriel. Gabes takes him to Buraq, a winged horse, a sort of celestial taxi; transport for prophets.

The wings are definitely not big enough

On Buraq, Mohammed flies to the Masjid Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem. Yes, you are reading this right. Mohammed spent time in Jerusalem and he made a 800 mile journey on an horse that could fly. In one night as well. I’ll provide a little map to help perspective.

800 miles by flying horse. Without Google Maps.

Once at Jerusalem, he tethers Buraq and meets the previous dudes who had his job – Jesus, Moses et al. I’m not sure which physical or biological laws we have not broken here.  He leads them in prayer and then commences the second part of the journey, the Mi’raj (Arabic for ladder). On Buraq he ascends into the heavens and has a heavenly shindig with the prophets of before. He finally ascends and meets Allah and is commanded to tell his people to pray fifty times per day. However, after descending a heavenly level (they really should have an elevator – and it’s definitely an elevator, not a lift. Allah despises Americanisms) and meeting Moses again, he is told to go back and barter – fifty is far too many. Moses has got the right ideas and after some flitting between the heavenly floors five times per day is agreed. Moses still wanted lower, the wily dog, but Mohammed’s like “I can only walk away so many times before he throws a lightning bolt at me!”

And so the amount of worship every Muslim must perform daily is set at five prayers: Fajr, Zohar, Asar, Maghrib and Isha.

This miracle or rather series miracles deserves a good amount of ridicule. Because of two things stories like this are still taken as true in a modern, rational society: a lack of education about the laws of nature, and the indoctrination of children.

At least one of the talking heads in the documentary referred to the night journey as a spiritual rather than a physical journey. Wait a second, I’ve heard that one before. Once upon a time the creation stories in Genesis were physical and real events but now they are metaphorical or spiritual events or mysteries baked in enigmas hidden in parables flecked with ambigiuty and obfuscation. Theologians really do not like hard facts or plain speaking. If miracles sound implausible and silly today, because of our knowledge, it’s because they are. 

Which parts of this night journey are spiritual and which are physical? Is Buraq spiritual? Is the ascension to heaven spiritual? What about the negotiating? Did Mohammed meet the other prophets physically? What does it even mean to say he met them spiritually? Can we not just say that this series of claimed events is a pack of lies?

Back to the documentary…

Towards the end of the programme, the slaying of the Jewish tribe of the Banu Qurayza was examined. The Qurayza were one of the many Jewish tribes in Yathrib, but they were one that betrayed Mohammed’s trust. They were at least welcoming of the Meccans whilst they were at war with Mohammed during the Battle of the Trench. Mohammed  besieged the tribe and after their surrender (with some discussion with an arbiter) the men of the tribe were slaughtered and the women and children taken as captives. This event still has ramifications in Muslim attitudes towards Jews today and is a reflection of how Mohammed was much more than a messenger –  he was also military leader and politician.

Next week’s episode is the conclusion and discusses Mohammed’s last sermon and death.

Review of Part 1

LA

Safiyah was seventeen and very beautiful when Muslims killed her father, husband and many of her relatives. In the same day the Prophet of Allah wanted to sleep with her. Here is the exact text of the story. 

“Safiyah was born in Medinah. She belonged to the Jewish tribe of Banu ‘I-Nadir. When this tribe was expelled from Medinah in the year 4 A.H, Huyaiy was one of those who settled in the fertile colony of Khaibar together with Kinana ibn al-Rabi‘ to whom Safiyah was married a little before the Muslims attacked Khaibar. She was then seventeen. She had formerly been the wife of Sallam ibn Mishkam, who divorced her. One mile from Khaibar. Here the Prophet married Safiyah. She was groomed and made-up for the Prophet by Umm Sulaim, the mother of Anas ibn Malik. They spent the night there. Abu Ayyub al-Ansari guarded the tent of the Prophet the whole night. When, in the early dawn, the Prophet saw Abu Ayyub strolling up and down, he asked him what he meant by this sentry-go; he replied: “I was afraid for you with this young lady. You had killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives, and till recently she was an unbeliever. I was really afraid for you on her account”. The Prophet prayed for Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (Ibn Hisham, p. 766) Safiyah had requested the Prophet to wait till he had gone a stage away from Khaibar. “Why?” asked the Prophet. “I was afraid for you on account of the Jews who still happened to be near at Khaibar!” 

The reason Safiyah rejected the sexual advances of the 57-year-old Muhammad should be obvious to any objective person. I believe most women prefer to mourn than jump into bed with the killer of their father, husband and many relatives on the same day of their death. But the fact that the prophet of Allah could not contain his sexual urges for one day to let this young girl grieve, says a lot of his thinking and moral character. However as for the rest of the story we are not sure whether it is true or was fabricated by Muslim historians to wipe the impression of rape. But this is all we have and to find the truth we have to rely on these biased documents written by Muslim historians.  The story goes on to say that Abu Ayyub was concerned for the safety of the prophet because he (Muhammad) had killed Safiyah’s father, husband and many of her relatives. This is logical. It is foolish to sleep with a woman after killing her loved ones. But Safiyah’s excuse for rejecting Muhammad’s advances towards her seems unreasonable. When Muhammad took this young girl into his tent, he had already killed many Jews and was winning the war. If there were any Jews left, they probably were more worried for their own lives than Safiyah’s chastity. Also she was already in the tent alone with Muhammad, how the Jews would have known if they were engaged in sex or not? I wonder what other excuse could she make to a man who was the murderer of her father, husband and many of her relatives to let her alone at least that night? 

“The next day a Walima (we dding-feast) was arranged on behalf of the Prophet… 

Note that the historian is saying that the wedding took place one day after the prophet got private with Safiyah and made his moves to have sex with her. This presented no problem for the prophet as he had his Allah reveal a verse saying it is okay to sleep with women captured in war without marrying them even if they are married. 

“And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess…” (Q. 4:24 )

The above verse shows that the Holy prophet did not believe that slaves have any right. You could be a happily married woman living your own life, but if Muhammad and his devout followers attacked your town and captured you, you would lose all your rights, and while your husband was being killed or enslaved you would be given to a Muslim Mujahid who would rape you all with Allah’s blessings.   

This is confirmed in another place.  

(Q. 23: 1-7) 

 1-The believers must (eventually) win through,-
2- Those who humble themselves in their prayers;
3-Who avoid vain talk;
4- Who are active in deeds of charity;
5- Who abstain from sex,
6- Except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame,
7- But those whose desires exceed those limits are transgressors;-

Let us continue with the story of Safiyah. 

“The other wives of the Prophet showed their jealousy by making slights upon her Jewish origin. But the Prophet always defended her. Once Safiyah was vexed to the extreme by the taunts of all the Arab wives of the Prophet. She took the complaint to the Prophet, who felt great compassion for her. He consoled her. He encouraged her. He equipped her with logic. He said: “Safiyah, take courage and be bold. They are in no way superior to you. Tell them: I am a daughter of the Prophet Harun, a niece of the Prophet Musa, and a wife of the Prophet Muhammad“.  

When she was brought along with other prisoners-of-war, the Prophet said to her, “Safiyah, your father always maintained enmity with me until Allah made the final decision.” She said, “But Allah does not catch one for the sins of another.” 

This of course contradicts Muhammad’s own behavior who annihilated the entire Bani Qainuqa with the pretext that few of them had killed a Muslim in retaliation . That is despite the verse that says “Namely, that no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another” (Q. 53:38)  Also it was not Allah who made the final decision. Safiyah’s father was killed by Muhammad’s men not by Allah. This would be the same as Hitler claiming that God killed all the Jews in the holocaust. If God wanted to kill all those people that Muhammad and his army killed He could have done it on his own. God needs no mercenaries to do his will.

“The Prophet then gave her the choice of joining her people after freedom or accepting Islam and coming into a matrimonial relationship with him” 

We have to remember that Muhammad killed most of her people and banished the rest of them. So giving the choice to join her people is not much of a choice.  

“She was very intelligent and gentle and said, “O Allah’s Messenger, I had hoped for Islam, and I confirmed you before your invitation. Now when I have the honour to be in your presence, I am given a choice between kufr and Islam I swear by Allah, that Allah and His Messenger is dearer to me than my own freedom and my joining with my people.” (Tabaqat). 

Was this confession, if true, sincere? Was she safe to speak out her mind? She was enslaved by a man who had exterminated her family and could do with her the same. See the reference made to her “freedom”. This shows clearly that she was not free. In fact she must have been very intelligent to fabricate those lies to save her own life. 

“When Safiyah was married, she was very young, and according to one report she was hardly seventeen years old and was extremely beautiful. Once A’isha said a few sentences about her short stature, at which the Prophet said, “You have said a thing that if it were left in the sea, it would mix with it (and make its water dirty). ” (Abu Dawud). She not only deeply loved the Prophet but also greatly respected him as Allah’s Messenger, for she heard the conversations of her father and uncle after they went to Medinah. When the Prophet migrated to Medinah, they came to see him and find out whether he was the true Messenger of Allah spoken of in the Scriptures. When they got back and talked together that night, Safiyah was in her bed listening to them. One of them said, “What do you think about him?” He replied, “He is the same Prophet foretold by our Scriptures.” Then the other said, “What is to be done?” The reply came that they must oppose him with all their might.” 

Is this story, narrated by Abu Dawud, credible? How can two Jews recognize Muhammad as the prophet foretold by their scriptures and decide to oppose him with all their might? It defies all logic. It takes a “deficient in intelligence” to believe in this nonsense. It is not clear whether Safiyah lied to conform and make her self accepted among her enemies or it is another fabrication of a zealot believer. Why would someone decide to oppose with all his might the one who he has found out to be the promised one of his own scriptures? But this is not all! Where in the Bible it says anything about Muhammad? How come Safiyah’s father and uncle could decipher their scriptures and find about Muhammad while for 1400 years all Muslim scholars have been unable to do it? 

“So Safiyah was convinced of the truth of the Prophet. She spared no pain to look after him, care for him and provide every comfort that she could think of. This is evident since she came into his presence after the fall of Khaibar.” 

See how the writer contradicts himself in one page? Just a few lines above we read that she was captured and was taken to Muhammad as a prisoner. She didn’t come on her own. She was taken to the prophet because she was young and the prettiest of other women captured. 

“The Prophet had a slight grievance against her for she had refused when the Prophet wanted to have privacy with her at the previous stage (of the journey). At the next halt, the Prophet had privacy with her and spent all night with her. When she was asked by Umm Sulaim, “What did you see in Allah’s Messenger?” She said he was very pleased with her and did not sleep at all but was talking to her all night. He had asked her, ‘Why did you refuse at the first stage when I desired privacy with you?’ She had said, ‘I was afraid for you because of the nearness of the Jews. “‘This thing further increased my merit in his eyes.” (Tabaqat). 

Bukhari also has recorded some Hadithes telling the invasion of Kheibar and how Muhammad met Safiyah. 

Narrated ‘Abdul ‘Aziz:
Anas said, ‘When Allah’s Apostle invaded Khaibar, we offered the Fajr prayer there yearly in the morning) when it was still dark. The Prophet rode and Abu Talha rode too and I was riding behind Abu Talha. The Prophet passed through the lane of Khaibar quickly and my knee was touching the thigh of the Prophet . He uncovered his thigh and I saw the whiteness of the thigh of the Prophet. When he entered the town, he said, ‘Allahu Akbar! Khaibar is ruined. Whenever we approach near a (hostile) nation (to fight) then evil will be the morning of those who have been warned.’ He repeated this thrice. The people came out for their jobs and some of them said, ‘Muhammad (has come).’ (Some of our companions added, “With his army.”) We conquered Khaibar, took the captives, and the booty was collected. Dihya came and said, ‘O Allah’s Prophet! Give me a slave girl from the captives.’ The Prophet said, ‘Go and take any slave girl.’ He took Safiya bint Huyai. A man came to the Prophet and said, ‘O Allah’s Apostles! You gave Safiya bint Huyai to Dihya and she is the chief mistress of the tribes of Quraiza and An-Nadir and she befits none but you.’ So the Prophet said, ‘Bring him along with her.’ So Dihya came with her and when the Prophet saw her, he said to Dihya, ‘Take any slave girl other than her from the captives.’ Anas added: The Prophet then manumitted her and married her.”

Thabit asked Anas, “O Abu Hamza! What did the Prophet pay her (as Mahr)?” He said, “Her self was her Mahr for he manumitted her and then married her.” Anas added, “While on the way, Um Sulaim dressed her for marriage (ceremony) and at night she sent her as a bride to the Prophet .  (Sahih Bukhari 1.367)

Mahr or dowry is a money that a bride receives from her husband when he marries her. Muhammad did not pay Safiyah her Mahr because he had to pay it to himself for manumitting her. Of course the irony is that he did not buy her but enslaved her by raiding her town. This story is significant because it gives us an insight into the moral and ethical values of the Prophet of God (Peace be upon his immaculate soul).

Our modern sensibility makes us cringe with stories like this, yet amazingly Muhammad taught that he is going to receive two rewards by marrying Safiyah. One for manumitting someone whom no one but himself had enslaved and the other for marrying the prettiest girl who was 40 years younger.   

Abu Musa reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said about one who emancipated a slave woman, and then married her, that for him there are two rewards. (Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3327)

Also in another part

Narrated Anas:
The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, “Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.” Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives, She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet . The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr’. (Sahih Bukhari V.5 B.59 N.512) 

By Ali Sina 

Abuser

Bukari 5:59:449.
Narated By Al-Bara: The Prophet said to Hassan, “Abuse them (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e, supports you).” (Through another group of sub narrators) Al-Bara bin Azib said, “On the day of Quraiza’s (besiege), Allah’s Apostle said to Hassan bin Thabit, ‘Abuse them (with your poems), and Gabriel is with you (i.e. supports you).’

Beater

Abu Dawud 8:2709.
Narated By Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-‘As: The Apostle of Allah (pbuh), AbuBakr and Umar burned the belongings of anyone who had been dishonest about booty (mal-e-ganimat) and beat him.

Cheater

Ibn Sa’d writes [p119]: “Abu Bakr has narrated that the messenger of Allâh (PBUH) had sexual intercourse with Mariyah in the house of Hafsa. When the messenger came out of the house, Hafsa was sitting at the gate (behind the locked door). She told the prophet, O Messenger of Allâh, do you do this in my house and during my turn? The Prophet said, control yourself and let me go for I make her haram to me. Hafsa said, I do not accept, unless you swear for me. That Hazrat (his holiness) said, by Allâh I will not touch her again.”

Deceiver

Abu Dawud 8:2631
Narated By Ka’b ibn Malik: When the Prophet (pbuh) intended to go on an expedition (“muhim”), he always pretended to be going somewhere else, and he would say: War is deception (“dhoka”).

Epileptic

Bukhari 1:1:5
Narated By Ibn ‘Abbas: Allah’s Apostle was the most generous of all the people, and he used to reach the peak in generosity in the month of Ramadan when Gabriel met him. Gabriel used to meet him every night of Ramadan to teach him the Qur’an. Allah’s Apostle was the most generous person, even more generous than the strong uncontrollable wind (in readiness and haste to do charitable deeds).

Fief distributor

Abu Dawud 13:3066
Narated By Abdullah ibn Umar: The Prophet (pbuh) gave az-Zubayr the land as a fief up to the reach of his horse when he runs. He, therefore, made his horse run until it stopped. He then threw his flog. Thereupon he said: Give him (the land) up to the point where his flog has reached.

Gangster

Bukhari 5:59:445.
Narated By Ibn Umar: On the day of Al-Ahzab (i.e. Clans) the Prophet said, “None of you Muslims) should offer the ‘Asr prayer but at Banu Quraiza’s place.” The ‘Asr prayer became due for some of them on the way. Some of those said, “We will not offer it till we reach it, the place of Banu Quraiza,” while some others said, “No, we will pray at this spot, for the Prophet did not mean that for us.” Later on It was mentioned to the Prophet and he did not berate any of the two groups.

Harasser

Bukhar 5:59: 512.
Narated By Anas: The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, “Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.” Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives, She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet. The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr’.

Idolater

Quran 53:19-22
“Now tell me about Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat,
The third one, another goddess.
What! For you the males and for him the females!
That indeed is an unfair division”

Jaziya enforcer

Abu Dawud 13:3040
Narated By Ubaydullah: Harb ibn Ubaydullah told on the authority of his grandfather, his mother’s father, that he had it on the authority of his father that the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) said: Tithes are to be levied on Jews and Christians, but not on Muslims.

Killer

Bukhari 5:59:447.
Narated By Abu Said Al-Khudri: The people of (Banu) Quraiza agreed to accept the verdict of Sad bin Mu’adh. So the Prophet sent for Sad, and the latter came (riding) a donkey and when he approached the Mosque, the Prophet said to the Ansar, “Get up for your chief or for the best among you.” Then the Prophet said (to Sad).” These (i.e. Banu Quraiza) have agreed to accept your verdict.” Sad said, “Kill their (men) warriors and take their offspring as captives, “On that the Prophet said, “You have judged according to Allah’s Judgment,” or said, “according to the King’s judgment.”

Looter

Muslim 4:1058
Jabir b. ‘Abdullah al-Ansari reported: The Prophet (may peace be upon him) said: I have been conferred upon five (things) which were not granted to anyone before me (and these are): Every apostle was sent particularly to his own people, whereas I have been sent to all the red and the black the spoils of war have been made lawful for me, and these were never made lawful to anyone before me, and the earth has been made sacred and pure and mosque for me, so whenever the time of prayer comes for any one of you he should pray whenever he is, and I have been supported by awe (by which the enemy is overwhelmed) from the distance (which one takes) one month to cover and I have been granted intercession.

Misogynist

Bukhari 7:62:30
Narated By Abdullah bin ‘Umar : Allah’s Apostle said, “Evil omen(sign) is in the women, the house and the horse.”

Narcissist

Tabakat Vol 1. p27
Ibn Sa’d reports Muhammad saying:

“Among all the people of the world God chose the Arabs. From among the Arabs he chose the Kinana. From Kinana he chose the Quraish (the tribe of Muhammad). From the Quraish he chose Bani Hashim (his clan). And from Bani Hashim he chose me.

Oppressor

Bukhari 8:82:795.
Narated By Anas: The Prophet cut off the hands and feet of the men belonging to the tribe of ‘Uraina and did not cauterise (their bleeding limbs) till they died.

Pedophile

Bukhari 7:62:64
Narated By ‘Aisha: That the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated(complete) his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years.

Quack

Bukhari 2:24:577
Narated By Anas: Some people from ‘Uraina tribe came to Medina and its climate did not suit them, so Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) allowed them to go to the herd of camels (given as Zakat) and they drank their milk and urine as medicine.

Rapist

Muslim 19:4292
Ibn ‘Aun reported: I wrote to Nafi’ inquiring from him whether it was necessary to extend (to the disbelievers) an invitation to accept (Islam) before making them in fight. He wrote (in reply) to me that it was necessary in the early days of Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others. On that very day, he captured Juwairiya bint al-Harith. Nafi’ said that this tradition was related to him by Abdullah b. Umar who (himself) was among the raiding troops.

Snorer (like camel)

Muslim 7:2654
“Revelation came to the Apostle of Allâh and he was covered with a cloth, and Ya’la said: Would that I see revelation coming to the Apostle of Allâh. He (Omar) said: Would it please you to see the Apostle of Allâh receiving the revelations ‘Omar lifted a corner of the cloth and I looked at him and he was emitting a sound of snorting. He (the narrator) said: I thought it was the sound of a camel.”

Terrorist

Bukhari 4:52:220
Allah’s Apostle said …. I have been made victorious with terror………

Ultra violent

Muslim 19:4321
It is reported on the authority of Sa’b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists (mushrik) being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.

Virgin molester

Bukhari 7:62:17
Narated By Jabir bin ‘Abdullah: When I got married, Allah’s Apostle said to me, “What type of lady have you married?” I replied, “I have married a matron (divorced)’ He said, “Why, don’t you have a liking for the virgins (untouched) and for fondling them?” Jabir also said: Allah’s Apostle said, “Why didn’t you marry a young girl so that you might play with her and she with you?’

Womanizer

Bukhari 1:5:282
The Prophet used to visit all his wives in one night and he had nine wives at that time.

XXX dealer

Bukhari 7:62:137
Narated By Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah’s Apostle about it and he said, “Do you really do that?” repeating the question thrice, “There is no soul that is destined (kismet may likha gaya) to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection.”

Yokel (bumpkin)

Volumn 001, Book 001, Hadith Number 003.
Narated By ‘Aisha: The angel came to him and asked him to read. The Prophet replied, “I do not know how to read.”

Zionist (Jew) slaughterer

Ibn Ishak, p464

prophet ordered to slaughter about 600-900 Jews of Banu Quraiza

Indeed, a thorough research of the ahadith and the Quran reveals that Prophet Muhammad—the perfect man for all times— had the following great characteristics in his personality in the present understanding:

Mohammed is a Abuser, Arsonist, Adulterer, Amputator, Assassin, Arrogant, Avenger, Bad, Bandit, Barbarian, Bloodthirsty, Belligerent, Brutal, Briber, Beastly, Bully, Cult leader, Cruel, Callous, Criminal, Carnal, Cheat, Charlatan, Cretin, Coward, Crackpot, Con-artist, Conqueror, Child-Molester, Dangerous, Demoniac,  Deranged, Enslaver, Evil, Ethnic cleanser, Filthy, Fool, Fraud, Greedy, Gory, Hatemonger, Highway robber, Heinous, Hypocrite, Homicidal, Immoral, Inhuman, Impotent, Ignorant, Illiterate, Intruder, Insane, Insidious, Jackass, Killer, Kidnapper, Lair, Libertine, Looter, Lecher, Lazy, Lewd, Misogynist, Molester, Monstrous, Megalomaniac, Manic, Mad man, Murderer, Materialistic, Meat-eater, Misanthropic, Mass Murderer, Mafia Don, Narcissist, Opportunistic, Pedophile, Prophet Pretender, Plagiarist, Polygamist, Plunderer, Pervert, Profiteer, Poop, Possessive, Paranoid, Pillager, Pimp, Psychopath, Proud, Quack, Raider, Rapist, Revengeful, Robber, Sadist, Slave-owner, Slave-master, Slave trader, Slave Maker, Spendthrift, Slave seller, Savage, Slave buyer, Smelly, Sexist, Sex maniac, Stupid, Superstitious, Schizophrenic, Swindler, Terrorist, Torturer, Tormenter, Tyrant, Thief, Thug, Unclean, Unfair, Vengeful, Violent, Vile, Voyeur, Warlord, Warmonger, Womanizer, Wicked, Whoremonger,  Xenophobic, Yucky, Zealot insidious, Gory, Whoremonger.

by Amar Khan

Weeping and Other Hysterics
Have Muslim Apologists Nothing More to Offer?

by Raymond Ibrahim
Hudson New York
March 14, 2011
http://www.meforum.org/2851/weeping-and-other-hysterics-have-muslim

  From Congressman Keith Ellison’s emotional breakdown to Congresswoman Jackie Speier’s accusations of “racism,” last week’s hearings on Muslim radicalization have made it clear that those who oppose the hearings have little of substance to offer. Still, the tactics used by such apologists—namely, appeals to emotionalism and accusations of racism—are influential enough that they need to be addressed and discredited once and for all.
For starters, though it would have been unheard of generations ago and seen as a sign of instability, public crying is the latest rage for politicians. A 2007 Associated Press report puts it well: “Tears, once kryptonite to serious presidential candidates, today are more often seen as a useful part of the political tool kit”—and are thus indicative of an increasingly therapeutic society, one more interested in a show of catharsis than facts.
Yet, tears aside, if we wish to be objective for a moment, Ellison’s testimony—culminating with his choking up and leaving the hearing—contributes nothing to the topic of Muslim radicalization in America. Instead, it raises more questions about Ellison—a former Nation of Islam leader, mouthpiece for the Muslim Brotherhood front-group CAIR, and critic of the U.S. Constitution.
Indeed, arguing that “suit-and-tie” Islamists have penetrated Western societies and are manipulating the legal system to their advantage—including by imposing aspects of Islamic law, winning special privileges for themselves, and, of course, shutting down criticism of Islam—Daniel Pipes has singled out Ellison as representing a far greater threat to Western civilization than Osama bin Laden.
Did Ellison feign an emotional breakdown during his opening remarks to leave the hearing and evade follow-up questions from Congressman Peter King and others—concrete questions about Muslim radicalization that he preferred not to respond to—or were his tears sincere? Either way, it is not clear which is worse: another obfuscating politician, or a politician whose emotions so dominate him that he cannot carry out his responsibilities.
While we are on the topic of strategic-weeping, it is relevant to note that authoritative Muslim scholars, such as Ibn Hajar, recommend deceiving infidels with crocodile tears: “Revealing one thing while secretly planning another is the essence of deception; moreover, the hadith incites [Muslims] to take great caution in war, while [publicly] lamenting and mourning in order to dupe the infidels” (The Al Qaeda Reader, p.142). This is not to conclude that Ellison is taking lessons from Hajar, but that even the most rabid jihadists—not just American politicians—are aware of the power of tears as a ruse.
The other tactic that frequently arises and is in dire need of being laid to rest—permanently—is this business of trying to stifle any talk on Islam and Muslims by labeling it “racist.” One would have thought it was obvious, but apparently it needs stressing: race and religion have absolutely nothing to do with one another. Race is inherent, represented by physical characteristics; religion is learned, impacting the mind, regardless of race. Thus most major religions—especially Christianity and Islam—have adherents from all races and ethnicities.
Despite these obvious facts, uncritical thinkers like Congresswoman Jackie Speier—or simply garden-variety manipulators—constantly cry “racism” when Islam and Muslims come under scrutiny. This approach is ubiquitous: discussing the Fort Hood shootings, a former American soldier lamented that “When a white guy shoots up a post office, they call that going postal. But when a Muslim [namely, Nidal Hasan] does it, they call it jihad.” Notice the confusion; as if a “white guy” and a “Muslim” represent different races. (What if the person is a “white Muslim,” as in the instance of Hasan?)
Of course, if a person of any color goes on a random shooting spree, it would be racist to pin it on his race. But if a person of any color goes on a shooting spree—while waving the Koran, screaming Allahu Akbar, or otherwise rationalizing his actions in Islamic terms, as did Nidal Hasan—then we are talking about a shooting spree motivated by a learned ideology or worldview that has nothing to do with the shooter’s race.
And this is the whole point: tears and moral outrage aside, while it is important to recognize that not all Muslims are jihadists, it is equally important to acknowledge that all jihadists are Muslims—hence the need to delimit the hearings to the Muslim community. You will not find jihadists ensconced among neo-Nazis or other “radicals.” Moreover, as Peter King put it:
There is no equivalency of threat between al-Qaeda and neo-Nazis, environmental extremists or other isolated madmen. Only al-Qaeda and its Islamist affiliates in this country are part of an international threat to our nation. Indeed, by the Justice Department’s own record, not one terror-related case in the last two years involved neo-Nazis, environmental extremists, militias or anti-war groups.
Based on these initial hearings, it is clear that the apologists have little to offer. As Jennifer Rubin writes at the Washington Post, “The Democrats’ unhinged rhetoric and wild accusations did more to undermine their opposition to the hearings than anything King could possibly have said.” Yet crying tears or “racism!” is emblematic of a greater problem: politicians trying to appeal to the people’s emotions, not their reason—an approach that has historically had horrific consequences.
Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum.
Related Topics:  Muslims in the United States  |  Raymond Ibrahim

This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

via centurean2.wordpress.com

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon’s posterous

“Call me mr Crocodile…!”

Ellison’s teary eyed performance should impress no one: this guy is a nasty piece of work.

Andrew G. Bostom (source)
Matthew Shaffer of NRO (as noted here by Ethel Fenig) exposed Keith Ellison’s   mendacious taqiyya(Koran-sanctioned Islamic dissimulation) theater during the Congressman’s testimony at Thursday’s Homeland Security Hearings on American Muslim radicalization.
The next day, during a 3/11/11 interview with Bill Maher (on “Real Time With Bill Maher”), responding to Maher’s complaint that, “[Islam] comes from a hate-filled holy book, the Koran, which is taken very literally by its people,”Ellison invoked a deceitfully redacted extract of Koran 5:32, and the ostensible Koranic paean to “tolerance,” verse 2:256.
Ellison’s disingenuous response was predictable.

• Sultan Knish is also onto it, here: An Islamist’s Crocodile Tears

Following the murderous acts of jihad terrorism committed on September 11, 2001, Ibn Warraq highlighted the tragic irony of many apologists quoting selectively from Koran 5:32, “whoso slays a soul …shall be as if he had slain mankind altogether; and whoso gives life to a soul, shall be as if he has given life to mankind altogether”, attempting to demonstrate that the Koran disapproved of violence and killing. Here is the entire verse (5:32), quoted in full context, with the intimately related verse, Koran 5:33:
(5:32) Therefore We prescribed for the Children of Israel that whoso slays a soul not to retaliate for a soul slain, nor for corruption done in the land, shall be as if he had slain mankind altogether; and whoso gives life to a soul, shall be as if he has given life to mankind altogether. Our Messengers have already come to them with the clear signs; then many of them thereafter commit excesses in the earth. (5:33) This is the recompense of those who fight against God and His Messenger, and hasten about the earth, to do corruption there: they shall be slaughtered, or crucified, or their hands and feet shall alternately be struck off; or they shall be banished from the land. That is a degradation for them in this world; and in the world to come awaits them a mighty chastisement

[For direct comparison see, Mishna, Sanhedrin, IV, 5, “Thus was created a single man, to teach us that every person who loses a single soul, it shall be written about him as if he has lost the entire world, and every person who sustains a single soul, it shall be written, about him as if he has sustained the entire world”]
As Warraq noted, with regard to Koran 5:32/33, ¹
The supposedly noble sentiments are in fact a warning to Jews. [² see these commentaries as well] “Behave, or else” is the message. Far from abjuring violence, these verses aggressively point out that anyone opposing the Prophet will be killed, crucified, mutilated, and banished

Regarding the other pacific sounding verse Congressman Ellison cited, 2:256, it must be contextualized by Muhammad’s bellicose evolution within the Koran itself. But how, exactly? Abrogation is critical to understanding this evolution. Ali ibn Abi Talib—revered by Shiite Muslims and Islam’s 4^th “Rightly Guided” Caliph—is reported to have told a pious Muslim companion, Abdul Rahman
“[C]an you differentiate between abrogating and abrogated verses” Abdul Rahman said, “no.” Thereupon Ali said “Thou art damned and causeth others to be damned.”
The Koran’s “verses of peace,” as cited by Ellison, and many other Muslim and non-Muslim apologists, most notably verse 2:256, “There is no compulsion in religion,” were all abrogated by the so-called verses of the sword. These abrogating verses of the sword recommend beheading or otherwise murdering and mutilating non-Muslims, and Muslim apostates. According to classical Muslim Koranic commentators verse 9:5 (perhaps the most infamous verse of the sword), “Slay the idolators wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush…”, for example, cancels 124 verses that promote patience and toleration. And this doctrine of abrogation, necessitated by the many contradictions which abound in the Koran, originates as putatively taught by Muhammad, himself, at verse 2:106: “Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?”. This verse, in combination with verses* 16:101, 22:52, and 87:6, was elaborated into a formal system of abrogation (naskh in Arabic) by the greatest classical Muslim Koranic scholars and jurists, which entailed (p.72),
…the suppression of a ruling without the suppression of the wording. That is to say, the earlier ruling is still to be found in the Koran, and is still to this day recited in worship, but it no longer has any legal force.
The sacralized Islamic sources indicate that as the Muslim prophet Muhammad accrued political and military power, he evolved from a proselytizer and persuader, to a warrior, and dictatorial legislator.  (i.e., a prototype jihadist; see for example, renowned contemporary mainstream Islamic cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s, “The Prophet Muhammad as a Jihad Model”). Thus the sword and other similar Koranic verses—as per the linkage between Muhammad’s biography and the Koranic narrative—capture the Muslim prophet at his most dogmatic, belligerent, and intolerant. Muslims are enjoined to fight and murder nonbelievers—woe unto those who shirk these campaigns, but those who are killed fighting for the one true religion, i.e., Islam, will be rewarded amply in the afterlife.**
Thus it is reasonable to conclude that Keith Ellison’s deceitful pronouncements at Thursday’s Homeland SecurityHearings, this past Thursday, and one day later on “Real Time With Bill Maher,” are consistent with the Koranic doctrine of taqiyya, Islamic religious dissimulation. Al-Tabari (d. 923), author of perhaps the earliest and most important authoritative Koranic commentary, explains Koranic verse 3:28, which sanctions taqiyya, as follows (translation by Raymond Ibrahim):
If you [Muslims] are under their [non-Muslims'] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them with your tongue while harboring inner animosity for them … [know that] God has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels rather than other believers-except when infidels are above them [in authority]. Should that be the case, let them act friendly towards them while preserving their religion.

Notes
*Additional Koranic verses sanctioning abrogation:
16: 101: “And when We change (one) communication for (another) communication, and Allah knows best what He reveals, they say: You are only a forger. Nay, most of them do not know.”; 22:52: “And We did not send before you any messenger or prophet, but when he desired, the Shaitan made a suggestion respecting his desire; but Allah annuls that which the Shaitan casts, then does Allah establish His communications, and Allah is Knowing, Wise”;
87:6: “By degrees shall We teach thee to declare (the Message), so thou shalt not forget.”
**Additional Koranic verses sanctioning jihad, and jihad martyrdom:
47:4: “Now when ye meet in battle those who disbelieve, then it is smiting of the necks until, when ye have routed them, then making fast of bonds.”
9:29: “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, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.”
4:76: “Those who believe fight in the way of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the way of the Shaitan. Fight therefore against the friends of the Shaitan; surely the strategy of the Shaitan is weak.”
8:12: “When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.”
8:38-39: “Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do.”
9:39: “If you do not go forth, He will chastise you with a painful chastisement and bring in your place a people other than you, and you will do Him no harm; and Allah has power over all things.”
4:74: “Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world’s life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward.”
9:111: “Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah’s way, so they slay and are slain; a promise which is binding on Him in the Taurat and the Injeel and the Quran; and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Rejoice therefore in the pledge which you have made; and that is the mighty achievement.”
^1. Ibn Warraq. Leaving Islam. Apostates Speak Out. Amherst, New York, 2003, p. 401.
^2. The classical Qur’anic commentary of Ibn Kathir, and the 20^th century commentary of Mawdudi confirm and validate the anti-Jewish attitudes expressed in Qur’an 5:32/33. From Ibn Kathir (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Riyadh, Vol. 3, 2000, p.160), entitled, “Warning Those Who Commit Mischief ”:
This Ayah chastises and criticizes those who commit the prohibitions, after knowing that they are prohibited from indulging in them. [Like] [T]he Jews of Al-Madinah, such as Banu Qurayza, An-Nadir, and Qaynuqa..[Jewish tribes ultimately attacked, expropriated, expelled, and even massacred by Muhammad]
From Mawdudi (Towards Understanding the Qur’an. Vol. 2, pp. 155-56), who includes a contextual reference to Qur’an 5:30/31 as well:
God honored some of the illiterate people of Arabia and disregarded the ancient People of the Book because the former were pious while the latter were not. But rather than reflect upon the causes of their rejection by God, and do something to overcome the failings which led to that rejection, the Israelites were seized by the same fit of arrogance and folly which had once seized the criminal son of Adam [verses 5:30/31], and resolved to kill those whose good deeds had been accepted by God. It was obvious that such acts would contribute nothing towards their acceptance by God. They would rather earn them an even greater degree of God’s disapproval. Since the same qualities which had been displayed by the wrongdoing son of Adam were manifest in the Children of Israel, God strongly urged them not to kill human beings and couched his command in forceful terms.

The “land” (in verse 5:33) signifies either the country or territory wherein the responsibility of establishing law and order has been undertaken by an Islamic state. The expression “to wage war [fight] against Allah and His Messenger” denotes war against the righteous order established by the Islamic state.

Pakistan and Islamization: stoning women to death for Allah

Lee Jay Walker

The Modern Tokyo Times

Brutality of Islam

 If you close your eyes you can imagine part of the land of India which was partitioned and became Pakistan.  If we think about this area before the onset of Islam it is easy to imagine Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Zoroastrians, and many faiths throughout the land which would become Pakistan.  However, countless Islamic invasions and then the partition of India led to the creation of modern day Pakistan.

The creation of East and West Pakistan did not lead to unity or peace but instead led to more religious persecution of non-Muslim minorities, ethnic tensions, language issues, and other important factors. In time Bangladesh and Pakistan would emerge after a bitter and brutal war which erupted in 1971 and during this brutal war the Pakistan army was involved in brutal massacres and the Hindu community was especially targeted.

Therefore, just like past Islamic conquests which enslaved and killed millions of Hindus in past Islamic jihads of India the same also happened during 1971.  The eastern part of Dhaka was dominated by Hindus therefore Pakistan military units were involved in major pogroms of Hindus.  Time magazine reported on 2 August 1971, that “The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Pakistani military hatred.”

After the brutal conflict in 1971 it is clear that Pakistan learnt nothing apart from more hatred because General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq would consolidate his power base during 1977 and 1978 and the new President of Pakistan was intent on installing more Islamization. 

General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq introduced many draconian laws in which non-Muslims and minority Muslims would suffer alongside women who also bore the brunt of Islamization.  Laws he introduced in the Pakistan Penal Code include the following:

Source of information:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zia-ul-Haq’s_Islamization

Therefore, modern day Pakistan is a land of Islamic hatred whereby Islamists stone women to death, persecute minorities, and keep women in the shadows in many parts of this land and honour killings are a daily reality.  At the same time you have institutional Islamic hatred whereby the government, police force, judiciary, local government leaders, and other areas of power install or maintain institutional hatred by allowing systematic persecution of minorities and women.

Ahmadiyya Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, and other minorities, now reside in fear because of the draconian blasphemy law and other laws which discriminate against non-Muslims and Ahmadiyya Muslims.

The nightmare of what Pakistan is can be seen by the recent murder of another woman which was highlighted in an article written by S Iftikhar Murshed. He states the following:

“The woman’s head was covered with a sack, her hands were tied and she was tethered to the ground – while a group of turbaned, bearded men hurled rocks at her, breaking her bones and then crushing her skull. According to reports in the press, she had been walking unescorted and was presumed guilty of adultery. The barbarity, allegedly perpetrated by the Taliban in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), was shown on Dubai’s Al Aan television. The same footage was televised by a private Pakistani channel on Sept 28 and the story also featured that day in the local print media.” 

“There was no reaction from civil society, no politician demanded that the government bring the criminals to justice, no resolution was passed by parliament expressing concern over the outrage, no statement emanated from the president or the prime minister condemning the incident, and the atrocity faded from public memory because the woman was a nonentity and did not matter.”

(Article http://www.thenews.com.pk/24-10-2010/opinion/11689.htm)

This article highlights the complete brutality of Sunni Islam under the Taliban; the institutions of Pakistan which are enabling hatred to prosper via draconian laws and ineptness when dealing with brutal murders like this; and the utter brutality of Mohammed himself who not only did adultery with female concubines but who then supported the stoning to death of people who did adultery.

The mass media in the West which highlighted an insignificant Christian pastor with a flock which is very small about burning the Koran remains largely silent about daily murders of women and minorities in Pakistan.  Or if information is provided then it is not advertised so much because it would break the “Islamic mantra of peace” which is being sold in many media outlets or by national leaders like President Obama who is following the party line of ex-President Bush.

In truth the brutal murder of this woman shames the appeasers of Islam and shames the multi-religionists who are closing their eyes to the reality of Islamic Sharia law and the tenets of Islam which were espoused by Mohammed.

It should also be remembered that America and the United Kingdom both supported General Zia-ul-Haq and little was said about the draconian Islamic laws which he put in motion, in full accordance with the Koran and the Hadiths.  Therefore, silence is both a Democratic and Republican issue in America and an issue for nations like the United Kingdom who have turned a blind eye to brutal laws and institutional hatred in Pakistan.

The author, S Iftikhar Murshed, continues by stating the adage “justice delayed is justice denied” is not necessarily true. In the case of the unknown woman in Fata, as in other instances, the skewed Taliban concept of Islamic justice was as swift as it was brutal. The stringent Quranic evidentiary requirements for proving adultery were set aside and the accused was condemned for a crime she had never committed.”

This comment clearly shows you that the article by S Iftikhar Murshed does not condemn the Koran and the Hadiths because he states “The stringent Quranic evidentiary requirements for proving adultery were set aside.”  However, why do people deserve to be killed for adultery, apostasy, or have your hands and feet chopped off for minor crimes in accordance with what Mohammed stated?

Returning back to this article it is clear that Pakistan is in crisis and this crisis is based on the religion of Islam. The complicity of nations who continue to prop-up this nation also must be rebuked because General Zia-ul-Haq created an even more vengeful Pakistan and the global Sunni Islamic jihadist movement obtained major funding and backing under his rule.

Ex-President Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski fell into line and supported the motives of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia in 1979 after the Siege of Mecca by forces loyal to

Juhayman ibn Muhammad ibn Sayf al-Otaibi created mayhem for the House of Saud.

(http://leejaywalker.wordpress.com/2010/08/10/the-siege-of-mecca-to-pro-islamic-policies-in-bosnia/)

In an earlier article I wrote called “USA, CIA, created Sunni Islamic Terrorism” I comment that “The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) implemented Operation Cyclone and this policy was aimed at supporting the Afghan Mujahideen during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski began a new policy whereby America would support radical Islam in the full knowledge that this meant supporting terrorism and a movement which supported killing all apostates from Islam and persecuting women.” 

“Therefore, both political parties in America were involved in the funding of radical Sunni Islam and Michael G. Vickers, a Special Forces NCO, was commissioned by the CIA to support radical Islamic forces. Of major importance was coordination and launching attacks against the Soviet Union which would prove to be successful. Given this, Vickers, and other covert operatives, would train terrorists and in time they would unleash a force that could not be contained.”

The CIA’s regional head, Gustav Avrakotos, alongside people like Charlie Wilson, Gordan Humphrey, Fred Ikle, William Casey, Joanne Herring, and a host of others, were all responsible in spreading radical Islam in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Therefore, the “dark forces” of radical Sunni Islam were being unified via enormous funding and military training…………… the CIA, political leaders, and the people mentioned above, would all play their role in the future destabilization of Afghanistan and Pakistan and in making September 11th happen.

“Of instrumental importance were Pakistan and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) unit which would work hand-in-hand with the CIA and other covert networks. Other nations were also involved, including the British, because MI6 and the SAS, would help to train Islamic terrorists and of course Saudi Arabia would provide ample funds in order to spread radical Sunni Islam.”

However, the mistakes of America and the United Kingdom can’t be exonerated nor can Mohammed who is the prophet of Islam because history tells us the reality of Mohammed and Islamic jihad. 

The defeat of communism was a serious issue during the Cold War but it is clear that Islamic jihad was an instrument of power and control. This began under the founding father of Islam because Mohammed simply sat by and watched the beheadings of the Banu Qurayza who were followers of Judaism.  More than 600 men over puberty were beheaded one after the other in full accordance with the wishes of Mohammed.

The fate that befell the Banu Qurayza clearly shows you the mindset of Mohammed and Islam. Jihad, jizya, dhimmitude, and the destruction of other faiths and systems is part and parcel of Islam and only fools would have ignored the reality of Islam and its bloody past and continuity in the modern world.

Therefore, the stoning to death of this lady may have been done by the Taliban but the “hands which are dripping in blood belong to Prophet Mohammed.”

In America and other nations people are now waking up despite media bias which is trying to distort the reality of Islam.  President Obama may not be on board and his eyes may be closed but forces within America are gradually waking up.

If only America, the UK, and others, had turned to India and the history of this nation because Islamic jihad, enslavement, brute force, dhimmitude, and so forth, was not only a past tragedy but is also a living tragedy.  After all, Hindus and other minorities still continue to suffer in the House of Islam in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and within Kashmir.

Also, the teachings of the Koran and the Hadiths clearly support Islamization via stealth jihad and jihad. In time this leads to dhimmitude and the destruction of the host culture and traditions.

Therefore, while Islamists were shouting “Allah Akbar” while killing a woman in such a brutal method let us not forget that the evil they did was in the name of Allah because Mohammed supported stoning to death.

Western nations have no excuse for their ignorance and if Islam is allowed to grow at any cost or if Western nations keep on supporting nations like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan without any modernization strings; then the “final Rome” called “world civilization” will be faced by an Islamic monoculture which devours the non-Muslims first and then like in Pakistan they turn on each other and backwardness becomes the norm.

Lee Jay Walker

http://leejaywalker.wordpress.com

http://islamicpersecution.wordpress.com

http://islamicinquisition.wordpress.com

http://themoderntokyotimes.wordpress.com

Lee Jay Walker

The Modern Tokyo Times

Islamic justice in Pakistan

 

If you close your eyes you can imagine part of the land of India which was partitioned and became Pakistan.  If we think about this area before the onset of Islam it is easy to imagine Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Zoroastrians, and many faiths throughout the land which would become Pakistan.  However, countless Islamic invasions and then the partition of India led to the creation of modern day Pakistan.

The creation of East and West Pakistan did not lead to unity or peace but instead led to more religious persecution of non-Muslim minorities, ethnic tensions, language issues, and other important factors. In time Bangladesh and Pakistan would emerge after a bitter and brutal war which erupted in 1971 and during this brutal war the Pakistan army was involved in brutal massacres and the Hindu community was especially targeted.

Therefore, just like past Islamic conquests which enslaved and killed millions of Hindus in past Islamic jihads of India the same also happened during 1971.  The eastern part of Dhaka was dominated by Hindus therefore Pakistan military units were involved in major pogroms of Hindus.  Time magazine reported on 2 August 1971, that “The Hindus, who account for three-fourths of the refugees and a majority of the dead, have borne the brunt of the Pakistani military hatred.”

After the brutal conflict in 1971 it is clear that Pakistan learnt nothing apart from more hatred because General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq would consolidate his power base during 1977 and 1978 and the new President of Pakistan was intent on installing more Islamization. 

General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq introduced many draconian laws in which non-Muslims and minority Muslims would suffer alongside women who also bore the brunt of Islamization.  Laws he introduced in the Pakistan Penal Code include the following:

Source of information:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zia-ul-Haq’s_Islamization

Therefore, modern day Pakistan is a land of Islamic hatred whereby Islamists stone women to death, persecute minorities, and keep women in the shadows in many parts of this land and honour killings are a daily reality.  At the same time you have institutional Islamic hatred whereby the government, police force, judiciary, local government leaders, and other areas of power install or maintain institutional hatred by allowing systematic persecution of minorities and women.

Ahmadiyya Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, and other minorities, now reside in fear because of the draconian blasphemy law and other laws which discriminate against non-Muslims and Ahmadiyya Muslims.

The nightmare of what Pakistan is can be seen by the recent murder of another woman which was highlighted in an article written by S Iftikhar Murshed. He states the following:

“The woman’s head was covered with a sack, her hands were tied and she was tethered to the ground – while a group of turbaned, bearded men hurled rocks at her, breaking her bones and then crushing her skull. According to reports in the press, she had been walking unescorted and was presumed guilty of adultery. The barbarity, allegedly perpetrated by the Taliban in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), was shown on Dubai’s Al Aan television. The same footage was televised by a private Pakistani channel on Sept 28 and the story also featured that day in the local print media.” 

“There was no reaction from civil society, no politician demanded that the government bring the criminals to justice, no resolution was passed by parliament expressing concern over the outrage, no statement emanated from the president or the prime minister condemning the incident, and the atrocity faded from public memory because the woman was a nonentity and did not matter.”

(Article http://www.thenews.com.pk/24-10-2010/opinion/11689.htm)

This article highlights the complete brutality of Sunni Islam under the Taliban; the institutions of Pakistan which are enabling hatred to prosper via draconian laws and ineptness when dealing with brutal murders like this; and the utter brutality of Mohammed himself who not only did adultery with female concubines but who then supported the stoning to death of people who did adultery.

The mass media in the West which highlighted an insignificant Christian pastor with a flock which is very small about burning the Koran remains largely silent about daily murders of women and minorities in Pakistan.  Or if information is provided then it is not advertised so much because it would break the “Islamic mantra of peace” which is being sold in many media outlets or by national leaders like President Obama who is following the party line of ex-President Bush.

In truth the brutal murder of this woman shames the appeasers of Islam and shames the multi-religionists who are closing their eyes to the reality of Islamic Sharia law and the tenets of Islam which were espoused by Mohammed.

It should also be remembered that America and the United Kingdom both supported General Zia-ul-Haq and little was said about the draconian Islamic laws which he put in motion, in full accordance with the Koran and the Hadiths.  Therefore, silence is both a Democratic and Republican issue in America and an issue for nations like the United Kingdom who have turned a blind eye to brutal laws and institutional hatred in Pakistan.

The author, S Iftikhar Murshed, continues by stating the adage “justice delayed is justice denied” is not necessarily true. In the case of the unknown woman in Fata, as in other instances, the skewed Taliban concept of Islamic justice was as swift as it was brutal. The stringent Quranic evidentiary requirements for proving adultery were set aside and the accused was condemned for a crime she had never committed.”

This comment clearly shows you that the article by S Iftikhar Murshed does not condemn the Koran and the Hadiths because he states “The stringent Quranic evidentiary requirements for proving adultery were set aside.”  However, why do people deserve to be killed for adultery, apostasy, or have your hands and feet chopped off for minor crimes in accordance with what Mohammed stated?

Returning back to this article it is clear that Pakistan is in crisis and this crisis is based on the religion of Islam. The complicity of nations who continue to prop-up this nation also must be rebuked because General Zia-ul-Haq created an even more vengeful Pakistan and the global Sunni Islamic jihadist movement obtained major funding and backing under his rule.

Ex-President Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski fell into line and supported the motives of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia in 1979 after the Siege of Mecca by forces loyal to

Juhayman ibn Muhammad ibn Sayf al-Otaibi created mayhem for the House of Saud.

(http://leejaywalker.wordpress.com/2010/08/10/the-siege-of-mecca-to-pro-islamic-policies-in-bosnia/)

In an earlier article I wrote called “USA, CIA, created Sunni Islamic Terrorism” I comment that “The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) implemented Operation Cyclone and this policy was aimed at supporting the Afghan Mujahideen during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski began a new policy whereby America would support radical Islam in the full knowledge that this meant supporting terrorism and a movement which supported killing all apostates from Islam and persecuting women.” 

“Therefore, both political parties in America were involved in the funding of radical Sunni Islam and Michael G. Vickers, a Special Forces NCO, was commissioned by the CIA to support radical Islamic forces. Of major importance was coordination and launching attacks against the Soviet Union which would prove to be successful. Given this, Vickers, and other covert operatives, would train terrorists and in time they would unleash a force that could not be contained.”

The CIA’s regional head, Gustav Avrakotos, alongside people like Charlie Wilson, Gordan Humphrey, Fred Ikle, William Casey, Joanne Herring, and a host of others, were all responsible in spreading radical Islam in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Therefore, the “dark forces” of radical Sunni Islam were being unified via enormous funding and military training…………… the CIA, political leaders, and the people mentioned above, would all play their role in the future destabilization of Afghanistan and Pakistan and in making September 11th happen.

“Of instrumental importance were Pakistan and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) unit which would work hand-in-hand with the CIA and other covert networks. Other nations were also involved, including the British, because MI6 and the SAS, would help to train Islamic terrorists and of course Saudi Arabia would provide ample funds in order to spread radical Sunni Islam.”

However, the mistakes of America and the United Kingdom can’t be exonerated nor can Mohammed who is the prophet of Islam because history tells us the reality of Mohammed and Islamic jihad. 

The defeat of communism was a serious issue during the Cold War but it is clear that Islamic jihad was an instrument of power and control. This began under the founding father of Islam because Mohammed simply sat by and watched the beheadings of the Banu Qurayza who were followers of Judaism.  More than 600 men over puberty were beheaded one after the other in full accordance with the wishes of Mohammed.

The fate that befell the Banu Qurayza clearly shows you the mindset of Mohammed and Islam. Jihad, jizya, dhimmitude, and the destruction of other faiths and systems is part and parcel of Islam and only fools would have ignored the reality of Islam and its bloody past and continuity in the modern world.

Therefore, the stoning to death of this lady may have been done by the Taliban but the “hands which are dripping in blood belong to Prophet Mohammed.”

In America and other nations people are now waking up despite media bias which is trying to distort the reality of Islam.  President Obama may not be on board and his eyes may be closed but forces within America are gradually waking up.

If only America, the UK, and others, had turned to India and the history of this nation because Islamic jihad, enslavement, brute force, dhimmitude, and so forth, was not only a past tragedy but is also a living tragedy.  After all, Hindus and other minorities still continue to suffer in the House of Islam in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and within Kashmir.

Also, the teachings of the Koran and the Hadiths clearly support Islamization via stealth jihad and jihad. In time this leads to dhimmitude and the destruction of the host culture and traditions.

Therefore, while Islamists were shouting “Allah Akbar” while killing a woman in such a brutal method let us not forget that the evil they did was in the name of Allah because Mohammed supported stoning to death.

Western nations have no excuse for their ignorance and if Islam is allowed to grow at any cost or if Western nations keep on supporting nations like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan without any modernization strings; then the “final Rome” called “world civilization” will be faced by an Islamic monoculture which devours the non-Muslims first and then like in Pakistan they turn on each other and backwardness becomes the norm.

Lee Jay Walker

http://leejaywalker.wordpress.com

http://islamicpersecution.wordpress.com

http://islamicinquisition.wordpress.com

http://themoderntokyotimes.wordpress.com

Prophet Mohammed, the Banu Qurayza, Kashmir, and Mansuur Mohammed

Lee Jay Walker

The Modern Tokyo Times

The prophet of Islam is being re-vamped in the West and many Muslims desire to gloss over the harsh reality of their own prophet.  In modern times Mohammed is the great family man despite marrying countless numbers of wives, getting divorced many times, having sex with concubines, and marrying a child.  Yet the Mohammed of Arabia who ruled with an iron-fist and what his followers did to non-Muslims can be witnessed by events in the 7^th century and right up to modern times.

The events that I refer to applies to the systematic annihilation of all male Jews who were over the age of puberty and the ongoing barbarity of radical Islam in modern day Somalia and Kashmir.

Therefore, the Banu Qurayza tribe who followed Judaism and the Muslim convert to Christianity in Somalia in modern times, Mansuur Mohammed; represent the reality and barbarity of Islam and the same applies to the destruction of Hinduism in Kashmir.  In these three events, we can see what happened to ancient Christianity in Nubia, what awaited the Zoroastrians of Persia, what awaited the fate of Buddhists and Hindus in Afghanistan, and what awaited so many other faiths by the sword of Islam.

Before focusing on this issue, it is clear that other faiths have spread by the sword but unlike Islam, no other faith can claim that their prophet was responsible for such hatred or that laws were stated which supported jihad, dhimmitude, and enslavement.  Also, while other faiths have looked deep “into their own personal demons” the same does not apply to the Islamic world.

It is clear that human failings like overt nationalism, the control of resources, feudalism, and many upheavals have happened in history.  However, you can not equate the negatives within the Buddhist world or Christian world on the teachings of Buddha or Jesus.  After all, both supported peace and stood up to the status quo by challenging people to focus on love, compassion, and a fair society.

However, the prophet of Islam is very different because in his world view it was clear that force and coercion were political and religious tools.  Mohammed clearly supported the notion of Islamic jihad; stealing from the defeated enemy; enslaving people who did not accept dhimmitude; and laying the foundation of a brutal legal system which kills apostates, chops the hands of petty criminals, and stones people to death for adultery despite the fact that Mohammed did adultery with his concubines.

Often people like to clump all religions together, however, it doesn’t wash because not once did Buddha or Jesus kill nor did they desire political power or to marry countless number of women while claiming to be religious.  On the contrary, Mohammed rewards Muslims for killing non-Muslims, by having virgins waiting for them when they sacrifice themselves during jihad. 

Jesus, however, gave his own life in order that others can find salvation and of course you have no pre-conditions because people are free to reject him or accept him and only the afterlife will judge providing you have an afterlife?

In Islam this is seen to be weak and the God of Mohammed seeks control, power, to enforce dhimmitude, to kill in the name of Allah, and to install a legal system which favors Muslims over the inferior non-Muslims.

I will now turn back to the 7^th century and the lifetime of Mohammed because he set in motion a religion which would engulf many parts of the world and this applies to terror, war, dhimmitude and Islamic jihad.

Matthias Kuntzel, the author of Jihad and Jew-hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the roots of 9/11 highlights on page 65 that “In 627 the Qurayza tribe was exterminated following a siege of Medina by the Meccans.  Mohammed went to the marketplace in Medina and had graves dug there.  Then the Jews were brought to him and beheaded at the gravesides – between 600 and 900 men in all.  The executions lasted the whole day…..Most of the women and children were sold into slavery in Medina, the remainder in Syria and Najad.”  (Johan Bouman, op. cit., p.86)

Therefore, the prophet of Islam supported the entire massacre of all Jewish males who followed the religion of Judaism and who were over puberty. Mohammed just sat back and watched this gruesome act and did nothing, apart from divide the spoils afterwards.  This barbaric act took place under the rule of Mohammed in the 7^th century and in this sense the beheading of Muslim apostates to Christianity in Somalia can be linked to the deeds of Mohammed.

Given this, Mansuur Mohammed who was beheaded in Somalia for being an apostate in the 21^st century, joins the Islam of Mohammed and the 7^th century because he met the same barbaric fate.   Koranic prayers would have been recited while beheading the Banu Qurayza and the same applies to the al-Shabaab (al-Shabab) in Somalia who were reciting the Koran and shouting in joy while cutting the head off a Christian convert.

In my article called Killing Christians in Somalia, burning Bibles in Pakistan and stealth jihad. I stated that “…we have silence when Christians are being beheaded while Muslims recite the Koran and shout “Allah Akbar” while killing someone in such a brutal way”.

In the minds of Islamists who support the ways and deeds of Mohammed they are following in the footsteps of their bloodthirsty prophet.  Therefore, the beheading of Mansuur Mohammed who converted from Islam to Christianity in Somalia is connected to the “same evil forces” which were unleashed by Muslims under Mohammed during his lifetime.

Mohammed clearly approved of the entire slaughter of all Jewish males over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza and he just sat back and watched the beheadings, one after one, into the hundreds, and eventually every Jewish male over puberty was killed for remaining loyal to Judaism. 

The mind of Mohammed was clearly evil because at no time did he try to stop his followers from doing this brutal crime.  In direct contrast to Jesus who stopped the prostitute from being killed by stoning to death we have the prophet of Islam who endorses such barbaric methods.  Mohammed not only watched this brutal genocide of all male followers of Judaism over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza; for this was not enough because he also enslaved the Jewish women and children of this tribe and plundered all their wealth which was to be shared by the victorious Muslims.

Mohammed now “set in stone the brutality of Islam” and this applies to jihad, dhimmitude, jizya, killing apostates, stoning people to death for adultery (despite doing adultery himself), plundering the wealth of the vanquished and enabling the forces of evil to kill in the name of God.

Islamists all over the world, irrespective if they are in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, or wherever, support the methodology of Mohammed and many desire to spread this faith and enforce dhimmitude on the people of the book or to massacre and destroy the foundations of Buddhism, Hinduism, and other faiths.  At the same time you have Islamists within the democratic world, for example in America, Germany, India, the UK, and other nations, who desire to spread Islam and to weaken the foundations of democracy in order to Islamize the entire world.

In our own lifetime we have witnessed the Islamization of Kashmir “in silence “and a civilization which nurtured this land for thousands of years and the Hindus of this area may end up like the Buddhists and Hindus of Afghanistan?  This applies to the complete Islamization of an area which once had a flourishing Hindu civilization but just like the destruction of Buddhism and Hinduism in Afghanistan by Islamic forces and then the destruction of all signs of this culture, the same fate awaits the Hindus of Kashmir if Islamists get their way.

If you check the website of http://www.kashmiri-pandit.org/sundry/genocide.html it states the following:

“Terrorism in Kashmir is an ideological struggle with specified political commitments which are fundamentalist and communal in character.

Terrorist violence is aimed at achieving the disengagement of the state of Jammu and Kashmir from India and its annexation to Pakistan. It is, the continuation of the Islamic fundamentalist struggle for the homeland of Pakistan which claims Jammu and Kashmir state on account of its Muslim majority character. 

The major dimension of the terrorist violence in Kashmir is the terrorists’ commitment to the extermination and subjugation of the Hindus in the state because Hindus do not subscribe to the idea of separation from India, nor do they expect to be governed by the authority of the state which derives its sanction from the law and precedent of Islam. Kashmiri Pandits (Hindus) have always been in the forefront of the struggle against secessionism, communalism and fundamentalism. Hence this peace loving minority with a modern outlook became the main victim of terrorist violence. The strategies involved in the terrorists’ operation against the Hindus in Kashmir include:

“The extermination of Hindus; subjecting Hindus to brutal torture to instill fear among them in order to achieve their submission; and to engineer a forced mass exodus of Hindus from the land of their ancestors and birth by way of issuing threatening letters, kidnappings and torture deaths on non-compliance of the terrorists’ dictates and ensure the destruction of the secular and pluralistic character of the socio-political fabric of the Kashmiri Society.”

If we go back to Arabia before Mohammed and during his early life then it is clear that Arabia was pluralistic and you had Christians, Jews, Pagans, and other faiths.  However, during the lifetime of Mohammed the sword would be taken to Pagans and the followers of Judaism, once Mohammed obtained power.  Also, just like the destruction of all non-Muslim faiths in Afghanistan (Buddhism, Hinduism, and others) by the followers of Islam the prophet of Islam had done the same and in time the same fate would await the Christians of Arabia.

Therefore, Mohammed had supported the entire destruction of Arab Paganism and Judaism, and in time the same fate would await Christians once complete Islamization had taken over all aspects of society.  Modern Islamists are connected with this 7^th century methodology because Islamists are doing the same in Kashmir with regards to the destruction of Hinduism.

The followers of Islam are also killing every single apostate that they can find in Somalia and all Christians converts face being beheaded or killed in other ways, while their children are being taken and converted to Islam.  Buddhists in southern Thailand face the same Islamic methodology and many Buddhist priests have been killed alongside other Buddhists and moderate Muslims who are deemed to be apostates for supporting pluralism.

The mindset of the prophet of Islam is ongoing and lives on within the brutal legal system of Islamic Sharia law; the destruction of other faiths by the followers of Islam in Kashmir, southern Thailand, Somalia, and in other parts of the world; and the mindset of Mohammed lives on within every murder of an innocent Christian, Hindu, Sikh, or other in Pakistan.

After all, the followers of Islam desire to enforce dhimmitude on non-Muslims (Egypt, Iran, and others) or the eradication of non-Muslim faiths within an Islamic monoculture (Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, and others).  Therefore, the beheadings of over 600 followers of Judaism in the lifetime of Mohammed and the beheading of the Christian convert, Mansuur Mohammed, in the 21^st century are connected.

The same applies to the ongoing Islamization of Kashmir where a rich Hindu civilization is under threat from complete Islamization.  Therefore, the Hindus of this region are like the Arab Pagans and followers of Judaism in the time of Mohammed because both face extermination and the destruction of their culture and all traces of Hindu architecture is under threat. However, while the world remembers the destruction of Buddhist symbols in Afghanistan not a murmur is being said in the international community about the plight of Hindus in Kashmir.

In truth, it is clear that Mohammed and the mindset of Islamists are the same and jihad and plunder goes hand in hand.  The 7^th century and 21^st century are the same in the minds of Islamists because they desire power, control, dhimmitude, jizya, and so forth; liberals can fool themselves but history teaches us that Islam destroyed many Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Pagan, and Zoroastrians societies. 

If leaders in democratic societies desire to ignore history and a living history of Islamization in Kashmir, Pakistan, southern Thailand, and in other parts of the world in the 21^st century then the sword of Islam and stealth jihad will work hand in hand in order to obtain power in new lands.

Lee Jay Walker

http://leejaywalker.wordpress.com

http://islamicpersecution.wordpress.com

http://islamicinquisition.wordpress.com

Matthias Kuntzel : Jihad and Jew-Hatred; Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11

Prophet Mohammed, the Banu Qurayza, Kashmir, and Mansuur Mohammed

Lee Jay Walker

The Modern Tokyo Times

 

Banu Qurayza were followers of Judaism and many hundreds

 of Jews were beheaded during the reign of Mohammed

———————————————————————-

 

 The prophet of Islam is being re-vamped in the West and many Muslims desire to gloss over the harsh reality of their own prophet.  In modern times Mohammed is the great family man despite marrying countless numbers of wives, getting divorced many times, having sex with concubines, and marrying a child.  Yet the Mohammed of Arabia who ruled with an iron-fist and what his followers did to non-Muslims can be witnessed by events in the 7^th century and right up to modern times.

 

The events that I refer to applies to the systematic annihilation of all male Jews who were over the age of puberty and the ongoing barbarity of radical Islam in modern day Somalia and Kashmir.

Therefore, the Banu Qurayza tribe who followed Judaism and the Muslim convert to Christianity in Somalia in modern times, Mansuur Mohammed; represent the reality and barbarity of Islam and the same applies to the destruction of Hinduism in Kashmir.  In these three events, we can see what happened to ancient Christianity in Nubia, what awaited the Zoroastrians of Persia, what awaited the fate of Buddhists and Hindus in Afghanistan, and what awaited so many other faiths by the sword of Islam.

Before focusing on this issue, it is clear that other faiths have spread by the sword but unlike Islam, no other faith can claim that their prophet was responsible for such hatred or that laws were stated which supported jihad, dhimmitude, and enslavement.  Also, while other faiths have looked deep “into their own personal demons” the same does not apply to the Islamic world.

It is clear that human failings like overt nationalism, the control of resources, feudalism, and many upheavals have happened in history.  However, you can not equate the negatives within the Buddhist world or Christian world on the teachings of Buddha or Jesus.  After all, both supported peace and stood up to the status quo by challenging people to focus on love, compassion, and a fair society.

However, the prophet of Islam is very different because in his world view it was clear that force and coercion were political and religious tools.  Mohammed clearly supported the notion of Islamic jihad; stealing from the defeated enemy; enslaving people who did not accept dhimmitude; and laying the foundation of a brutal legal system which kills apostates, chops the hands of petty criminals, and stones people to death for adultery despite the fact that Mohammed did adultery with his concubines.

Often people like to clump all religions together, however, it doesn’t wash because not once did Buddha or Jesus kill nor did they desire political power or to marry countless number of women while claiming to be religious.  On the contrary, Mohammed rewards Muslims for killing non-Muslims, by having virgins waiting for them when they sacrifice themselves during jihad. 

Jesus, however, gave his own life in order that others can find salvation and of course you have no pre-conditions because people are free to reject him or accept him and only the afterlife will judge providing you have an afterlife?

In Islam this is seen to be weak and the God of Mohammed seeks control, power, to enforce dhimmitude, to kill in the name of Allah, and to install a legal system which favors Muslims over the inferior non-Muslims.

I will now turn back to the 7^th century and the lifetime of Mohammed because he set in motion a religion which would engulf many parts of the world and this applies to terror, war, dhimmitude and Islamic jihad.

Matthias Kuntzel, the author of Jihad and Jew-hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the roots of 9/11 highlights on page 65 that “In 627 the Qurayza tribe was exterminated following a siege of Medina by the Meccans.  Mohammed went to the marketplace in Medina and had graves dug there.  Then the Jews were brought to him and beheaded at the gravesides – between 600 and 900 men in all.  The executions lasted the whole day…..Most of the women and children were sold into slavery in Medina, the remainder in Syria and Najad.”  (Johan Bouman, op. cit., p.86)

Therefore, the prophet of Islam supported the entire massacre of all Jewish males who followed the religion of Judaism and who were over puberty. Mohammed just sat back and watched this gruesome act and did nothing, apart from divide the spoils afterwards.  This barbaric act took place under the rule of Mohammed in the 7^th century and in this sense the beheading of Muslim apostates to Christianity in Somalia can be linked to the deeds of Mohammed.

Given this, Mansuur Mohammed who was beheaded in Somalia for being an apostate in the 21^st century, joins the Islam of Mohammed and the 7^th century because he met the same barbaric fate.   Koranic prayers would have been recited while beheading the Banu Qurayza and the same applies to the al-Shabaab (al-Shabab) in Somalia who were reciting the Koran and shouting in joy while cutting the head off a Christian convert.

In my article called Killing Christians in Somalia, burning Bibles in Pakistan and stealth jihad. I stated that “…we have silence when Christians are being beheaded while Muslims recite the Koran and shout “Allah Akbar” while killing someone in such a brutal way”.

In the minds of Islamists who support the ways and deeds of Mohammed they are following in the footsteps of their bloodthirsty prophet.  Therefore, the beheading of Mansuur Mohammed who converted from Islam to Christianity in Somalia is connected to the “same evil forces” which were unleashed by Muslims under Mohammed during his lifetime.

Mohammed clearly approved of the entire slaughter of all Jewish males over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza and he just sat back and watched the beheadings, one after one, into the hundreds, and eventually every Jewish male over puberty was killed for remaining loyal to Judaism. 

The mind of Mohammed was clearly evil because at no time did he try to stop his followers from doing this brutal crime.  In direct contrast to Jesus who stopped the prostitute from being killed by stoning to death we have the prophet of Islam who endorses such barbaric methods.  Mohammed not only watched this brutal genocide of all male followers of Judaism over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza; for this was not enough because he also enslaved the Jewish women and children of this tribe and plundered all their wealth which was to be shared by the victorious Muslims.

Mohammed now “set in stone the brutality of Islam” and this applies to jihad, dhimmitude, jizya, killing apostates, stoning people to death for adultery (despite doing adultery himself), plundering the wealth of the vanquished and enabling the forces of evil to kill in the name of God.

Islamists all over the world, irrespective if they are in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, or wherever, support the methodology of Mohammed and many desire to spread this faith and enforce dhimmitude on the people of the book or to massacre and destroy the foundations of Buddhism, Hinduism, and other faiths.  At the same time you have Islamists within the democratic world, for example in America, Germany, India, the UK, and other nations, who desire to spread Islam and to weaken the foundations of democracy in order to Islamize the entire world.

In our own lifetime we have witnessed the Islamization of Kashmir “in silence “and a civilization which nurtured this land for thousands of years and the Hindus of this area may end up like the Buddhists and Hindus of Afghanistan?  This applies to the complete Islamization of an area which once had a flourishing Hindu civilization but just like the destruction of Buddhism and Hinduism in Afghanistan by Islamic forces and then the destruction of all signs of this culture, the same fate awaits the Hindus of Kashmir if Islamists get their way.

If you check the website of http://www.kashmiri-pandit.org/sundry/genocide.html it states the following:

“Terrorism in Kashmir is an ideological struggle with specified political commitments which are fundamentalist and communal in character.

Terrorist violence is aimed at achieving the disengagement of the state of Jammu and Kashmir from India and its annexation to Pakistan. It is, the continuation of the Islamic fundamentalist struggle for the homeland of Pakistan which claims Jammu and Kashmir state on account of its Muslim majority character. 

The major dimension of the terrorist violence in Kashmir is the terrorists’ commitment to the extermination and subjugation of the Hindus in the state because Hindus do not subscribe to the idea of separation from India, nor do they expect to be governed by the authority of the state which derives its sanction from the law and precedent of Islam. Kashmiri Pandits (Hindus) have always been in the forefront of the struggle against secessionism, communalism and fundamentalism. Hence this peace loving minority with a modern outlook became the main victim of terrorist violence. The strategies involved in the terrorists’ operation against the Hindus in Kashmir include:

“The extermination of Hindus; subjecting Hindus to brutal torture to instill fear among them in order to achieve their submission; and to engineer a forced mass exodus of Hindus from the land of their ancestors and birth by way of issuing threatening letters, kidnappings and torture deaths on non-compliance of the terrorists’ dictates and ensure the destruction of the secular and pluralistic character of the socio-political fabric of the Kashmiri Society.”

If we go back to Arabia before Mohammed and during his early life then it is clear that Arabia was pluralistic and you had Christians, Jews, Pagans, and other faiths.  However, during the lifetime of Mohammed the sword would be taken to Pagans and the followers of Judaism, once Mohammed obtained power.  Also, just like the destruction of all non-Muslim faiths in Afghanistan (Buddhism, Hinduism, and others) by the followers of Islam the prophet of Islam had done the same and in time the same fate would await the Christians of Arabia.

Therefore, Mohammed had supported the entire destruction of Arab Paganism and Judaism, and in time the same fate would await Christians once complete Islamization had taken over all aspects of society.  Modern Islamists are connected with this 7^th century methodology because Islamists are doing the same in Kashmir with regards to the destruction of Hinduism.

The followers of Islam are also killing every single apostate that they can find in Somalia and all Christians converts face being beheaded or killed in other ways, while their children are being taken and converted to Islam.  Buddhists in southern Thailand face the same Islamic methodology and many Buddhist priests have been killed alongside other Buddhists and moderate Muslims who are deemed to be apostates for supporting pluralism.

The mindset of the prophet of Islam is ongoing and lives on within the brutal legal system of Islamic Sharia law; the destruction of other faiths by the followers of Islam in Kashmir, southern Thailand, Somalia, and in other parts of the world; and the mindset of Mohammed lives on within every murder of an innocent Christian, Hindu, Sikh, or other in Pakistan.

After all, the followers of Islam desire to enforce dhimmitude on non-Muslims (Egypt, Iran, and others) or the eradication of non-Muslim faiths within an Islamic monoculture (Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, and others).  Therefore, the beheadings of over 600 followers of Judaism in the lifetime of Mohammed and the beheading of the Christian convert, Mansuur Mohammed, in the 21^st century are connected.

The same applies to the ongoing Islamization of Kashmir where a rich Hindu civilization is under threat from complete Islamization.  Therefore, the Hindus of this region are like the Arab Pagans and followers of Judaism in the time of Mohammed because both face extermination and the destruction of their culture and all traces of Hindu architecture is under threat. However, while the world remembers the destruction of Buddhist symbols in Afghanistan not a murmur is being said in the international community about the plight of Hindus in Kashmir.

In truth, it is clear that Mohammed and the mindset of Islamists are the same and jihad and plunder goes hand in hand.  The 7^th century and 21^st century are the same in the minds of Islamists because they desire power, control, dhimmitude, jizya, and so forth; liberals can fool themselves but history teaches us that Islam destroyed many Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Pagan, and Zoroastrians societies. 

If leaders in democratic societies desire to ignore history and a living history of Islamization in Kashmir, Pakistan, southern Thailand, and in other parts of the world in the 21^st century then the sword of Islam and stealth jihad will work hand in hand in order to obtain power in new lands.

Lee Jay Walker

http://leejaywalker.wordpress.com

http://islamicpersecution.wordpress.com

Matthias Kuntzel : Jihad and Jew-Hatred; Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11

Lee Jay Walker

The Modern Tokyo Times

Banu Qurayza were followers of Judaism and many

hundreds of Jews were beheaded during the reign of Mohammed

 ——————————————————————————————-

 

The prophet of Islam is being re-vamped in the West and many Muslims desire to gloss over the harsh reality of their own prophet.  In modern times Mohammed is the great family man despite marrying countless numbers of wives, getting divorced many times, having sex with concubines, and marrying a child.  Yet the Mohammed of Arabia who ruled with an iron-fist and what his followers did to non-Muslims can be witnessed by events in the 7^th century and right up to modern times.

The events that I refer to applies to the systematic annihilation of all male Jews who were over the age of puberty and the ongoing barbarity of radical Islam in modern day Somalia and Kashmir.

Therefore, the Banu Qurayza tribe who followed Judaism and the Muslim convert to Christianity in Somalia in modern times, Mansuur Mohammed; represent the reality and barbarity of Islam and the same applies to the destruction of Hinduism in Kashmir.  In these three events, we can see what happened to ancient Christianity in Nubia, what awaited the Zoroastrians of Persia, what awaited the fate of Buddhists and Hindus in Afghanistan, and what awaited so many other faiths by the sword of Islam.

Before focusing on this issue, it is clear that other faiths have spread by the sword but unlike Islam, no other faith can claim that their prophet was responsible for such hatred or that laws were stated which supported jihad, dhimmitude, and enslavement.  Also, while other faiths have looked deep “into their own personal demons” the same does not apply to the Islamic world.

It is clear that human failings like overt nationalism, the control of resources, feudalism, and many upheavals have happened in history.  However, you can not equate the negatives within the Buddhist world or Christian world on the teachings of Buddha or Jesus.  After all, both supported peace and stood up to the status quo by challenging people to focus on love, compassion, and a fair society.

However, the prophet of Islam is very different because in his world view it was clear that force and coercion were political and religious tools.  Mohammed clearly supported the notion of Islamic jihad; stealing from the defeated enemy; enslaving people who did not accept dhimmitude; and laying the foundation of a brutal legal system which kills apostates, chops the hands of petty criminals, and stones people to death for adultery despite the fact that Mohammed did adultery with his concubines.

Often people like to clump all religions together, however, it doesn’t wash because not once did Buddha or Jesus kill nor did they desire political power or to marry countless number of women while claiming to be religious.  On the contrary, Mohammed rewards Muslims for killing non-Muslims, by having virgins waiting for them when they sacrifice themselves during jihad. 

Jesus, however, gave his own life in order that others can find salvation and of course you have no pre-conditions because people are free to reject him or accept him and only the afterlife will judge providing you have an afterlife?

In Islam this is seen to be weak and the God of Mohammed seeks control, power, to enforce dhimmitude, to kill in the name of Allah, and to install a legal system which favors Muslims over the inferior non-Muslims.

I will now turn back to the 7^th century and the lifetime of Mohammed because he set in motion a religion which would engulf many parts of the world and this applies to terror, war, dhimmitude and Islamic jihad.

Matthias Kuntzel, the author of Jihad and Jew-hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the roots of 9/11 highlights on page 65 that “In 627 the Qurayza tribe was exterminated following a siege of Medina by the Meccans.  Mohammed went to the marketplace in Medina and had graves dug there.  Then the Jews were brought to him and beheaded at the gravesides – between 600 and 900 men in all.  The executions lasted the whole day…..Most of the women and children were sold into slavery in Medina, the remainder in Syria and Najad.”  (Johan Bouman, op. cit., p.86)

Therefore, the prophet of Islam supported the entire massacre of all Jewish males who followed the religion of Judaism and who were over puberty. Mohammed just sat back and watched this gruesome act and did nothing, apart from divide the spoils afterwards.  This barbaric act took place under the rule of Mohammed in the 7^th century and in this sense the beheading of Muslim apostates to Christianity in Somalia can be linked to the deeds of Mohammed.

Given this, Mansuur Mohammed who was beheaded in Somalia for being an apostate in the 21^st century, joins the Islam of Mohammed and the 7^th century because he met the same barbaric fate.   Koranic prayers would have been recited while beheading the Banu Qurayza and the same applies to the al-Shabaab (al-Shabab) in Somalia who were reciting the Koran and shouting in joy while cutting the head off a Christian convert.

In my article called Killing Christians in Somalia, burning Bibles in Pakistan and stealth jihad. I stated that “…we have silence when Christians are being beheaded while Muslims recite the Koran and shout “Allah Akbar” while killing someone in such a brutal way”.

In the minds of Islamists who support the ways and deeds of Mohammed they are following in the footsteps of their bloodthirsty prophet.  Therefore, the beheading of Mansuur Mohammed who converted from Islam to Christianity in Somalia is connected to the “same evil forces” which were unleashed by Muslims under Mohammed during his lifetime.

Mohammed clearly approved of the entire slaughter of all Jewish males over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza and he just sat back and watched the beheadings, one after one, into the hundreds, and eventually every Jewish male over puberty was killed for remaining loyal to Judaism. 

The mind of Mohammed was clearly evil because at no time did he try to stop his followers from doing this brutal crime.  In direct contrast to Jesus who stopped the prostitute from being killed by stoning to death we have the prophet of Islam who endorses such barbaric methods.  Mohammed not only watched this brutal genocide of all male followers of Judaism over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza; for this was not enough because he also enslaved the Jewish women and children of this tribe and plundered all their wealth which was to be shared by the victorious Muslims.

Mohammed now “set in stone the brutality of Islam” and this applies to jihad, dhimmitude, jizya, killing apostates, stoning people to death for adultery (despite doing adultery himself), plundering the wealth of the vanquished and enabling the forces of evil to kill in the name of God.

Islamists all over the world, irrespective if they are in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, or wherever, support the methodology of Mohammed and many desire to spread this faith and enforce dhimmitude on the people of the book or to massacre and destroy the foundations of Buddhism, Hinduism, and other faiths.  At the same time you have Islamists within the democratic world, for example in America, Germany, India, the UK, and other nations, who desire to spread Islam and to weaken the foundations of democracy in order to Islamize the entire world.

In our own lifetime we have witnessed the Islamization of Kashmir “in silence “and a civilization which nurtured this land for thousands of years and the Hindus of this area may end up like the Buddhists and Hindus of Afghanistan?  This applies to the complete Islamization of an area which once had a flourishing Hindu civilization but just like the destruction of Buddhism and Hinduism in Afghanistan by Islamic forces and then the destruction of all signs of this culture, the same fate awaits the Hindus of Kashmir if Islamists get their way.

If you check the website of http://www.kashmiri-pandit.org/sundry/genocide.html it states the following:

“Terrorism in Kashmir is an ideological struggle with specified political commitments which are fundamentalist and communal in character.

Terrorist violence is aimed at achieving the disengagement of the state of Jammu and Kashmir from India and its annexation to Pakistan. It is, the continuation of the Islamic fundamentalist struggle for the homeland of Pakistan which claims Jammu and Kashmir state on account of its Muslim majority character. 

The major dimension of the terrorist violence in Kashmir is the terrorists’ commitment to the extermination and subjugation of the Hindus in the state because Hindus do not subscribe to the idea of separation from India, nor do they expect to be governed by the authority of the state which derives its sanction from the law and precedent of Islam. Kashmiri Pandits (Hindus) have always been in the forefront of the struggle against secessionism, communalism and fundamentalism. Hence this peace loving minority with a modern outlook became the main victim of terrorist violence. The strategies involved in the terrorists’ operation against the Hindus in Kashmir include:

“The extermination of Hindus; subjecting Hindus to brutal torture to instill fear among them in order to achieve their submission; and to engineer a forced mass exodus of Hindus from the land of their ancestors and birth by way of issuing threatening letters, kidnappings and torture deaths on non-compliance of the terrorists’ dictates and ensure the destruction of the secular and pluralistic character of the socio-political fabric of the Kashmiri Society.”

If we go back to Arabia before Mohammed and during his early life then it is clear that Arabia was pluralistic and you had Christians, Jews, Pagans, and other faiths.  However, during the lifetime of Mohammed the sword would be taken to Pagans and the followers of Judaism, once Mohammed obtained power.  Also, just like the destruction of all non-Muslim faiths in Afghanistan (Buddhism, Hinduism, and others) by the followers of Islam the prophet of Islam had done the same and in time the same fate would await the Christians of Arabia.

Therefore, Mohammed had supported the entire destruction of Arab Paganism and Judaism, and in time the same fate would await Christians once complete Islamization had taken over all aspects of society.  Modern Islamists are connected with this 7^th century methodology because Islamists are doing the same in Kashmir with regards to the destruction of Hinduism.

The followers of Islam are also killing every single apostate that they can find in Somalia and all Christians converts face being beheaded or killed in other ways, while their children are being taken and converted to Islam.  Buddhists in southern Thailand face the same Islamic methodology and many Buddhist priests have been killed alongside other Buddhists and moderate Muslims who are deemed to be apostates for supporting pluralism.

The mindset of the prophet of Islam is ongoing and lives on within the brutal legal system of Islamic Sharia law; the destruction of other faiths by the followers of Islam in Kashmir, southern Thailand, Somalia, and in other parts of the world; and the mindset of Mohammed lives on within every murder of an innocent Christian, Hindu, Sikh, or other in Pakistan.

After all, the followers of Islam desire to enforce dhimmitude on non-Muslims (Egypt, Iran, and others) or the eradication of non-Muslim faiths within an Islamic monoculture (Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, and others).  Therefore, the beheadings of over 600 followers of Judaism in the lifetime of Mohammed and the beheading of the Christian convert, Mansuur Mohammed, in the 21^st century are connected.

The same applies to the ongoing Islamization of Kashmir where a rich Hindu civilization is under threat from complete Islamization.  Therefore, the Hindus of this region are like the Arab Pagans and followers of Judaism in the time of Mohammed because both face extermination and the destruction of their culture and all traces of Hindu architecture is under threat. However, while the world remembers the destruction of Buddhist symbols in Afghanistan not a murmur is being said in the international community about the plight of Hindus in Kashmir.

In truth, it is clear that Mohammed and the mindset of Islamists are the same and jihad and plunder goes hand in hand.  The 7^th century and 21^st century are the same in the minds of Islamists because they desire power, control, dhimmitude, jizya, and so forth; liberals can fool themselves but history teaches us that Islam destroyed many Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Pagan, and Zoroastrians societies. 

If leaders in democratic societies desire to ignore history and a living history of Islamization in Kashmir, Pakistan, southern Thailand, and in other parts of the world in the 21^st century then the sword of Islam and stealth jihad will work hand in hand in order to obtain power in new lands.

Lee Jay Walker

http://leejaywalker.wordpress.com

http://islamicpersecution.wordpress.com

Matthias Kuntzel : Jihad and Jew-Hatred; Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11

Lee Jay Walker

The Modern Tokyo Times

Banu Qurayza were followers of Judaism and many hundreds of Jews were beheaded during the reign of Mohammed

The prophet of Islam is being re-vamped in the West and many Muslims desire to gloss over the harsh reality of their own prophet.  In modern times Mohammed is the great family man despite marrying countless numbers of wives, getting divorced many times, having sex with concubines, and marrying a child.  Yet the Mohammed of Arabia who ruled with an iron-fist and what his followers did to non-Muslims can be witnessed by events in the 7^th century and right up to modern times.

The events that I refer to applies to the systematic annihilation of all male Jews who were over the age of puberty and the ongoing barbarity of radical Islam in modern day Somalia and Kashmir.

Therefore, the Banu Qurayza tribe who followed Judaism and the Muslim convert to Christianity in Somalia in modern times, Mansuur Mohammed; represent the reality and barbarity of Islam and the same applies to the destruction of Hinduism in Kashmir.  In these three events, we can see what happened to ancient Christianity in Nubia, what awaited the Zoroastrians of Persia, what awaited the fate of Buddhists and Hindus in Afghanistan, and what awaited so many other faiths by the sword of Islam.

Before focusing on this issue, it is clear that other faiths have spread by the sword but unlike Islam, no other faith can claim that their prophet was responsible for such hatred or that laws were stated which supported jihad, dhimmitude, and enslavement.  Also, while other faiths have looked deep “into their own personal demons” the same does not apply to the Islamic world.

It is clear that human failings like overt nationalism, the control of resources, feudalism, and many upheavals have happened in history.  However, you can not equate the negatives within the Buddhist world or Christian world on the teachings of Buddha or Jesus.  After all, both supported peace and stood up to the status quo by challenging people to focus on love, compassion, and a fair society.

However, the prophet of Islam is very different because in his world view it was clear that force and coercion were political and religious tools.  Mohammed clearly supported the notion of Islamic jihad; stealing from the defeated enemy; enslaving people who did not accept dhimmitude; and laying the foundation of a brutal legal system which kills apostates, chops the hands of petty criminals, and stones people to death for adultery despite the fact that Mohammed did adultery with his concubines.

Often people like to clump all religions together, however, it doesn’t wash because not once did Buddha or Jesus kill nor did they desire political power or to marry countless number of women while claiming to be religious.  On the contrary, Mohammed rewards Muslims for killing non-Muslims, by having virgins waiting for them when they sacrifice themselves during jihad. 

Jesus, however, gave his own life in order that others can find salvation and of course you have no pre-conditions because people are free to reject him or accept him and only the afterlife will judge providing you have an afterlife?

In Islam this is seen to be weak and the God of Mohammed seeks control, power, to enforce dhimmitude, to kill in the name of Allah, and to install a legal system which favors Muslims over the inferior non-Muslims.

I will now turn back to the 7^th century and the lifetime of Mohammed because he set in motion a religion which would engulf many parts of the world and this applies to terror, war, dhimmitude and Islamic jihad.

Matthias Kuntzel, the author of Jihad and Jew-hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the roots of 9/11 highlights on page 65 that “In 627 the Qurayza tribe was exterminated following a siege of Medina by the Meccans.  Mohammed went to the marketplace in Medina and had graves dug there.  Then the Jews were brought to him and beheaded at the gravesides – between 600 and 900 men in all.  The executions lasted the whole day…..Most of the women and children were sold into slavery in Medina, the remainder in Syria and Najad.”  (Johan Bouman, op. cit., p.86)

Therefore, the prophet of Islam supported the entire massacre of all Jewish males who followed the religion of Judaism and who were over puberty. Mohammed just sat back and watched this gruesome act and did nothing, apart from divide the spoils afterwards.  This barbaric act took place under the rule of Mohammed in the 7^th century and in this sense the beheading of Muslim apostates to Christianity in Somalia can be linked to the deeds of Mohammed.

Given this, Mansuur Mohammed who was beheaded in Somalia for being an apostate in the 21^st century, joins the Islam of Mohammed and the 7^th century because he met the same barbaric fate.   Koranic prayers would have been recited while beheading the Banu Qurayza and the same applies to the al-Shabaab (al-Shabab) in Somalia who were reciting the Koran and shouting in joy while cutting the head off a Christian convert.

In my article called Killing Christians in Somalia, burning Bibles in Pakistan and stealth jihad. I stated that “…we have silence when Christians are being beheaded while Muslims recite the Koran and shout “Allah Akbar” while killing someone in such a brutal way”.

In the minds of Islamists who support the ways and deeds of Mohammed they are following in the footsteps of their bloodthirsty prophet.  Therefore, the beheading of Mansuur Mohammed who converted from Islam to Christianity in Somalia is connected to the “same evil forces” which were unleashed by Muslims under Mohammed during his lifetime.

Mohammed clearly approved of the entire slaughter of all Jewish males over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza and he just sat back and watched the beheadings, one after one, into the hundreds, and eventually every Jewish male over puberty was killed for remaining loyal to Judaism. 

The mind of Mohammed was clearly evil because at no time did he try to stop his followers from doing this brutal crime.  In direct contrast to Jesus who stopped the prostitute from being killed by stoning to death we have the prophet of Islam who endorses such barbaric methods.  Mohammed not only watched this brutal genocide of all male followers of Judaism over puberty who belonged to the Banu Qurayza; for this was not enough because he also enslaved the Jewish women and children of this tribe and plundered all their wealth which was to be shared by the victorious Muslims.

Mohammed now “set in stone the brutality of Islam” and this applies to jihad, dhimmitude, jizya, killing apostates, stoning people to death for adultery (despite doing adultery himself), plundering the wealth of the vanquished and enabling the forces of evil to kill in the name of God.

Islamists all over the world, irrespective if they are in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, or wherever, support the methodology of Mohammed and many desire to spread this faith and enforce dhimmitude on the people of the book or to massacre and destroy the foundations of Buddhism, Hinduism, and other faiths.  At the same time you have Islamists within the democratic world, for example in America, Germany, India, the UK, and other nations, who desire to spread Islam and to weaken the foundations of democracy in order to Islamize the entire world.

In our own lifetime we have witnessed the Islamization of Kashmir “in silence “and a civilization which nurtured this land for thousands of years and the Hindus of this area may end up like the Buddhists and Hindus of Afghanistan?  This applies to the complete Islamization of an area which once had a flourishing Hindu civilization but just like the destruction of Buddhism and Hinduism in Afghanistan by Islamic forces and then the destruction of all signs of this culture, the same fate awaits the Hindus of Kashmir if Islamists get their way.

If you check the website of http://www.kashmiri-pandit.org/sundry/genocide.html it states the following:

“Terrorism in Kashmir is an ideological struggle with specified political commitments which are fundamentalist and communal in character.

Terrorist violence is aimed at achieving the disengagement of the state of Jammu and Kashmir from India and its annexation to Pakistan. It is, the continuation of the Islamic fundamentalist struggle for the homeland of Pakistan which claims Jammu and Kashmir state on account of its Muslim majority character. 

The major dimension of the terrorist violence in Kashmir is the terrorists’ commitment to the extermination and subjugation of the Hindus in the state because Hindus do not subscribe to the idea of separation from India, nor do they expect to be governed by the authority of the state which derives its sanction from the law and precedent of Islam. Kashmiri Pandits (Hindus) have always been in the forefront of the struggle against secessionism, communalism and fundamentalism. Hence this peace loving minority with a modern outlook became the main victim of terrorist violence. The strategies involved in the terrorists’ operation against the Hindus in Kashmir include:

“The extermination of Hindus; subjecting Hindus to brutal torture to instill fear among them in order to achieve their submission; and to engineer a forced mass exodus of Hindus from the land of their ancestors and birth by way of issuing threatening letters, kidnappings and torture deaths on non-compliance of the terrorists’ dictates and ensure the destruction of the secular and pluralistic character of the socio-political fabric of the Kashmiri Society.”

If we go back to Arabia before Mohammed and during his early life then it is clear that Arabia was pluralistic and you had Christians, Jews, Pagans, and other faiths.  However, during the lifetime of Mohammed the sword would be taken to Pagans and the followers of Judaism, once Mohammed obtained power.  Also, just like the destruction of all non-Muslim faiths in Afghanistan (Buddhism, Hinduism, and others) by the followers of Islam the prophet of Islam had done the same and in time the same fate would await the Christians of Arabia.

Therefore, Mohammed had supported the entire destruction of Arab Paganism and Judaism, and in time the same fate would await Christians once complete Islamization had taken over all aspects of society.  Modern Islamists are connected with this 7^th century methodology because Islamists are doing the same in Kashmir with regards to the destruction of Hinduism.

The followers of Islam are also killing every single apostate that they can find in Somalia and all Christians converts face being beheaded or killed in other ways, while their children are being taken and converted to Islam.  Buddhists in southern Thailand face the same Islamic methodology and many Buddhist priests have been killed alongside other Buddhists and moderate Muslims who are deemed to be apostates for supporting pluralism.

The mindset of the prophet of Islam is ongoing and lives on within the brutal legal system of Islamic Sharia law; the destruction of other faiths by the followers of Islam in Kashmir, southern Thailand, Somalia, and in other parts of the world; and the mindset of Mohammed lives on within every murder of an innocent Christian, Hindu, Sikh, or other in Pakistan.

After all, the followers of Islam desire to enforce dhimmitude on non-Muslims (Egypt, Iran, and others) or the eradication of non-Muslim faiths within an Islamic monoculture (Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Yemen, and others).  Therefore, the beheadings of over 600 followers of Judaism in the lifetime of Mohammed and the beheading of the Christian convert, Mansuur Mohammed, in the 21^st century are connected.

The same applies to the ongoing Islamization of Kashmir where a rich Hindu civilization is under threat from complete Islamization.  Therefore, the Hindus of this region are like the Arab Pagans and followers of Judaism in the time of Mohammed because both face extermination and the destruction of their culture and all traces of Hindu architecture is under threat. However, while the world remembers the destruction of Buddhist symbols in Afghanistan not a murmur is being said in the international community about the plight of Hindus in Kashmir.

In truth, it is clear that Mohammed and the mindset of Islamists are the same and jihad and plunder goes hand in hand.  The 7^th century and 21^st century are the same in the minds of Islamists because they desire power, control, dhimmitude, jizya, and so forth; liberals can fool themselves but history teaches us that Islam destroyed many Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Pagan, and Zoroastrians societies. 

If leaders in democratic societies desire to ignore history and a living history of Islamization in Kashmir, Pakistan, southern Thailand, and in other parts of the world in the 21^st century then the sword of Islam and stealth jihad will work hand in hand in order to obtain power in new lands.

Lee Jay Walker

http://leejaywalker.wordpress.com

http://islamicpersecution.wordpress.com

Matthias Kuntzel : Jihad and Jew-Hatred; Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11