***

  > English Forum > English

English English Boards - This board is dedicated to freedom of speech and logical discussions. Copts.com is not responsible for any content posted by the users of the board and disclaims all liabilities

 
  #1  
06-04-2008
   Ibrahim Al Copti
Ibrahim Al Copti Ibrahim Al Copti
Moderator
 
: May 2005
: 2,143
Ibrahim Al Copti is on a distinguished road
flower History of Jihad

How the Jihadi Mayhem began with the Jihad against the Arabs (622-634 C.E. 1-8 A.H.)

The psychological make-up of Pre-Islamic Arab society determined by the geographical environment

Arab society in the peninsula is blessed with an harsh environment. Where agriculture is non-existent, and life is at a subsistence level in a barren desert environment with extremes in climate that vary from warm to extremely hot. This has shaped the temperament of the people who are hot tempered, violent and hyper-sensitive in their sense of honor, revenge and retribution. With life an on-going struggle against the forces of nature that comprise of desert storms, a bleak and monotonous environment, devoid of natural vegetation, except in the oases, the mental make-up of Arabs has been shaped by the dictum Kill or be killed. even before Islam was founded. They worshipped innumerable gods and goddesses in addition to Allah who was one of the many gods. Among them were Allat, Alluza, Mannat who were goddesses and were looked upon as daughters of Allah along with male gods like Hubal (Baal).

For more than four millennia before Islam, polytheism had been part of the psyche of the Bedouin Arabs who inhabited the Arabian peninsula. Four thousand years before Mohammed, the ancestors of the Semitic people who came from the same ethnic stock and who lived further north in Mesopotamia had a different pantheon of gods. These Semitic people who built the Babylonian, Assyrian, (Sumerian and Akkadian) civilizations worshipped gods like Gilgamesh, Ishtar, (Goddess) Marduk, Tiamat, Adrammelech, Apsu, Enki, Ianna, Anu, Ereshkigal among others. By the time of Mohammed, worship of these gods had become extinct.

In fact when the Muslims Arabs invaded Mesopotamia (Iraq) which was then a part of the Zoroastrian Sassanid empire of Persia, the invading Muslim Arabs did not bother to destroy the ancient Mesopotamian shrines in the ruins of Nineveh where the temples to these gods were built. The reason for this was that as these ruins held neither people who could be forcibly converted to Islam, nor any wealth that the Muslims could plunder, these ancient sites did not attract the attention of the marauding Muslim Arabs in the 7th century. So unlike Ctesiphon, Jerusalem, Caesarea, etc; the ancient Mesopotamian cities which lay in ruins were spared of being vandalized by the truculent Muslim Arabs.

Nineveh was spared the fate of Ctesiphon and Caesarea which have been totally obliterated from their sites, or like Jerusalem which the Muslims co-opted in to Islam in 636 C.E. by constructing the Dome of the Rock, over the ruins of what was originally the Jewish Second Temple to god that had been destroyed by the Romans in the year 70 C.E. Another example of such co-option is Constantinople where the Hagia Sophia was converted into the Selimiye Mosque by the Muslim Turks in 1453 C.E.

Mohammed comes on the scene to lead a people made bitter by the natural environment

We are concerned here with the Bedouin Arabs who resided in the Arabian Peninsula. Here our ancestors developed civilization, but only on the coastal fringes, specially in the Southern regions that is today Yemen, and limited settled civilization around the bigger oases of Makkah and Yathrib (later renamed Medina).

Till the 7th century, we did not make any impact on global civilization, till we were united by a charismatic but sadistic and cruel leader - Mohammed (yimach shmo ve-zichro - may his name and memory be obliterated). The story of Mohammed is that of a superlative but warped genius who was born in 570 C.E. He was born posthumously to Abdallah and Amina. Mohammeds father, Abdallah died a few months after Amina was in the family way, before Mohammed was born. Mohammed ibn Abdallah translates as Mohammed son of Abdallah.

Why Mohammed chose Allah as the only deity in Islam?

Pre-Islamic Bedouin Arab society was highly matriarchal as is evident from the worship of many goddesses like Allat, Al Uzza, Mannat. But Arab society had strong patriarchal elements too, as evident in the naming tradition according to which every Arab is known by his fathers name, and not his mothers.

Having lost his father, the posthumous orphan Mohammed wanted to perpetuate his fathers memory. His fathers name Abdallah was conjugated from Abd-Allah which translates as Slave of Allah. This is the reason why Mohammed chose Allah among the many pre-Islamic Arab deities to be the only deity to be worshipped by the Muslims! Not many historians have discerned this fact why it was allah who became the centerpiece of Islam and not any other pre-Islamic Arab male deity like Bēl, Bēl-Šamīn, Abgal, Aglibol, Wadd, and Yaghūth (the last two are in fact referred to in the Qur'an (71:23) as gods of the era of the Prophet Noah).

Even Baal (alternatively known as Hubal) who in fact was the most important deity in pre-Islamic Mecca, found no place in Islam. Only Allah survived in Mohammeds Islam. So Allah did not choose Mohammed, it was the other way round. Mohammed chose Allah! Allah was chosen by Mohammed as his father was named after allah! Some historians identify Hubal and allah to be the same deity. But, to the best of our knowledge, no historians have discerned this fact why it was allah who became the centerpiece of Islam.

Mohammeds Epileptic fits were behind his hallucinations that an angel spoke to him revealing the Quran

Mohammed was a paranoid ambitious genius who combined in himself the role of a military strategist, a psychologist, motivator and commander of men. With a harsh childhood in which he lost his parents, he grew to manhood earlier in life than most kids of his age. But the hardships that accompanied his growth from childhood to adolescence made him an epileptic. His epileptic fits were to play a pivotal role in his later life an create an hallucination that some god was talking to him

There is an occurrence in Mohammeds life that is eloquent on this issue of his mental illness. Once, Mohammed and his foster brother were playing when Halima, his nurse was nursing him in the desert. Suddenly, the foster brother came running to Halima and said that Mohammed was sick. When they went out, they found a young Mohammed behind the bushes with his clothes turned up. It's possible that he was sexually assaulted; however, much later a legend was created partially by Mohammed himself that two angels in grey robe came and one split his chest open and took out the heart and removed a dark clot and then when they weighed him the whole universe weighed less than Mohammed!

The possibility that he was sexually assaulted (sodomized) in his childhood seems to have made him a bitter person and could have accentuated his mental illness, but in spite of this he showed uncanny ability to manipulate and get the results he wanted. In most probabilities, his mental illness could have been a wild form of paranoid schizophrenia.

In his later life, during his 'revelations' he groaned like a she-camel having a baby (which by the way is not a pleasant sound). He had directed his followers to cover him up with a black blanket whenever he suffered from the epileptic fits and that's why he carried this black blanket with him all the time. This narration is the kernel of historical truth that has come down through ages of Arab-Muslim folklore that grew around him.

In his early life the hardships that were bestowed on him by circumstances coupled with the misfortune of being an epileptic, made him a fiercely determined man. And he nurtured within himself a burning desire to be a leader of men. His caravan journeys that began early in his life gave him an insight into the psychological make-up of the society he lived in.

His being a member of the Quraish the ruling aristocracy of Makkah (Mecca) was his first stepping stone to leadership

His personal misfortune in this kind of a harsh environment, had made him bitter since childhood. But this personal misfortune, was set off against his being born in the clan that ruled Mecca a pilgrimage town, where all the Arab tribes came once a year in a ritual called Hajj that centered around an object of worship called the Kaaba (literally a cube).

The Kaaba is actually a meteorite which fascinated the ancient tribal Arabs who were awe-struck by its flaming rush from the skies to land at Mecca. Since that day a legend grew around it that is reflected in the various versions of the Books of Semitic peoples that are known as the Tureth or Torah (the Old Testament of the Bible), the Bible (the New Testament) and the Quran. The word Quran itself is derived from the Arabic root word Qurrah which means to collect, implying that Mohammed collected the content of the Quran from other sources, viz., the Old Testament of the Jews, the New Testament of the Christians.

To this content Mohammed added the bloodcurdling Satanic verses that call for slaying the idolaters. To give legitimacy to his Quran, Mohammed floated the fiction, that the text came from a non-existent god (allah) and so no man could change what has been given by some god. In fact the Quran is basically the same book, as the Bible, with modifications made over a period of time, first by Mohammed himself and later by Islams many adherents, after Mohammeds death.

How Mohammed shrewdly grabbed a leadership role, igniting his innate desire to be a leader of men

Mohammed being a member of the Quraish clan which was in charge of the Kaaba, belonged to a privileged clan. But he did not hold a position of distinction within the clan. The turning event of his life was in the year 610 C.E. when during a dispute within his clan about who would be in charge of the annual repairs to the Kaaba. The clan members decided that the person who at that time walks into the Kaaba first would be in charge of the repairs.

And it so happened that Mohammed came to know of this condition, and the evil genius that he was, he realized that this was his opportunity to thrust himself on a higher pedestal. Next morning when the Meccans had gathered to see who walks towards the Kabba first, came our man Mohammed walking nonchalantly towards the holiest object of the Quraish of Mecca.

Little did the Quraish realize that the person walking towards the Kaaba was not the chosen one, but one who held within him a diabolical genius who by this petty but powerful act grabbed unto himself an exalted position of being in charge of repairs to the Kaaba and paved the way himself to elevate his position in the eyes of the Meccans.

This shrewd and diabolical act of the evil genius Mohammed was to start a trail to bloodshed thru Persia, Byzantine, Egypt, North Africa, Spain, France, Balkans and of which 9/11 was the most dramatic example a trail which has not ended till today, nor will it end till Islam is brought to its full and final end.

Till that point in time, Mohammed was any other Arab, any other Bedouin, any other Quraish tribal. But from then onwards, his stature changed in the eyes of his compatriots. And most importantly, it changed in his own eyes. He began considering that he had to fulfill a mission, an extraordinary mission. His delusion was nurtured by his being an epileptic and he hallucinated that he was in direct communication with god. He began to rationalize his ideas about his personal grandeur by telling people that god had chosen him as his messenger. His claims were met with ridicule.

Mohammeds epileptic. fits now began play a pivotal role making him hallucinate that he was in communion with some god

But his innate ambition to be a leader of men, had been fuelled by his having managed to be chosen to undertake repairs to the Kaaba. An ambition, which he consciously and deliberately nurtured through his epileptic fits using which he fibbed that god had communicated through the Jibril (the Bedouin word for our angel Gabriel) and commanded him to be the leader of all men by asking for their submission. The concept of submission was so overriding, that the faith he founded was also named Submission or in Arabic Islam.

Islam is not a religion of Peace, it is a religion of Submission to the Muslims

The canard that Islam means peace, is a misconception deliberately created by Muslim-apologists to pull wool over the eyes of innocuous Westerners and other non-Muslims. While actually the word Islam comes from and Arabic term for losing oneself submitting or surrendering to the will (of Mohammed). So please, in spite of what Muslims will tell you, do not be deceived by claims that Islam means peace. Islam means submission.

The Arabic word for peace is Salam, derived from the same Hebrew word Shalom which also means peace. But Islam and Salam are two incongruous words that share no common ground either in name or in substance.

We need to know that the root word of Islam is "al-silm" which means "submission" or "surrender." It is not derived from the word Salam which means peace, as Muslims will have you believe.

The Quran states: "Oh you who believe, Come, all of you, into submission." (al-Baqara 208). The word al-silm in the Arabic original of this verse refers to Islam.

So Islam means "submission to a god" which in the Islamic context meant surrender to Mohammed as long as that murderous lustful fiend lived, and after he was poisoned to death, Islam has meant that we non-Muslims surrender to the Muslims by accepting Islam and along with Islam all of us accept their murderous attitudes, their Arabic language, their hirsute habits of growing beards, their dress code of wearing caps and turbans, long gowns and covering women in tent like Hijab, marry four ladies and have an endless number of kids, and use our heads for only one purpose - nodding it robotically while reciting that instruction Manual of Hate and terror - the Quran!

We need to realize how effortlessly we are led up the garden path by the wily Muslims, to embrace and spout their bluff that Islam is a religion of peace.


__________________
( 8: 32)


(2)
  #2  
06-04-2008
   Ibrahim Al Copti
Ibrahim Al Copti Ibrahim Al Copti
Moderator
 
: May 2005
: 2,143
Ibrahim Al Copti is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad

Mohammeds self-delusion is evident in the first phrase in Islam

His self delusion was evident in the first sentence that he preached "La ilah ilallah, Mohammed ur Rasulallah" "There is no god, but allah and Mohammed is his Prophet."

This way he had cleverly removed any competition to himself from any other concept of god. He borrowed his idea of god from the main god of the Quraish - Allah whose image was one of the many that were being worshipped at the Kaaba. But with this first statement, Mohammed also placed himself on a pedestal, that was unique. He was the prophet of god and the last prophet at that, so he brooked no competition ever after.

This kind of a flagrant egoism, earned him many detractors. And when he started preaching that all gods other than Allah were false gods, the Meccans panicked. Since the existence of these many gods brought people to Mecca on pilgrimage and earned the Meccans good money. The aristocracy of the Quraish tribe, saw a grave threat to their own position as intercessors between the lay Arabs and the gods in the Kaaba, as with Mohammed's proclamation, it was he alone who was to be recognized as a prophet and intercessor.

The reason why all Muslim males have Mohammed as part of their name.

Mohammed made himself immortal and omnipresent among the Muslims by making it obligatory that all his followers have his name Mohammed as part of their name too. So today we find names like Mohammed Atta, Mohammed Bin Laden, Mohammed Khatami, Mohammed Ali and so on. It is for this reason, that his followers have been termed Mohammedans the followers of Mohammed, although they do not like this appellation.

Sunnat - Emulating Mohammed's behavior in all respects

Apart from having his name as a part of theirs, Muslims also are paranoid about each and every one of them being a clone of Mohammed. The ritual of emulating Mohammed in everything is called the Sunnat (or Sunnah). Muslim males emulate him in doing everything he did like drinking camel urine, dyeing hair red by using henna, in addition to emulating Mohammed's usual traits of being murderous, lecherous, and deceptive. Emulating their founder's traits are for all Muslims an act of faith! So much for individual liberty in this murder cult called Islam!

The reason for the Conversion of Ali to Islam

In Mecca, Mohammed got the support of his powerful uncle Abu Talib, who never embraced Islam and remained an idolater all his life till his death in 620, but he stoutly defended his nephew Mohammed and his rants against the gods of the Quraish of Mecca.

Mohammed desperately tried to increase his following and he used threats and subterfuge to convert people. He initially targeted his message towards his relatives who were near to him and who could be easily fall for his pernicious plot. His first convert was his wife Khadija who was followed by his slave Zaid. But even in his family circle, he encountered resistance.

Islams Abrahamic heritage originated from Mohammeds Christian wife Khadija

Before her conversion to Islam, Khadija incidentally had been a Christian, and it was she who introduced the illiterate Mohammed to the biblical stories of Abraham, Issac, Sarah, Hagar, Ismael, Moses, etc. This is how Mohammed incorporated a bastardized version of the bible in his compilation that he called the Quran (from the Arabic word Qurrah to collect). So tt was Christianity that also gave the iconoclastic angle to Mohammeds ideas, as also the entire Judeo-Christian hangover that is to be seen in Islam. The pre-Islamic pagan Arabs, knew nothing about the Bible or the Torah. The only link that they had with the Jews was the Arabic language that belonged to the Semitic family. Pre-Islamic Arab lore and poetry had no references to Moses, Solomon, Abraham. This Islam owes to Mohammeds Christian wife Khajida.

His trusted cousin, who later also became his son-in-law, Ali (Abu Talibs son) was honor bound to defend Mohammeds life and limb, but he too initially resisted Mohammeds coercion to give up the worship of the gods of the Kaaba and to embrace Islam. His father Abu Talib forbade him to embrace Islam, as he himself never did till his death. But both of them as they were close relatives of Mohammed, were honor bound to defend Mohammed and prevent the Meccans from harming him.

After Abu Talib died in 620, Mohammed blackmailed Ali by saying that he could not intercede with allah on behalf of Abu Talib, since he had not given up the worship of the gods of the Kaaba and so Abu Talib was now burning in Hell (Jahannum).

Ali who was then grieving from the loss of his father was emotionally weak as his resistance to Mohammed gradually broke during this emotionally weak phase. He finally fell prey to Mohammeds blackmail and sought refuge in Mohammeds cunning subterfuge. This was how Mohammed got his first major youthful convert. Ali was then a strong and brave teenager who was to play a major role in the attacks that Mohammed was to launch on the Meccans and later in the Muslim invasions of Persia and Byzantine.

Why had Mohammed to use his guile to escape from the Meccan plot to murder him, when there was an Allah to save him?

The Meccan Quraish aristocracy, looked upon this as a direct threat to their position and they plotted to murder Mohammed. But the cunning chap that he was, he got to hear of it and gave them the slip and escaped in the dead of the night to Yathrib (Medina). But the fact that he had to escape from his would be assassins in the dead of the night makes one wonder why Allah did not strike dead his assassins, rather than having him flee like a coward from Mecca!

The Hegira - flight to Medina

This led to the second seminal event in Mohammed life, his escape (called migration or Hejira in Arabic) to Yathrib (later renamed Medina by Mohammed ) where lived the rivals of the Meccans. This took place in 622 C.E. (which marks the beginning of the Hejira or Hijri era of the Muslims). In Medina lived two comminutes, the pagan polytheistic Arabs and the Jews. The two communities were often on the warpath and there were innumerable battles between them. We need to note that the Jews were (and are) also of the same ethnic stock as the pre-Islamic Arab tribes. The Arabs were more numerous, but the Jews by virtue of being traders were more prosperous and better organized, they also had built fortresses within and around Medina to defend themselves during their internecine fights with the pre-Islamic Arab tribes around Yathrib (Medina).

In these many battles the Jews were normally victorious against the Arabs. And they used to boast that they would one day wipe out the Arabs when the prophet of god would appear among them.

Why did the Arabs of Medina embrace Islam

Now at Medina, the people knew that Mohammed had been declaring himself to be the prophet of god, and he was on his way to Medina. The Arabs of Medina decided to outwit the Jews by becoming his followers and seek his help in defeating the Jews, before the Jews could get to him. This is why the Arabs of Medina (Yathrib) welcomed Mohammed, in whom they saw an opportunity to break the monopoly of the Jews as also get back at their other rivals the Meccans. It was this that made them sympathetic to him. The Muslims of today would have you believe that they were impressed by his message of worshipping one god, who sole prophet he claimed to be. This is horseshit.

The Arabs of Medina cared two hoots for the bunk that Mohammed parroted to elevate himself as a leader of the Arabs. Abdullah-ibn-ubay, the leader of Medina displayed contempt for Mohammed openly and for this was looked upon with disfavor by Mohammed. But he was powerless to act against Adullah-ibn-ubay at that time, but both continued to be rivals for a long time, till Mohammed with his craftiness eclipse Ubay. Mohammed compelled Ubay to embrace Islam and then declared that Ubay was a Munafqin (hypocrite) or one who had become a Muslim for Munafa (personal gain). In fact all of Mohammeds followers were in Islam for Munafa, since his promise of plunder and chance to rape captive women of the enemy was what had attracted all the criminals among the Arabs to join Mohammeds gang.

At his core, Mohammed was nothing more than a power grabber, who slyly used religion to promote himself. And the people of Mecca as well as those of Medina saw through that. It was only that the people of Medina, saw in him a tool to get back at the Jews and the Quraish of Mecca, so some of them decided to prop him up. He had many opponents among the Arabs of Medina too. Prominent among them were the poets, whom Mohammed got murdered to silence their opposition to his schemes.

Mohammed begins his dirty work with his raids - Ghazawats on Meccan caravans

So we see how his following from among the people of Medina, was thus a political ploy of Medina, against Mecca, to add grist to the mill of an already existent rivalry. There was no lofty reason for which Mohammed got his first converts in Medina (Yathrib). Immediately on getting a following among a people who looked upon Mecca as a rival, Mohammed organized them to take his first revenge on the Meccans, and he started regularly raiding the caravans of the Meccans that passed by Medina. He organized 64 such raids from 622 to 630, of which he personally led 27 raids. These raids were called Ghazawats or Razzias.

Mohammeds cruelty and guile made themselves evident at the Battle of Badr (2 A.H., 624 C.E.) - the first battle he fought

The Meccans finally got fed up of Mohammed's antics and attacked him in Medina. This led to the first major battle in Mohammed's life - the battle of Badr. The Meccan army was led by Abu Jahal. In this battle, he realized that the far stronger Meccan army could only be defeated by guile. He ordered all the water springs outside Medina, to be sanded-up, so that the attacking Meccans would be without any sustenance. Now this would have been a legitimate tactic in war, but coming from a messenger of god to contrive to starve people of his own clan of water in order to defeat, betrayed Mohammed 's ruthless mentality which showed that he was far from anything saintly!

The Meccans decided to outwit Mohammed and attack Medina during a cloudburst, to obviate the need for water. But the heavily armored Meccan army got trapped in the slushy sands outside Medina and they were thrown in disarray with camels falling over each other in total disorder unable to meet the infantry charges of the Mohammed 's rag-tag, but highly motivated gang.

Mohammed had instructed his followers not to take prisoners and all the Meccans who fell off their camels were instantly beheaded. The carnage that followed led to a complete rout of the Meccans and the victory of a bandit whose followers were to carry forward this bloodied legacy across continents, slaughtering millions of people Abu Jahal, the leader of the Meccan army was trapped under his camel that had lost its balance and fallen to the ground. In this position when he could not fight back, he was beheaded by Umar the future Khalifa Caliph. His head was presented by Umar to Mohammed who was delighted to see his enemy decapitated. (Strike of the heads of the non-believers is the mentality Mohammed drilled into his followers. And this commandment found its way into the Quran whose word is followed by the Zarqawi and Al Qaeda thugs even today).

The defeat at Badr stunned the Meccans into disbelief and there was despondency and mourning amongst the populace. They foresaw worse things to come.

Lust for booty and slaves, spurred the followers of Mohammed

Mohammed spurred his followers with lust for booty and sex slaves. The captured womenfolk were distributed by Mohammed amongst his followers and so was the booty distributed. Thus his followers had greed to motivate them, while the Quraish were fighting a defensive war to protect their caravans from Mohammed 's predatory raids. (As the Americans are today also fighting the War on Terror to keep the oil flowing from the Mid-east oil wells). While Mohammed was fighting to disrupt his adversary (as Osama and Zarqawi are doing today)

Mohammed also drilled into his followers the fantasy that if they died, they would reach heavan (Jann'at) where they would be served upon by 72 virgins (Houris) and pearly eyed boys (for the perverts among his followers). The motivation of the Quraish was to defend their business and way of life, as is that of the Americans today to ensure the flow of oil and defend the Western way of life. In this struggle, Mohammed with his dangling the carrots of booty and slaves along with the fantasy of landing in heaven with its 72 virgins for those who died, was able to ensure that his gangsters (the first Muslims) became insanely paranoid in battle.

They had everything to gain, and nothing to lose. While the Quraish were businessmen, fighting to get rid of a menace to their way of life. This difference in the motivation levels led to the defeat of the Quraish and to successive defeats of the many non-Muslim armies that opposed the Muslims first through Asia, then through Africa and finally through Europe. We Americans would do well to remember this today as we fight the War on Terror (Islam).

Lessons about the Muslim psyche that the Battle of Badr tell us

Badr was the first battle where the paranoid Muslim gangsters which that power hungry megalomaniac of Mecca had gathered around him, showed feats of desperate foolhardiness, that paid off and stunned the opposing forces. This was to repeat itself many a time through the course of Muslim history, thus building a false fantasy that allah was aiding the Muslims. What was aiding them, was no allah, but in fact it was their lust and greed. Mohammed had worked his followers into a frenzy and as a hungry man knows no law, these gangsters, rapists, murders would stoop to any level to defeat an enemy. The world has not yet learnt this fountainhead of Muslim psychology, so cleverly built by the founding father of terrorism - Mohammed -ibn-Abadallah.

We know that every civilization and culture has built a penal code. Similarly, the criminal mind of Mohammed also devised a penal code in such a way that if a Muslim did anything against Islam, he was a Murtad (Apostate) and apostasy had only one punishment in Islam - death. So Islam was, and still is, a one way dead-end street, while you can enter it, there is no way out!

Islamic theology (sic) absolved all crimes if they were committed while fighting non-Muslims

One of the cardinal principles of Islam is that when a Muslim commits any foul and heinous deed in order to bring victory to his gang (of Muslims), Islamic law forgives all those deeds in the name of Muslims waging a Jihad against the Non-Muslims (Kafirs). Mohammed preached contempt for all non-Muslim and told his gangsters that the non-Muslims were living in ignorance (Jahiliyaa) and that he would lead his followers to enlightenment (Ailm or ilm). This enlightenment forgave all acts of rape, murder, torture, as long as they were committed against the non-Muslims (Kafirs).

In all of Islam's existence of 1400 years very few have been able to recognize this heinous nature of Islam. Today those who are fighting the Muslims need to get an understanding of what they are up against, if they are to defeat the Muslims and destroy the threat of Islam once and forever.

What the Jihad Signifies

The battle of Badr marked the beginning of the Islamic terror of Jihad. The Muslims had begun their dirty work. the Jihad was on, and on in earnest. Mohammed gave this name Jihad (from Jahada which in Arabic means struggle) to his war campaign. In reality it was not a struggle, it was in fact genocide against all humanity - since at that time except for the gang of small bandits at Medina led by Mohammed, everyone else was non-Muslim. This defeat of the Meccans in 624, was also the first victory for the forces of that evil genius Mohammed.

Lessons from the Battle of Badr :

In this battle Mohammed ordered for the water springs to be sanded up in this very first battle. This shows that he would stoop to any level to win a war. This is more appalling, as Mohammad masqueraded as a spiritual person, as a prophet of god. If any military commander like Alexander of Hannibal had used this tactic, it would been looked upon as a legitimate one to secure victory. But for a chap who claimed to be prophet of god to do this is beyond words. We do not know whether to call Mohammed shameful or shameless!

This ruthless mentality was passed on to his followers and has become typecast with all Muslims today. So we should always expect any Muslim to stoop to any level. Not just in battle, but even in day-to-day life. This is first lesson in the Legacy of Mohammed as evident in his first Battle at Badr.

The beginning of the Jihad and why Allah has no form

Mohammeds being an evil genius was also seen in his decision of saying that Allah has no form. There was no lofty or abstract reason for this. This was purely a military tactic. With the Muslim object of worship having no form or shape (and no sense either!), while his Muslim gangsters could go about destroying idols and icons of non-Muslims, the Muslims presented no object to a victorious army to desecrate and destroy, since the Muslim fantasy of allah has no form and was not to be found anywhere, except in the perverted minds of the gangsters of Mohammed.

This was psychological boost to the Muslims who could not be humiliated, in the way they humiliated others. This was the kind of humiliation which the pre-Muslim Quraish were to learn in a few years when Mohammed slyly capture Mecca.

The Battle of Jebel Uhud (3 A.H., 625 C.E.)

The Battle of the Jebel Uhud (Uhud hill) was an extension of the Battle of Badr. The Quraish who were frustrated at Mohammed's continuing assaults on the Caravans, re-organized their forces and attacked Medina once again.

After the defeat at Badr, the Quraish gathered a bigger forces comprising of all able-bodied Quraish men and attacked Mohammed and his gang that was hold up in Medina. This battle took place at a hillock named Uhud near Madina.

In this war Mohammed again promised victory to his followers and told them that as in the Battle of Badr, they would get to plunder the attacking Quraish, who always went to war well stocked with Tents, Carpets, and Cooking Utensils. But this lust for plunder was to make Mohammed taste a military defeat for the first time.

Mohammed had placed a group of archers on the hillock to surprise the attacking Quraish army, while the main portion of the Mohammeds army would engage the Quraish in the ravine below. It so happened that the Muslim archers who were fighting from an elevation could force the Quraish to retreat. As the Quraish retreated, leaving behind their tents, cooking pots, carpets, the main part of the Muslim army which was facing the Quraish, paused the fighting to collect this plunder left behind by the retreating Quriash. On seeing their comrades helping themselves to the abandoned wealth of the Quriash, the archers left their position on the hillock and came down to share in the spoils of war!

On seeing that the attack of arrows had stopped, the Quraish re-grouped and attacked the Muslims who were by now busy looting the abandoned Quraish Camp. This led to a massacre of the Muslims, and Mohammed himself was hurt by an attack from Khalid-ibn-Walid, the brave Quraish general (who was later to convert to Islam and lend his bravery to the blood-thirsty march of Islam).

This way the Battle of the Uhud hill ended in defeat for Mohammed due to the lust of his gangsters for plunder. Mohammed had to save his ass by beating a hasty retreat into the fortified town of Madina. So much for the divine help that their fiction called allah renders the Muslims in warfare!

Lessons from the Battle of Uhud:

Mohammed was basically a gangster, who in the initial stages found camp-followers by waving the carrot of plunder before them. The first Muslim converts were those hardened criminals who wanted to loot a harried and defeated enemy. So the level of morality among the early Muslims (as also among todays Muslims) was quite low. Their war discipline was pathetic. After all they were there as Muslims to plunder and rape.

The fact that greed could get the better of the Muslims was the lesson for Mohammed from the Battle of Uhud. Henceforth, he made violation of discipline and retreat from a battle an offense punishable with death. A tradition carried by Muslims till today. This shows the ruthless character of Mohammed, who would be merciless with his own followers if they failed in the objective of defeating an enemy. This coercion played a no small role in the successive victories the Muslims had.

The Muslims could only be defeated, by those adversaries who in turn slaughtered Muslims en masse as happened at the Battle of Tours in 732, in France, a few hundred miles south of Paris , where as a singular exception, the equally ruthless Franks (Ferangis) surrounded the Arab-Muslim army and slaughtered it almost up to the last man and saved France (and Europe) from Islam.

In war, the Muslims could be either victorious or dead. So to defeat the Muslims, they need to be fought to their deaths. A lesson America would do well to bear in mind in the War of Terror.

How brave pre-Muslim Arab warriors like Khalid-ibn-Walid converted to Islam to continue their careers on the battlefield

There is another lesson to be learnt from the Battle of Uhud. At Uhud, the Quraish were led by Khalid-ibn-Walid, who was an inveterate foe of Mohammed in those days and he almost had killed Mohammed at the Battle Uhud. But after Mohammed through his guile, made the Quraish weaker and finally overran Mecca, Khalid saw that he could express his ferocity only if he combined it with the malice and guile of Mohammed and so to continue his military career, he converted to Islam. After his conversion Khalid-ibn-Walid became a very fearsome Muslim general who led the Muslims to victory in the battle of Al Yarmuk against the Byzantines in 12 A.H. (636 C.E.).

Khalids conversion and later success itself tells a tale that in the psychology of the Arabs, only if the powerful are also the successful and dangerous, they are respected. Khalid need not have converted to Islam, had he killed Mohammed at the battle of the Uhud hill or had defeated him subsequently at Mecca. But as Khalid could not defeat, Mohammed, he decided that the best way to ensure success for himself was to join the Muslims. Before his conversion, Khalid was ferocious like all Arabs, after his conversion, he became malicious too.

Khalid-ibn-Walids conversion to Islam has another lesson for those who fight the Muslims, that the Muslims only understand and respect, strength and cruelty. They treat magnanimity, charity and noblesse with contempt. So we Americans and our allies, will have to re-invent our cowboy spirit and go for the scalps of the Muslims, if we want to be victorious.

If we want to earn the respect and submission of the Arab-Muslims, we need to put the fear of death in them. And this death cannot be the individual death which the Arab-Muslims are eager to seek through their martyrdom (genocide murder) operations, but we need to give them death through the mass slaying of the Muslims with trans-continental thermo-nuclear attacks, that would wipe out millions of them at one stroke. Ruthless and mindless as this may sound today, there is no other way to defeat the beast-like Muslims.

The Battle of the Trench (or Ditch)

In the following year the Quraish built and alliance of different Arab tribes to fight the Muslim gangsters holed up in Medina. They enrolled the help of many tribes, among them were the Banu Ghaftan. This confederacy of tribes, attacked Medina with a huge army. This time the ruse used by Mohammed was to dig a ditch or a trench around the city of Medina. He did this on the suggestion of Salman Farsi (a follower of his who had returned from Persia). This Salman was an Arab who originally lived in Persia and who had been banished by the Persian emperor for his heretical ideas and the crime of fomenting rebellion against the Persian Empire. To avenge his insult, Salman, returned to his homeland Arabia and played a major role in instigating the power crazed megalomaniac Mohammed to form an army to attack Persia.

Muslim sources would want you to believe that this Salman came to Arabia to seek spiritual solace in Mohammed. Nothing could be further from the truth, as Mohammed had only his blood-curdling mentality of blackmail and murder to impose on all his victims. Far from having any kind of benevolent wisdom, Mohammed was a murderer, a pedophile and a scoundrel of the worst kind whose existence was a curse on humankind, a curse from which we still suffer, a curse called Islam

Salman knew that the Persians had this practice of having defensive trenches and moats dug around cities. But the Arabs were unaware of this practice as their battles generally involved attacking and defending passing caravans, and rarely against the few cities that existed in Arabia at that time. And in attacking a moving target like passing caravans, static defenses like moats and trenches played no role.

So when the Quraish confederacy approached Medina, they were confused by the Trench, and they settled for a long siege. Now Mohammed used his third trick of applying pressure selectively on the confederate army and promising the different confederates with friendship if they embraced Islam. Incidentally he did not tell them then that the punishment for anyone leaving Islam was death. An ex-Muslim was a Murtad and had to be killed. At the Battle of the Trench, in the beginning Mohammed's overtures were initially met with scorn. But as the battle became a long drawn one, with the weather turning inclement with sandstorms, hail and rain, some of the confederates decided to withdraw from battle after accepting Islam as a pretext for withdrawing from the battle.

The Quraish had not made the acceptance of Islam a punishable offense, the way Mohammed had ordained death for those leaving Islam. The first of the confederate tribe to fall for the wily Mohammeds ruse was that of the Banu Ghaftan. After this one by one of the confederates withdrew from the alliance by offering the pretext of embracing Islam.

Finally the Quraish decided that the siege could not continue and lifted it to retreat to Mecca. After the Quraish lifted the siege, Mohammed waylaid those poets and balladeers in Madina who had formally declared themselves to be Mohammeds followers (and had converted to his creed of Islam), but whom he had suspected of having secretly pledged their loyalty to the attacking Quraish. He ordered that they should be assassinated.

Mind you, these poets were not combatants, they were balladeers, who loved the freedom of worship of the pre-Islamic Arab society, and they decried Mohammeds tyranny thru their poems and ballads. That was enough for Mohammed to order their assassination. And they had to die not in battle, and not because they had picked up arms against the gangster Mohammed, but because of his sinister plot to murder them when they least suspected that they would be done to death. The Islamic tradition of putting Murtads (apostates) to death had begun on Mohammeds orders to murder the poets of Medina.

Lessons from the Battle of the Trench :

Here Mohammed used subterfuge, very effectively to undermine a confederacy that was opposing him. The Muslims were to use this tactic in several wars in the following years when the non-Muslim Arab contingents of the Persian (Sassanian) and the Byzantine Armies defected to the Arabs. (This tradition continues today in the Muslim marines in our armed forces like Captain James Yee who operate against American interests while donning the uniform of the military they have pledged to serve.) Throughout the centuries, we have many instances of Muslim contingents in the non-Muslim armies defecting, at the nick of time, to the attacking Muslim army, tilting the balance in favor of the Muslims.

So the lesson for us today is that a Muslim's loyalty is only to his co-religionists, never ever to that of an army of a non-Muslim nation. Those non-Muslim militaries who enroll Muslims in their forces bring inside traitors, who are nothing but snakes on their bosom. Our own experiences with Muslim marines who have turned traitors is a latest example of the trend of subterfuge started by Mohammed in the Battle of the Trench. This is the lesson for us here from the Battle of the Trench.

Mohammeds Daawat-ul-Islam (ultimatums to embrace Islam) to the Roman and Persian Emperors

Emboldened by the victory at the battle of the Trench, Mohammed began casting his greedy eyes on the rich empires to the north of Arabia, whose prosperous cities he had visited when he was working with Khadijas (his rich first wife) caravans before 610. Since then Mohammed had always coveted the wealth of Byzantine Syria and Sassanian Persia. He now saw his chance to intimate the kings of these empires. He sent out an invitation which asked them to find refuge in Islam Embrace Islam and you will be safe, these were the exact words which Mohammed addressed to Heracleus, the Byzantine Emperor and Chroses (Khusrav Pervez, or Khusro, called Kisra by the Arabs), the Sassanian Emperor. (This Muslim tradition of blackmail has not changed. Even today, President Bush is ordered by Zarqawi to embrace the blood-thirsty cult of Islam and seek refuge to find peace.)

But in the 7th century, both the Persian and the Byzantine emperors were stunned by this affront, and not realizing the kind of menace this invitation represented, both reacted with indifference and hostility. The messengers sent by Mohammed were so arrogant, that Khusro, the Sassanid Persian emperor, exclaimed to them that had you not been ambassadors, I would have sent back your severed head to Mohammed.

Heracleus, the Byzantine emperor, himself did not react with hostility, but a vassal of his Harith, the Governor of Syria, punished one of Mohammeds messengers by attacking him for having delivered such an insulting message to his Emperor. This was reason enough for Mohammed to declare that it was now the duty of the Muslims to attack the Roman Empire! In this Mohammed was biting more than he could chew.

Battle of Muta (Roman Mutas) with the Roman Empire in 7 A.H. (629 C.E.)

Mohammed made his personal slave and one of the earliest converts to join his gang, Zaid, the leader of this expedition. He gave him an army of 30,000 and also deputed another burly roughneck named Jaffar to accompany Zaid as the leader of the army. Mohamed wanted to win this battle so desperately that he decided in advance that there was to be no retreat, and if Zaid was killed, Jaffar would lead the Army, and if Jaffar was killed, Khalid-ibn-walid was to lead the army. Mohammed was desperate for a spectacular victory, since Mecca still lay unsubdued in the South and the Quraish had started to make overtures to the Persians and Romans to help them defeat Mohammed. So Mohammed had to nip these efforts in the bud, by defeating one of the prospective allies of the Quraish.

He also asked Umar, another blood-thirsty killer to accompany the army. Later, Umar was to lead the gang of Muslims, as their Khalifa (Caliph) after Mohammed was poisoned by one of his victims and after Mohammeds successor and father-in-law Abba (Abu) Bakr died after leading the gang of murderous Muslims for four years. Incidentally, Umar in turn was murdered by Utman, his successor.

But here at the battle of Muta, the disciplined Roman legions and phalanxes caught the Arab Muslim hordes in an impossible position and the result was a massacre of the Arab Muslims. Their ganglord Zaid, Mohammeds trusted slave was killed, and so was his lieutenant Jaffar, When Umar faced the phalanxes, he chose to turn tail and run into the desert. The band of Arabs being leaderless, Khalid-ibn-Walid who was then a new convert tried to rally the gangsters and promised a rich booty. But thieves and thugs rather run for their lives instead of risking them just for a chance to loot. With the merciless attack from the Roman phalanxes, the murderous but unruly Muslims broke ranks and fled.

Ultimately Khalid-ibn-walid also sought safety in flight. Thus ended the first encounter of the bloodthirsty Muslims with the Roman legions. The Arabic word Rumi (for Roman) is still a term of derision used by the Arabs to refer to Westerners.

Lessons from the Battle of Muta

In spite of a decisive victory, the Romans did not push on against the nascent Muslim aggression into Arabia and destroy Mohammed and his band of bandits utterly. And that too at a time, when the Quraish at Mecca were not yet Muslims and were wanting help from the Romans and the Persians to defeat Mohammed. This was the cardinal folly of the Romans, a folly that was to be committed by many conventional thinking adversaries of the Muslims, over and over again during the following centuries right up to our times till after 9/11!

Very few of us realize that the Muslims are far from being a conventional enemy. They are schizophrenic savages, over whom victory is guaranteed, only after, and only if, all of them are hacked to death. This is exactly what the Muslims have been doing till today to all their adversaries.

Missed Opportunites to Destroy Islam

The cardinal folly of the Romans after their victory over the Muslims at Muta in 629, was preceded by the Quraish after their victory over the Muslims at the battle of Jebel Uhud in 625, and was repeated by the Zoroastrian Persians after their victory over the Muslims at the Battle of the Bridge (Al Jisr) in 636, by the Franks after the battle of Tours in 732, by the Hindus after the Battle of Tarain in 1191, by the Mongols after the Battle of Baghdad in 1258, by the Europeans at the battle of Vienna in 1683 and by many others through the fourteen hundred years of Muslim depredations against humankind. After all these defeats, the Muslims came back to vanquish all these victors, causing manifold suffering death and destruction which could have been avoided had the Muslims been annihilated when they were defeated.

The Persians and the Byzantines (Romans) also did not have the vision and foresight to realize the kind of mortal threat both of them faced in the Muslims (As the Americans the Russians, the Brits, the Aussies, the French, the Germans, the Spanish, the Chinese, the Indians, or the Israelis have today history is being repeated ad nauseam).

In the 7th century, the Romans and the Persians did not unite nor did they help out each other against the Muslims and went down fighting individually against the Muslim menace. Had they realized the kind of threat that Islam represented and had they paid heed to the repeated appeals by the pre-Muslim Quraish to the kings of Abyssinia, Persia and Byzantium to destroy Mohammed and his band of savage killers, the history of the world would have been far less bloody and our generation would not have had to battle with one billion humans who are today imprisoned in the murderous Muslim creed.

It was only the later Christians who belatedly realized the mortal nature of combat with the Mohammedans and gave a fitting reply to the them at Poitiers (Tours) in 732 and at Vienna in 1683. But that was too late to destroy the Muslim threat to civilization, a task that yet remains to be done and will hopefully be done by the American led Western alliance in the near future before the cause of civilization is totally forever.

We hope the Americans, Russians, Germans, French, Spanish, Chinese, Indians, British, Israelis all realize the gravity and seriousness of the Muslim threat to civilization and they sink their differences to come together in this mortal combat of civilization with Islam.

The Battle with the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraizah

After losing the battle of Muta with the Romans, Mohammed returned to his familiar quarry, the nature-worshipping Quraish and their allies the Jewish tribes. So after the Battle of the Trench, Mohammed turned on his favorite enemy the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraizah. He had in the inception of his claims to being a prophet of some god, has tried to court favor with the Jews by telling them that he had accepted Moses and Abraham as earlier prophets, he being the last one. He also asked the Kiblah (direction of prayer) to be in the direction of Jerusalem. Later when the Jews refused to accept him as a prophet, he changed this direction from Jerusalem to Mecca (after the conquest of Mecca) and then added Jesus as the recognized apostles of god. He had shrewdly till then, to win favor from the Jews, not included Jesus, whom the Jews did not accept.

As the Jews kept resisting his claim as a prophet, he decided to teach them a lesson. He started with the richest of the Jewish tribes the Banu Quraizah who had earlier promised to help Mohammed if the Quraish attacked him. But they gave only half hearted help during the three battles at Badr, Uhud and Trench, so now Mohammed wanted his revenge on the Jews.

He decreed that the Jews had violated the terms of their agreement with the Muslims, and were guilty of high treason they could no longer be allowed to live in Medina. They were ordered to lay down arms and migrate elsewhere. The Jews ridiculed the proposal. So Mohammed besieged their citadel. The siege lasted for twenty-five days. On the last day, Ali carried the citadel by assault. All the Jews were taken captive. Mohammeds verdict was that all male adults of the Banu Quraizah should be killed in cold blood, their women and children should be sold off as slaves and their property distributed among the Muslims. The Jews were then hacked to death, their heads were sawn off and the heads were piled before Mohammed, much in the same way as Mohammeds true inheritors, Zarqawi and gang do today!

Lessons from the Battle with the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraizah.

Here Mohammeds ruthless and bloodthirsty nature became evident. He exulted in the mass murder of the Jews and told his followers that appropriating the property and the women of the Jews was a legitimate booty for the Muslims. This was the practice the Muslims carry with them to this day, and any non-Muslim unfortunate enough to fall into the hands of the Muslims is beaten to death, as happened with the IDF soldiers of the Israeli army who were lynched at the beginning of the second Intifada of the Palestinians.

Since the days of Mohammed, it has been an hoary and a popular ghastly practice for the Muslim to dismember the bodies of the murdered enemies and carry body parts as souvenirs, dance over the corpses of slain enemies and distribute candy whenever Muslims kill non-Muslims. This is what we witnessed in across the Arab world and especially among the Palestinians on 9/11.

Mohammed's guile in the Hudna (Temporary Peace Treaty) of Hudaibiya

After the battle of the Trench in 5 A.H. (627 C.E.), the Quraish did not give battle to the murderous band of the first Muslims that surrounded Mohammed at Medina. So Mohammed decided that it was time for him to launch a Jihad against the Quraish. He cleverly disguised his aggression of Mecca as a Hajj (a pre-Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca), that he wanted to perform in the season in the year 6 A.H. (628 C.E.). When he and his band of one thousand followers arrived at Hudaibiya near Mecca after taking an out of the way route, so as to evade being spotted by the Quraish. On seeing Mohammed and his gangsters at the gates of Mecca, the Quraish got the shock of their lives.

Mohammed the accursed wanting to storm the holiest of holy sites of the (pre-Muslim) Arabs, on the pretext of Hajj. They sent an emissary (Urwa ibn Masud, who was the son-in law of Abu Sufyan, the leader of the Quraish) to Mohammed, asking him to desist from entering Mecca. This emissary went back and reported to the Quraish that Mohammed and his followers were in a rage and would invade Mecca, if they were not allowed into the town. Urwa reported that they were fanatically committed to Mohammed, such that they do not let the water in which he bathes fall on the ground. They collect that water and venerate it. When he cuts his hair they collect his hair and treasure it (in fact strands of Mohammed alleged hair are worshipped - one instance is the Hazratbal Masjid in Indian Administered Kashmir). The Quraish were despondent when their emissary returned to Mecca with these tidings.

Meanwhile Mohammed sent into Mecca for reconnaissance, one of his henchmen named Othman to check the defenses of Mecca. Othman also met the Quraish leaders to negotiate an entry for the Muslims and their gang leader Mohammed into Mecca, but they adopted delaying tactics. When Othman took long to come, a rumor got current in the Muslim camp that Othman had been killed by the Quraish. Thereupon all the Muslims took the pledge that they would fight against the Quraish to seek revenge for the murder of Othman. When the Muslims were poised to take up arms and attack Mecca, Othman returned to the Muslim camp with Suhail ibn Amr, an eminent citizen of Mecca, whom the Quraish sent to negotiate a treaty with the Muslims. This was the Hudna (Temporary Peace Treaty) of Hudaibiya.

Here Mohammed's craftiness comes to the fore. The terms of this treaty included that if any Muslim from the Quraish clan renounced Islam and returned to Mecca, then Mohammed would not hold any grudge against him and not ask for his return, but if anyone from the Quraish embraced Islam and went to Medina, Mohammed would immediately return him to the Quraish at Mecca.

Mohammed told Amr and the Quraish, that he bore no malice towards the Quraish and so he had offered this clause. The Quraish were taken for a ride in this clause, as they also believed that because of this clause no Quraish would embrace Islam, but some of Mohammed's followers would leave Islam and return to Mecca. Actually this clause was a clever ruse of Mohammed, to infiltrate his spies into Mecca, while not allowing any spies from the Quraish to enter Medina.

Over the next two years, many of Mohammed's followers pretended to leave Islam and came and settled in Mecca, thus preparing for the eventual invasion of Mecca that was to take place in 8 A.H. (630 C.E.), when on a frivolous pretext, Mohammed abrogated that treaty and invaded Mecca.

The Hudna (Temporary Peace Treaty) of Hudaibiya demonstrates in a very telling way, the evil genius that Mohammed was. And this character of his has been filtered down to the last Muslim, who uses it to cheat and trick non-Muslims in every small thing in day-to-day life in a practice popularly known among the Muslims as Taquiyya (also spelt as Taqiyya or Taqiya) which means deception.

Pervez Musharraf the President of Pakistan, referred to this Hudna (Temporary Peace Treaty) of Hudaibiya (and to the double-crossing that exists in it), when he announced after 9/11 that he was making a pact with America to fight the Taliban who then ruled Afghanistan and whose guest was that, horror of all horrors, Osama Bin Laden.

Mohammeds pretext to abrogate the Hudna (Temporary Peace Treaty) of Hudaibiya

After signing the treaty, Mohammed started gathering allies for the final assault on Mecca. Alarmed at his moves, the Quraish also started building up their own alliances. In this scenario a tribe named Banu Bakr allied themselves with the Quraish and another named Banu Khuza'ah joined the camp of Mohammed. Incited by Mohammed the Banu Khuza'ah attacked a caravan of the Banu Bakr whereupon the Banu Bakr attacked the Banu Khuza'ah. This pretext was enough for Mohammed to send an ultimatum to the Quraish (whose allies were the Banu Bakr) giving the Quraish three alternatives. The first alternative was that the Banu Bakr and the Quraish should pay blood money for the victims of Banu Khuza'ah. The second alternative was that the Quraish should terminate their alliance with Banu Bakr. The third alternative was that the treaty of Hudaibiya should be considered to have been abrogated. In a fit of desperation, the Quraish replied that they would neither pay blood money, nor terminate their alliance with Banu Bakr. On this pretext, the wily Mohammed abrogated the Hudna (Temporary Peace Treaty) of Hadaibiya and made preparations for a attack on Mecca.

The forced conversion of Abu Sufyan, the leader of the Quraish of Mecca and its implications for the division of Muslims into Sunnis and Shias

The Meccans realized that Mohammed had tricked them, by using the conflict between the Banu Bakr and Banu Khuza'ah to abrogate the treaty, as he wanted to attack Mecca, for which he now had adequate strength. Mohammed marched on Mecca and laid siege to the city. He had a large army and we are told that when at night fire was lit in the Muslim camp it appeared as if the whole of the desert was on fire The Meccans realized that they were in no position to beat Mohammed on the battlefield and their leader Abu Sufyan decided to go and meet Mohammed to mediate a peace.

Mohammed had already captured the daughter of Abu Sufyan, when she had gone to mediate a peace with Mohammed earlier, and had included her in his harem, so technically Abu Sufyan was his father-in-law (sic), Mohammed detained Abu Sufyan and released him only after Abu had embraced Islam. Mohammed had kept Abus daughter as a concubine and he now held Abu captive. Mohammed threatened Abu Sufyan with death and his daughter with dishonor. This coercion was the last straw that broke Abus Sufyans resistance to Mohammed, and he converted to Islam.
__________________
( 8: 32)


(2)
  #3  
06-04-2008
   Ibrahim Al Copti
Ibrahim Al Copti Ibrahim Al Copti
Moderator
 
: May 2005
: 2,143
Ibrahim Al Copti is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad

The conversion of Abu Sufyan was a seminal event, that is not recognized as such by historians.

It was Abu Sufyan, aided by Quraish generals like Khalid-ibn-Walid (before he had lapsed into Islam), who had led the Meccan resistance to Mohammed and his cult of Islam. The Quraish were the ruling aristocracy of pre-Islamic Mecca, and they held Mohammed in contempt as an upstart. They resisted Mohammed till they physically could, and even after their forced conversion, nursed a grudge against Mohammed.

Herein lay the original root of the schism of the Muslims into Sunnis and Shias that was to come after 661 C.E. Abu Sufyan had converted to Islam, as there was no other way for Abu Sufyan to save his life and honor. As he could not beat Mohammed in the battlefield, he decided to outwit him, from within, by embracing Islam.

Here we need to note that thenceforth the followers of Abu Sufyan, expressed their inherent warlike bloodthirsty violent mentality through the medium of Islam, they continued to nurse a personal grievance against Mohammed and bided their time to take their revenge. Mohammed himself died two years later in 632 due to his being poisoned by a Jewish lady of the Banu Quraizya tribe.

The power struggle between the Muslims and Neo-Muslims after Mohammeds death disproves the claim that clan or blood loyalties are secondary to the loyalty of a Muslim to his Deen - Islam

Mohammeds death marked the first power struggle between the original non-Quraish Muslim converts Medina and the neo-Muslim Quraish of Mecca. The Madina Muslims were called Ansars (helpers) by Mohammed, showing their secondary status in his eyes. He always preserved a preference for Quraish, although they had refused to embrace Islam. This speaks volumes to refute the claim that a Muslim is loyal only to Islam and not to blood or clan relation. Mohammed himself did not observe this principle, as he preferred Meccan Quraish to the Medina Muslims who were the first to embrace Islam. Mohammed knew that the people of Medina had become Muslims to oppose the their age old rivals the Meccans, to whom Mohammed belonged and he made his preference for the Meccans clear, by giving the Quraish a status higher than the Ansars in Muslim society.

Idol Worship among the Muslims

As soon as the Meccans embraced Islam, he preserved the status of Mecca as a Holy city, continued with the pre-Muslim practice of Hajj, and above all preserved the idol of the Meccan god the Kaaba, which became the paramount object of Muslim idol worship, in a community that otherwise abhors Idol worship.

Another practice centered around an idol that Mohammed preserved was the pre-Muslim practice of stoning of the pillar that is supposed to be the idol of Satan, which the Muslims continue to do today while performing Hajj or Umrah. The Arab practice of worshiping idols and departed humans is seen even till this day in the way Yasser Arafat is idolized and the Palestinians kiss his photos and even talk to it as if it were a living being. The kissing of the Kabba lies in its origin in pre-Muslim idol worship of the Arabs, a practice that existed before Mohammed, and which he preserved as a token of his clan loyalty to the Quraish of Mecca. After Mohammeds death the Medina Muslims (Ansars) wanted one among them to be the Caliph, their claims were rejected by the Meccans and Abba (or Abu) Bakr (literally Uncle Bakr) who was Mohammeds father-in-law was made the Caliph. Abba Bakr was a consensus candidate, since he was one of Mohammeds first followers who had fled with him to Medina and had never opposed Mohammed, but then he was a Quraish from Mecca, he was not from Medina. He died two years after he became prophet, and again the question of the Caliphate came to the fore. Now again the Meccans ensured that The Caliphate remained with those of Quraish extraction. But Umar too was an original convert, who had fought with Mohammed in the battles with the Meccans. The Meccans ensured that the caliphate did not pass to the Medina Muslims. After Umar began resisting the Quriash, he was murdered, and in his place was chosen Uthman (or Othman), who became the third Caliph. The point to note was that all these three caliphs were from the Quraish, who had followed Mohammed to Medina and had fought against the Meccans, but, after becoming Caliphs, they survived till they did nothing to offend the Quraish. The Quraish remained in control of muslin polity after their conversion to Islam and bided their time, till they could formally take over the caliphate. When their appointees Umar, and Outman began to work against the Quraish aristocracy, they murdered both of them. Thus the Meccans ensured that they remained in control, after they embraced Islam, as they had been before Islam. In doing this, they also kept under control their age-ld rivals the people of Medina, who were among the first Muslim followers of Mohammed. It is against the background of the murder of two caliphs, Umar and Uthman, that Ali who had been waiting in the wings for long to become a prophet, donned the mantle of Khalifa (Caliph).

The Murder of the Murderer Ali

After, Ali became the Caliph, he started efforts to weaken the power of the Quraish aristocracy, by dismissing the governors that they had appointed at various places, like Syria and Egypt. Some of the governors meekly conceded to obeying his orders. But Abu Muawiya ibn Sufyan who was Abu Sufyans son and had been appointed as the Governor of Syria under pressure from Abu Sufyan in the time of Caliph Umar, refused to step down, and defied Ali.

When Ali insisted that he step down and sent a force to enforce his decision to sack Abu Muawiya ibn Sufyan, the Quraish clan decided that this was the time to get rid of Ali, and they murdered him while he was at prayer. Alis death was followed by the murder of his sons, Husain and Hassan. These were his sons begot from his concubine Shahrbanu, the child princes of the last Sassanid king Yazdgard whom the Muslims captured after the battle of Qadsiyyah and the sack of Ctesiphon.

Thus came to an end a long career of murder that Ali had indulged in as one of the first members of the murderous gang of Muslims. Ali was a cruel and hateful man, and he died a well deserved death in the hands of other who had a similarly murderous motivation.

With the murder of the murderer Ali, the Caliphate (leadership of the Arab world) returned to the Quraish clan of Abu Sufyan

But now with Alis murder, Abu Muawiya ibn Sufyan, who was Abu Sufyans son, was proclaimed the caliph, and the leadership of the Arab world that Abu Sufyan had to concede to Mohammed in 630, returned to his clan in 661.

The reasons for the Shiite-Sunni divide in Islam

It was this politics that was at the root of the split of the followers of Abu Sufyan who called themselves Sunnis and those of Mohammed thru Ali, Hassan and Husain who called themselves Shias. (Arab historians deliberately mislead us when they attribute the motherhood of these two sons of Ali to Fatima, another of Alis wives, and the daughter of Mohammed. But the reason for such attribution is to keep the ancestry of Husain and Hasan purely to Arabs and to suppress the Persian element of their ancestry. The historical fact is that Shahrbanu the Persian princess was the mother of Hassan and Hussain.)

Why are many Persians Shias and most Arabs Sunnis?

At the Persian capital Ctesiphon, among the unfortunate children who were left behind, was Shahrbanu a child princess of the Persian King Yazdgard. When the Arabs came to know about Shahrbanu (who was then three years old) they presented her as a gift to the Caliph Umar, who in turn gifted her to Mohammeds son-in-law Ali as maal-e-ganimat (slaves obtained by Muslims after a war).

At that time Ali was thirty two years old and he decided to take the three year old child princess as his concubine! In doing this he was following the illustrious (sic) footsteps of his lecherous father-in-law Mohammed. The lecherous Mohammed had married and consummated his marriage with a seven year old girl named Ayesha in addition to many other unfortunate young and beautiful ladies who had been captured by the Muslim gangsters in the numerous wars at Badr, Uhud, Trench, Autas in the Arabian peninsula.

It was from this "marriage" of Ali to Princess Shahrbanu, that he fathered his two sons Hassan and Husain, who were later murdered in Battle of Karbala in October of AD 680. Ali himself had been murdered in 39 A.H. (661 C.E.). The descendants of Hassan and Hussain were to be the Shiite Imams who founded the Shia sect of Islam that had mixed Persian (royal Sassanid) and Arab ancestry. (Arab historians deliberately attribute the motherhood of these two sons of Ali to Fatima, another of Alis wives, and the daughter of Mohammed.

But the reason for such attribution is to keep the ancestry of Hussain and Hassan purely to Arabs and to suppress the royal Sassanid Persian element of their ancestry.

The historical fact is that Shahrbanu the Persian princess was the mother of Hassan and Hussain. So the descendants of Hussain and Hassan from whom came many of the Shiite Imams had royal Sassanid Persian ancestry. A fact that the Muslim historians try to hide by wrongly claiming that Shaharbanu was a young princess of marriageable age when she had been captured by the Arabs.

We know that the battle of Qadisiyah had been fought in the year 637, and Yazdgard had ascended the throne in the year 634, when his age was 21 - twenty one. So in 637 when he fled his capital leaving behind his daughter he was 24. How could a King aged 24 have a daughter who herself was a teenager or a young lady?

The Muslim historians have us believe that Shahrbanu was honorably married off by Ali to his son Hussain from whom she begot Ali's grandson Ali Zayn al Abidin (the fourth Shia Imam) in 658 CE.

But we know that Shahrbanu was abducted in the year 637, and according to Arab accounts she gave birth to a son in 658. If she was a young lady when she was abducted in 637 then why did she have to wait for 21 years till 658 before she could beget? Especially so considering that the Muslims force their wives to procreate as soon as they can lay their hands on them!? The Arab Muslims and their Iranian Muslim cohorts are practicing their ritual deception taqiya to mislead us and give a veneer of honorability to the abduction and rape of Shahrbanu by Ali when he lustfully took the Persian princess into his harem as his rightful property (maal-e-ganimat) won after a war as per the heinous Muslim custom.

This is the reason why most Persians are Shias. The Persian converts to Islam saw in the Shiite Imams a continuation of their pre-Islamic royal Sassanid lineage as the Shiite Imams were descended from the union of Ali with Shahrbanu (or of Hussain with Shahrbanu in which case too the royal Sassanid Persian element of the ancestry of the Shiite Imams remains). The Zoroastrian converts who yearned for a return to the Sassanid days saw in Ali, Hussain, Hassan and the Shiite Imams, the successors to their Sassanid emperor Yazdgard by virtue of Ali (or by some accounts his son Hussain) being the husband of their princess Shahrbanu.

Today many Muslim historians and their communist ideologues try to trumpet the lie that Hussain and Hassan were sons of Ali by Fatima, Mohammeds daughter. Can these worthies explain why then do Shias claim that the Shia Imams who descended from the progeny of Hussain, spoke Persian (the language of the a subjugated people) apart from Arabic (the language of Islam)? These Imams who were alleged to be the progeny of Ali and Fatima, both of whom were Arabs should never ever choose to speak in a language of a people the Arabs had subjugated and derogatorily referred to as Ajam (retarded). But the Shia Imams did so as they owed a part of their ethnicity to the mother of Hussian and Hassan who was a Persian princess. And their Persian royal lineage attracted many Zoroastrian Persians to Islam.

Also why did the Abbasiad caliphs who although Sunnis, but Persian converts, shifted the capital of the Caliphate from Damascus (an Arab city) to Ctesiphon the erstwhile capital of the Sassanid Persians. Baghdad is the rebirth of Ctesiphon (or Al Madain meaning the Cities as the Arabs call Ctesiphon). These facts fly in the face of the deliberate smothering of the Persian undercurrents in Shia Islam.

Abu Sufyan's (the chieftain of Makkah) forcible conversion to Islam led to his followers becoming Sunnis

Many historians fail to point out that the reason why many Arabs from the Hejaz are Sunnis today was also rooted in the forced conversion of Abu Sufyan to Islam in 630. Now we continue with the story of Abu Sufyan at Mecca in 630.

Coming back to Abu Sufyan, after his talks for a compromise with Mohammed failed and he was forced to accept Islam, Abu Sufyan, the reluctant new convert returned to Mecca and told the Quraish that it was futile to resist Mohammed. On Abu Sufyans advise, the Meccans realizing their hopeless plight, made a final attempt to ask Mohammed to lift the siege and resume negotiations. A demand scornfully rejected b Mohammed, who set the condition before the Quraish to surrender and accept Islam. The Meccans surrendered and Mohammed triumphantly marched into Mecca. In fact, it was after the surrender of Mecca that Mohammed coined the term Islam as the name for his bloodied creed. The term Islam is derived from Al Silm which is the Arabic word for submission or surrender. Islam certainly does not mean peace, as the Muslims will have you believe. The word for peace is Salam which phonetically resembles the term Islam, but has nothing to do with it philologically!

The surrender of the Quraish of Mecca, was to be followed by the surrender of millions of Islams innocent victims all across the globe who were to be forced to surrender this way to this ruthless and murderous creed, who name itself meant to surrender.

For the Quraish of Mecca the game was over, they decided that if you cannot beat the Muslims, join them and be like them cunning, untrustworthy, ruthless, rapacious and savage (all the negative adjectives in the English language are inadequate to capture the bestiality of the Muslims). Countless others were to be made into beastly Muslims this way as the Islam began its bloodied march across Arabia and then into Persia, Byzantium, North Africa, Central Asia, India, Indonesia, Europe and in our times into America (9/11).

The Horrifying experience of the Meccans under Mohammed

When Mohammed marched into Mecca itself he promptly proceed to demolish all the images of the gods worshipped by the Meccans. Among them were Allat, Alluza, Mannat who were goddesses and were looked upon as daughters of allah along with male gods like Hubal (Baal). He even demolished the image of allah and proclaimed that Allah has no form. This was a clever ruse to ensure that there is no object that his followers would get demoralized at, if the object of their reverence was demolished by a conquering anti-Muslim army. This is why his allah has no form.

But for the demoralized population of Mecca which had lost the cream of its warriors at Badr, Uhud and Trench, the only option was to accept Mohammeds terms. In this he was generous to the Quraish, as he was after all one of them. He decreed that Mecca would continue to be the center of the new creed, the Hajj pilgrimage would continue and all Muslims would perform Hajj (which till then had been limited to the pagan Arabs).

So the Meccans continued to gain economically in the new creed, their city was still the center of the new creed, whose followers were to grow manifold in a few decades. So the Meccans not only accepted Islam, but became its champions. This story was to repeat itself across many continents. As the Muslim Quraish of Mecca (and other Muslims) invaded other parts of Arabia to impose this bloodied creed on the pagan Arabs of Tayaef, Yemen, Oman, Bahrain, and later when all the Arabs with this unifying but savage creed attacked Persia, Byzantium and other parts of the globe, making new converts, who in turn attacked their neighbors to spread the murderous creed.

The bloody march of Islam had begun the Jihad was on and on in earnest. A Jihad that has not stopped till today and will not stop, till the last Muslim on this planet lies dead when the non-Muslim world decides to put a complete and permanent end to this bloodied creed of Islam.

The Battle of Autas (near Taif alias Tayef)

After Mecca fell into his hands lie a ripe fruit, Mohammed s appetite for imposing Islam on the rest of the Arabs was not satisfied, in fact, he became more ravenous to devour the rest of Arabia. He set his eyes of the town of Taif, which had scorned him, when he had first sent asked them to convert to Islam in his initial days. Now that he was powerful, Mohammed wanted to take his revenge on the people of Taif. He sent an ultimatum to the tribes of Hawazin and Thaqueef from the town of Taif, inviting them to accept Islam. They rejected the ultimatum and told him that they were not cowards like the Quraish of Mecca.

The two tribes along with their allies mustered in considerable strength at Autas a few miles to the east of Mecca on the way to Taif. With the craftiness that had become the instinct of the Muslims, the Muslim army trapped the defenders at a pass named Hunain with an attack from the rear preventing their retreat in to the fortified town of Taif. With both armies trapped in the narrow pass, to resolve the issue through single combat, a champion Abu Nadhul who was a very tall and well built man stepped forward from the ranks of the army of Taif and challenged the Muslims to a duel.

The duel was to be fought on camel back. But Ali who had accepted the challenge from the Muslim side, bent low from his camel and struck Abu Nadhuls camel. Now this was a foul tactic according to the rules of Bedouin dueling. The rider had to be attacked and not the camel on which he was astride. As Abus camel stumbled from the treacherous Muslim - Alis blow, Abu fell to the ground. Ali jumped down from his camel and was upon Abu and cut off his head. This made the army of Taif lose heart, but they fought on to the taunts from the Muslim army that allah has willed their defeat and hence killed their leader.

When the demoralized army of Taif, began to give ground, the Muslims overwhelmed them. The beaten army of Taif tried to regroup outside the Pass at Autas, but could not stem the tide of the truculent Muslims, who had taken the battle by deception. The Army of Taif retreated into the fort of Taif and locked the gates. The Muslim army laid siege to the Fort and the siege dragged on. Wanting to resolve the issue again through deception, Mohammed asked Ali to destroy all the oases around Taif, break the idols and forcibly convert the tribals to Islam.

Once the people of Taif saw that their allies were succumbing one after another to the treacherous Muslims, they asked for terms for surrender. The terms were the usual, Islam or war. The hapless Arabs in Taif tried to negotiate with Mohammed and relented by sending a message that they were ready to become Muslims if Mohammed would allow them to continue worshipping their gods for one year. Mohammed flatly rejected their condition, saying all gods are false in Islam, except allah. The Taifians tried to scale down their condition by asking for six months, three months and finally one month. Mohammeds reply reveals his mind. He said in Islam they had to accept all that he had enjoined. There could be no compromise in the matter of his injunctions. This laid bare the intolerant nature of Islam.

Lessons from the battle of Taif - Islamzation of the Arabs and Islamization and Arabization of all conquered non-Arabs.

The Battle of Taif exposes the utterly intolerant nature of Islam. There is no room for any adjustment in Islam, Either you accept the terms or die (the third choice is to live the life under the Muslims that worse than death, so the choice is between Islam and death). Countless countries and people were soon to know this intolerant brainwashing element of Islam. So any counter-offensive against Islam will also have to have this counter-brainwashing at its heart. The defeated Muslims can never be allowed to practice Islam in any way whatsoever. They have to be given a choice between leaving Islam or death. Only this kind of a hard-hearted strategy that is implemented world wide can see Islam to its grave.

With the victory over Taif, all the more important Arab tribes had been converted to Islam. The mopping up operations remained to set the stage for the global jihad, the attack against the non-Arab world to make them Muslims. Till now the issue to be imposed on the pre-Muslim Arabs was only Islam. Now another dimension was added to it as the Jihad moved on to non-Arabs lands, the Islamization of those people was half the story, they also had to be Arabized, with Arabic language and culture displacing the language and culture of the conquered people. The Persians, Byzantines, North Africans were soon to get a taste of this new threat of Islam.

Arabs the first victims of Islam

As you read on, you may get the impression hat this website is anti-Arab. It is not. Arab readers should especially keep in mind that their ancestors were the first ones to be subjugated and terrorized by Islam. Yes the founder of this cult Mohammed, was an Arab. But the pre-islamic Arabs, had no place within the tyranny of Islam.

Yes the pre-islamic Arabs were hardy and extreme in their behavior, but this was caused by the environment. Had the Eskimos lived in the Sahara, they too would have evolved a similar temperament. But Mohammed raised this temperament to a level of a creed, he made tyranny, slaughter, rape of the conquered women, loot of the conquered population as matter of faith. The pre-islamic Arabs were also violent and there were internecine and incessant tribal and clan wars. But the honor of womenfolk was never in danger. There are no records in pre-islamic Arab culture, where a victorious Arab tribe violated the honor of the womenfolk of the defeated tribe. The pre-islamic Arabs also did not practice polygamy. Abu Sufyan had only one wife, but Mohammed had sixteen. The pre-islamic Arab womenfolk never wore the Hijab (gown), Niqab (mask), nor were they confined to a womens chamber (Zenana). All thes perverted practices cam from Mohammed sick mind and became a hallmark of Islam.

Herein lies the vile seed of Islam that sprouted in that evil genius Mohammed. This is how the Arabs themselves were first tyrannized and when they realized that they could not defeat this monstrous creed, they decided to join it and advocate it in the same blood-thirsty manner that Mohammed ordered them to do.

The Struggle of the Arabs against Islam

In the foregoing paragraphs we have tried to capture in brief, the struggle which the Arabs put up against Islam. They tried to correct Mohammed when he was in Mecca, before the hegira (Migration, actually his escape to Medina), when they failed to convince him, they also tried to stop his madness by trying to assassinate him, and they fought innumerable battles with him at Badr, Uhud, Trench, Autas and at many other places. They asked for the King of Persia Kisra (Khushrau Pervez or Chosroes) and the King of Abyssinia to help them to capture Mohammed and end his mad venture.

Incidentally, the King of Abyssinia had invaded Arabia some years before Mohammed started Islam, with a view to bringing order to the lawless Bedouin tribes. This invasion took place in what is called by the Arabs - the Year of the Elephant. But in spite of this enmity, the Quraish called upon the king of Abyssinia to help them to crush Mohammed. He refused to help. While the King of Persia, not realizing the seriousness of the threat, sent in two armed Persian guards in the year 624 to arrest Mohammed!

Thus both the kings failed to realize the threat and did not help the pre-Muslim Arabs to end the career of this maniac whose followers were to destroy both Abyssinia and Persia in a few decades after that.

Mohammeds is a lesson for the world leaders of today to realize the threat to all of them in Islam and to unify in a single solid alliance to defeat and destroy Islam once and forever. Are Presidents Putin, Jiang, Chirac, chancellor Angela Merkel, listening?? They need to strengthen President Bush and Prime Minister Blair, or else France, Germany, Russia will, one by one go down to Islam. This is not a threat, this is a lesson of history which Persia, Byzantine, Visigothic Spain, pre-Islamic North Africa of King Gregory, all tell us. All of these kingdoms went down before Islam one by one. History should not repeat itself if civilization is to survive the mortal threat of Islam.

Mohammed organized a people made bitter by the environment, by institutionalizing this bitterness into the theology of Islam

He encouraged people to worship him, his hair (Hazratbal mosque at Kashmir in India, his spitum, the water gargled by him, his urine, ad nausem) Thus Islam was his own personality cult, and his was a murderous personality.

He understood the psychology of warriors and so he lulled them in to a fiersome hypnotic loyalty by creating an insatiable desire to win sensual and carnal pleasures on earth if they lived to victimized the vanquished adversary; and in heaven if they died they had the 72 houris and pearl eyed boys. This way he made his followers into paranoid warriors, who disregarded danger and were numb to pain and this brought victory. His no alcohol policy also helped immensely to get a tactical advantage like never before.

Not Alexander not Julius Caesar, not Hannibal in fact no one before Mohammed s mulish armies had this paranoid motivation where temporal was mixed with fantasy (spiritual) to motivate an army to victory.

Every foul tactic was fair for allahs war. No moral scruples existed for any ghoulish act. Thus only an army with a greater determination and paranoia and absence of morals than the Muslims, can defeat Islam. And we Americans will have to become so, if we are to defeat the Islamic Jihad.

The Muslims were organized as an army, with a command that was inviolable, so only another army with a better and more disciplined command can succeed in defeating them. The Persians were no match, nor were the Byzantines; but the Franks under Charles Martel were, as also were the Mongols under Hulagu Khan. And we Americans will have to become so like the ruthless Franks and Mongols if we are to defeat the Jihad.

Giving Offence (not Pre-emption), a Quranic Principle

The point to be emphasized here is that out of the 28 battles, Mohammad fought 27 were offensive. They cannot even be called pre-emptive, since none of his adversaries had made plans to attack Mohammed. The Quraish had left him in peace after he fled to Medina. The Koran uses the principle of making a Hudna (pretence of making peace) when the enemy is strong, and using that period to making oneself stronger than the enemy.

And after the enemy is weak, then to attack the enemy by giving offense and provoking the enemy. Hitler too did this when he attacked Poland in World War 2, by saying that the Poles has attacked Germany and that the Nazis were defending Germany. Hitlers strategy bears an uncanny resemblance to the Quranic pre******ion.

The Quran advocates this policy of giving offense to an adversary and in fact sanctifies such abominable behavior to a holy(sic) duty for all Muslims by declaring the faith (Deen) to them and giving them an option of embracing Islam or being prepared for an attack by Muslims. (It is following this Muslim custom, that Zawahiri has the temerity to ask President George Bush to seek refuge in Islam.)

We need to note that the first battle of Mohammed, the battle of Badr was not defensive as most Muslims would have you believe. Mohammed initiated the fight by waylaying the Quraish caravans. Thus the beginning of the Islamic Jihad was in Mohammeds banditry.

Today if America wants to outdo the Jihadis at their own game it would do well, to emulate this Quranic principle of giving offense to the adversary (todays Jihadis), and then going in to crush them utterly. America needs to realize that the only way of defeating the Jihad is by subjugating one Muslim country after another by taking out a few cities using nukes and neutrons and then giving them an ultimatum of leaving Islam or facing destruction.

This is what Mohammed did to the Quraish, to the people of Taif, and this is also what the Muslims did to the Sassanian Persians, Byzantines, Visigoths in Al Andalus (Spain), and many others. And this is what the Iranian Mullahs plan to do once they have the bomb! It is high time to pay the Muslims with their own coin, and this is the only way to defeat them.

Did any allah help the Muslims in warfare?

For too long, the Muslims have boasted that an allah helped them in the victories which they notched up one after other in the Jihad. For a person for whom there is a god, this reasoning may appeal and be frightening too, since if some god that is presumed to exist, is helping the Muslims, then no one else has any chance against the Muslims. This was a clever psychological ploy of the Muslims and a deadly psychology weakness that they planted in the minds of their victims from other religions.

If some kind of a god himself or herself favored the beastly Muslims, then there was no point in fighting the Muslims whose victory was anyway assured is what poor religious yokels will believe. But we the aggressive atheists, will see Islam into its grave, from where the corpse of Islam will never ever turn, even in its grave where we WILL send it soon

Atheism apart, for any practical person, although he or she may be religious, for whom, all results of warfare are result of the use of human brain and brawn, this argument is useless. And even if there is at all a god, then that god is an equalizer, for the Muslims and their victims. And the result of a battle with the Muslims (or any other battle) is a result of brain and brawn.

The much flaunted austerity and simplicity of Islam

Muslims boast that their religion appealed to new converts since it was austere and simple. This is touted as a plus point with Islam. But Islam's austerity lies in its origins in the barren environs of the Arabian desert. In a place where not a blade of grass could grow, how could humans who lived in that environment be expected to be ostentatious?

They had to be simple and austere as dictated by the environment. People from such an environment were hardy and ready to face hardship and when they had the fortune of being organized, into a military force, and who had nothing much to lose if they died in warfare, they could easily throw themselves into the battlefield wanting to die, since they had nothing much to live for. Herein lies the Arab and later the Muslim psyche of fighting to death and seeking death and loving and romanticizing death and martyrdom, since they had nothing to live for anyway in their barren lifeless and featureless desert.

This psychology remained, even after the environment changed with the Arab Muslim conquering richer and well endowed lands of Persia and Byzantine. So even after they conquered the rich empires of the Sassanids and the Byzantines, with their brute force, the Arab Muslims still were seeking death in warfare, that made them desperate and deadly enemies who could win in battles against the refined Persians and Byzantines. Only the hardy Franks under Charles Martel could outmatch the death-seeking paranoia of the beastly Muslims and defeat them at Poitiers (Tours) in Central France.. This death-seeking psychology is at work upto our times, in the sick minds of the suicide (genocide) bombers that we saw on 9/11, 3/11, 7/7 and at many other places like Jerusalem, Bali, Beslan, Amman, Baghdad, Ramadi, etc.

The fiction of there being moderate Muslims and that an allah helps them in war

As the war on Terror progresses, there is an increasing clamor that we need to link up with the moderates among the Muslims and thus isolate the lunatic fringe of terrorists who indulge in beheadings, genocide bombings, terror attacks et al. But then all these acts have been sanctioned in the Quran itself, which calls for the slaying of Idolaters (Kafirs), asks Muslim to let the Kafirs find harshness in you, and forbids Muslims from taking Kafirs as friends. All Muslims believe in the Quran, be he/she an unlettered peasant, or a highly educated and qualified doctor, surgeon, software pro, judge, littrateur, or any other accomplished professional.

A Muslim howsoever polished and sophisticated remains a beast at heart, as long as he follows the Quran.

Every Muslim is a beast at heart

Ask any educated Muslim anywhere in the world, whether he upholds the UN Charter, the Constitution of the USA, UK, France, where he and his family has settled for generations, or he upholds the Quran with all its blood-thirsty injunctions and listen to his answer. He will say, before the Quran everything is null and void. We saw this during the Cartoon vandalism all over Europe, Asia, and Africa

Nothing that is contrary to the Quran's blood-thirsty injunctions is acceptable for him, so we can conclude that a Muslim can never in his heart of hearts be a member of a civilized society. He may pretend to be one, as Mohammed Atta pretended to be before he flew the airplanes into the Twin Towers, but within him the beast shall always be alive, waiting for the right chance to reveal himself.

For a Muslim every personal friendship with non-Muslims, oath of citizenship, loyalty to the armed forces, is all transitory and subservient to the Quran. And he would cast off all oaths, promises in favor of the Quran whenever he is in a position of power to do so.

We caution you that a Muslim is always a Muslim first and last. Never take Muslims for your friends, never ever trust them, never make peace with them, and always strive for their destruction. A Muslim would always remain a beast inside his external polished demeanor and appearance. Given a chance he will slice your throat, if you do not accept Islam. Any Muslim who refuses to do this would be deemed a traitor, a Murtad (Apostate) by other Muslims and be done to death. So no Muslim will dare to step out of line.

Yes there could be many Muslims who think in their heart of hearts that Islam is savage. But they will never say that openly. We would deem such Muslims as ex-Muslims. There are Muslims, ex-Muslims and non-Muslims. There are no moderate Muslims. A Moderate Muslim is like a lady being partially pregnant! This is fiction, either you are pregnant or you are not. So you are either a Muslim (and a follower of that barbaric Quran) or you are an ex- Muslim. You cannot be both a Muslim and civilized, you cannot be a Muslim and moderate. This is a contradiction in terms. You are either civilized moderate or you are a Muslim. Make your choice.

Islam, Fanatic Islam and Islamic Terrorism

Today many the world over are innocent of how Islam was founded, how it grew and what Islam implies for the future of Humankind. So there are endless debates that Islam is a religion of peace, that all Muslims are not fanatical, and that we need to differentiate between, Muslims and terrorists.

The reading of the story of Islam so far should be enough to dispel the notion that Islam differs from Islamic fanaticism, or that Islam is a religion of peace and that the Terrorists have hijacked a peaceful religion. No it is not. It is Islam which gave birth to Terrorism, which started from the evil mind of its founder Mohammed (yimach shmo ve-zichro - may his name and memory be obliterated) and has filtered down to the last follower (Muslim) today. Islam is Fanaticism, it is high time we woke up to this chilling reality.

How Islam prevents Muslims from leaving Islam Murder any Muslim leaving Islam

Mohammed (yimach shmo) was a shrewd man who knew that there was always a danger of Muslims deserting Islam and reverting to some other less blood-thirsty religion, so he made it an offense punishable with death for anyone leaving Islam, having once accepted it. According to the Shariah, a Murtad (Muslim Apostate) has to be killed, and it is the duty of a Muslim to kill any other Muslim who leaves Islam.

The murderous Quran is the inviolable word of god

There can also never ever be any discussion on the murderous commands of the Quran, since they are supposed to be the word of god, or so Mohammed (yimach shmo ve-zichro - may his name and memory be obliterated) told his followers.

Assemble five times a day to swear your loyalty to Islam

To be doubly sure that his flock remains together in to its murderous ken (prison), he decreed that it was compulsory for all Muslims to come together and pray five times during the day. So there wasnt any chance for his followers to leave Islam and emancipate themselves.

Why Muslim women have to wear the veil to hide their faces and bodies?

Islam sanctioned the taking of the ladies of a defeated enemy as concubines or slaves. The womenfolk of the defeated people were held in the harems of the victorious Muslims as sex-slaves. This lecherous practice let open the doors of lecherousness and lust wide open among the Muslims and to prevent them from casting lustful eyes on each other wives (other Muslim women), Mohamed decreed that all Muslim women should wear the hijab to hide their faces and bodies from men Muslim or non-Muslim.

Mohammed was shrewd enough to see that after once having opened the gates of lecherous instincts, the Muslims would covet each others wives too, and this would lead to internecine warfare amongst the Muslims. To prevent this, he decreed that all Muslim women were to be covered from head to toe. And so the Muslims today look upon any woman no so covered to be fair game for being ravished and raped.

The innumerable wives of Mohammed

With his innumerable wives, some of whom were under-aged, Mohammed himself set and example of lecherous behavior for other Muslims to emulate. His marriage to Khadija, the rich widow with whom he lived for 20 years, was the only normal marriage, as it had taken place before he started using his ecliptic fits to declare himself as a prophet of some allah, using which he started his murder and rape cult Islam.

After this first normal marriage with Khadija, he started his spree of marriages with his marriage of Aisha who was the daughter of his follower Abu Bakr. Aisha was just seven years old when Mohammed married her and she was only nine years old when he conjugated this marriage! This is the inspiration for the Arabs of today to pick up child brides!

Mohammed did not stop at this marriage, after marrying his second wife the child Aisha, his third wife was Hapsha, the widowed daughter of Omar, who was another of his gangsters. His fourth wife was Zinab. His fifth wife was another widow. His sixth wife was Zainab (not to be confused with the earlier wife Zinab). Now Zainab was the wife of his adopted son Zaid. So Mohammed could cast his lecherous and lustful eyes on a girl who was his daughter-in-law and he told Zaid that he had received a commandment from allah, that Zainab was meant for him. He asked Zaid to divorce his wife and himself married her! His seventh wife was Ziora, eight was Habiba and the ninth was Saphia.

Mohammed had many other wives whose names are not recorded in history. Such was the lecherous prophet of Islam. No wonder Muslims are lecherous as a rule and look upon any liberated woman who is not covered up as fair game for being raped, while they keep their women under a tent-like cloak.

Getting into Islam was a one way street.

Islam was a dead end, where you could enter, (in fact you were forced to enter at the pain of death) , but could never leave, since you would be killed. In fact such was the indoctrination and mass hysteria that Mohammed (yimach shmo) started, that in a generation or so, the new converts forgot that their forefathers were not Muslims, and in fact in North Africa, they even forgot that they were not Arabs. They forgot that their forefathers were made to submit to Islam at the pain of death.

This sealed the fate of all those who were forced to embrace Islam from ever becoming decent thinking humans ever again.

Only the total destruction of non-Muslim heritage and wholesale slaughter of non-Muslims has got the Muslims Victory

With every Muslim military victory, there was not just a change of ruler, but a wholesale slaughter of those who refused to convert or pay Jaziya. There was also a total destruction of the pre-Islamic culture, educational institution, libraries, etc. The planned and deliberately implemented slaughter of the non-Muslim priestly and warrior class was done to enfeeble the conquered populace so much that they would forget who they were their national and cultural identity be subsumed under a newly imposed Arabized Muslim identity.

This kind of tyranny was never known to the human race, with any other conqueror, like Alexander, Julius Caesar, Hannibal, or even those who came after the Muslims like the British Colonialists, or the Spanish Conquistadors. Yes the Spanish Conquistadors were ruthless, but in spite of all they did to he native Americans, the nave Americans still have preserved their memory of they being a people different from the Spanish Conquistadors, not so with the Egyptians, North Africans, Berbers, et al.

Ask any Egyptian who he is, he will say he is an Arab, were the Pharaohs Arabs? Were the builders of the Pyramids, Arab? Ask any Libyan, Sudanese, Algerian, Tunisian, Somalian, who he is he will say he is an Arab. These are people, whom the conquering Muslim Arab, so Arabized that they have forgotten who they are, their national identities have completely been submerged into the Arab Muslim Ummah.

This has not happened with the native Americans or the Maoris or the Africans, in spite of the fact that apartheid was practiced in South Africa. The Arabs as conquerors totally brainwashed at the point of the sword all the conquered people, Arabized and Islamized them at the pain of death.

Knowing all this is relevant today for those who seek to defeat Islam. To do so we have to first understand the depth of depravity in Islam. If the Muslims have to be saved from Islam, then it is not sufficient to conquer the Muslim countries and try to being democracy to them, we have to de-Islamize these people, if they are to be emancipated into civilized beings.

Islam has brutalized them and made them robotic followers and into robotic killers, narrow-minded individuals, despotic rulers, and cruel sadists by following the injunctions of the Instruction Manual of Terrorism (the Quran). This is proven by the bloodied Shiite-Sunni murders that have started in Iraq despite elections, and elections by people who support a murderous creed throw up murders as their legislators as in the case of Hamas and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Islam is a perverted mentality, a mental sickness based on intimidation to convert all non-Muslims to Islam, and to murder if you refuse to convert. And if you manage to save your head, then you have to live under their dehumanizing tyranny and live as non-Muslims (Dhimmis or Zimmis).

The Retrograde Negative Spirit of Islam pervades all across that Islamic civilization(sic). Although to call it civilization is a contradiction in terms

The very first verse uttered by that lecherous mass-murderer, the accursed Mohammed-ibn-abdallah (Mohammed son of Abdallah. Abd-allah literally means slave of allah) was La Ilah Il Allah, Mohammed ur Rasoolallah which translated literally would read No god but god, Mohammed is prophet of god. In Arabic La connotes No. So what can one expect from a mentality whose very first of its five principles is based on negativism?

Negativism permeates all through Islam, its attitudes towards all non-Muslims, its use of dishonesty to portray itself as a victim, its murderous intent towards all those who refuse to convert to Islam, its use of any level of cruelty to Islamize entire humankind.

We can save ourselves from this Malignant Madness of Islam, only if we see it through to its grave. The other option is landing in the grave ourselves along with liberty, progress and free-thinking, freedom of speech and scientific advancement, all of which will be become slaves to that Instruction Manual of Hate and Terror the Quran.

Why is a threat of death the only way to defeat Islam?

Islam was spread with the use of death threats. The defeated non-Muslims were given the choice of Islam or Death. After having been forced to accept Islam through such terminal coercion, the converted people had no way of renouncing Islam. If they did so, they were targeted as Murtads (apostates) and were killed. It is mandatory in Islam for Muslims to kill anyone who leaves the cult. So the converts were forced to remain Muslims. And as this was their fate, then the best bet for them was to imbibe the murderous attitude themselves and impose it on others.

Today although "Islam or Death" is not possible openly, unless you live in Muslim ruled countries of the Islamic crescent like Egypt, Sudan, Iran, Pakistan or in areas contiguous to Muslim majority areas like Malaku in Indonesia, Southern Sudan, Kashmir, North Nigeria.

Muslim converts today are convicts or psychological wrecks like Jose Padilla and Richard Reid

But the Muslims have devised ingenious methods to reach those best suited for Islam, so they evangelize in Prisons, where they can appeal to the dregs of society, or those come from broken families, those who have gone through divorces, or those who have had some heart-breaking personal experience.

It is on the emotions of such unfortunate wrecks and irredeemable convicts that these Muslim missionaries prey like vultures and hyenas to make them join the murderous ranks of Islam. Richard Reid, the Shoe bomber, Jose Padilla are specimen of those who become Muslim today.

The cardinal fact is that across the fourteen centuries of Islams existence, it has been its death threat that made people Muslim and it was the same death threat that kept them Muslim. The same death threats are used today to intimidate Ayan Hirsi Ali, Salman Rushdie and many others like them to keep them from speaking the truth about Islam.

He who was born by the sword shall die by the sword

Modifying the age-old adage He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword. We can say that Islam which was born by the sword shall die by the sword As it was a death threat that made people into Muslims and kept them as Muslims, the only way these scum can be shaken out of their adherence to the savagery called Islam is a death threat. Not individual death threats as the Muslims hurl today at Hirsi and Salman, but a death threat of extermination through a nuclear holocaust of the entire Muslim population across the globe!

Only when the beastlike Muslims see the determination of a world to do them in, upto their last man and woman, can the Ummah of Islam be smashed.

When the Muslims see that there is no option other than death, if they persist in remaining Muslim, will the fort of Islam be breached and once the first trickle of Muslims who renounce Islam starts, the trickle will turn into a flood and an avalanche that will wipe out Islam.

Yes there will certainly be many Muslims who will try to kill those who renounce Islam, but when these murderers are themselves hunted down with equal ferocity, will the lay Muslims believe that it is safe for them to give up Islam. Then and only then, shall we see Muslims coming over in droves to give up Islam. But this can happen only after we seriously hurl and start executing a death threat of mass killing of all Muslims across the globe. There are no soft options here.

Do we have it in us to do that?

The answer decides whether civilization wins or Islam wins!

The Paradox of the death seeking psychology of Islam

This very death seeking psychology of Islam is also the behind their wanting to become suicide (genocide) bombers today. Any power that wants to defeat this death-seeking psychology, will have to be a death-giving one. Since Muslims want martyrdom, so only those who can give them this martyrdom fast and on a mass scale can overcome this delinquent psychology of the Muslims. The roots of Islam are psychological, and only one who understand this psychology, can overcome it.

Islam is a psychology of perpetual war. A psychology that had existed among the pre-Islamic Bedouin Arabs. But then, before Islam, this psychology was not a global problem, since the Arabs fought amongst themselves. With Islam this psychology was inbuilt into religion and infused with a zeal to impose this psychology on all those who were weak enough to fall before Muslim swords. As long as Islam has other religions on this globe, the war Jihad, will go on till the whole world is Islamized. But in the unlikely event of the entire world being Islamized, will this violence stop? No Never. Then in that global Dar-ul-Islam, Muslims would fight amongst themselves Shias against Sunnis, Iranians against Iraqis, Arabs against non-Arabs and so on. Herein lies the paradox of Islam. As long as Islam is surrounded by other religions, there will be violence, but even after, and if at all, Islam is alone on this globe, there will still be endless violence, till Islam is put to an end.

Islam has a senseless and unmanageable agenda, with other religions, while they are not sensible, at least they are manageable. Other religions also bear animosity against each other, but they can be sobered down and made to co-exist with each other, as do Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Shintoism, Hinduism, Animism, etc.

But Islam defies, being civilized, and being made manageable. And it will defy till its violent end. Before Islam burst upon the world, all other religions had made the world non-sensible, but it is Islam that has made religion unmanageable, Had Islam not been around, it would not have been necessary to think in terms of the demise of religion itself. It is Islam that is forcing and will continue to force humankind away from religion. While non-Islamic religions made man into a delinquent, who kept muttering to himself, Islam has made man into a delinquent who has gone violently berserk, The delinquent has now to be shot a tranquilizer and then given a strong sedative to sober him up, so that mankind can bury the delinquent behavior of religion which Islam has made criminal, and after which humankind can continue its march of knowledge and science to plant the banner of humanity across the universe, and not waste its energies in fighting against itself in the narrow confines of planet earth.

Source: http://www.historyofjihad.org/
__________________
( 8: 32)


(2)
  #4  
07-04-2008
No Where To Run No Where To Run
Registered User
 
: Apr 2008
: 32
No Where To Run is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad

Dear Ibrahim
you talking about Jihad i'll show you jihad its started in Bible

"All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman. (From the NIV Bible, 2 Chronicles 15:13)"

Jihad (Fighting for the Cause of GOD Almighty) started with the Bible!

1- Jihad in the Bible:

Christians often refer to Islam as a terrorist religion, and they abuse the Arabic word "Jihad" and portray it as a reference to terrorism. We must not forget that JIHAD began in the Bible, where GOD Almighty Commanded His followers to fight for His Holy Cause. Let us look at what the Bible says about Jihad:


GOD Almighty Chose the land of Palestine to be the Jews' "Promise Land", and thus, ordered them to go into it and fight the pagans there so they can have possession over it:

Numbers 13:26-28
26 They came back to Moses and Aaron and the whole Israelite community at Kadesh in the Desert of Paran. There they reported to them and to the whole assembly and showed them the fruit of the land.
27 They gave Moses this account: "We went into the land to which you sent us, and it does flow with milk and honey! Here is its fruit.
28 But the people who live there are powerful, and the cities are fortified and very large. We even saw descendants of Anak there.


One simple Question: Did the disbelievers in the land of Palestine during the times of Moses start any war with the Hebrews who ORIGINALLY came from Egypt?? Absolutely Not!


Later on, the Hebrews or the "Israelites" or the "Jews" (call them as you wish) have committed Pedophilia, Murders and Terrorism against those disbelievers:

"Now kill all the boys [innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. (Numbers 31:17-18)"

Now what crime did the innocent children and non-virgin women commit in order for them to get killed?



It's odd how one of the 10 Commandments says "Thou shalt not kill (or murder). (Exodus 20:13)", and yet, the bible ordered the killing of innocent children and non-virgin girls by the mass!




Also, according to the Talmud's historical elaborations on Numbers 31:17-18 above, Moses gave direct orders for his men to have SEXUAL INTERCOURSE with every VIRGIN GIRLS who was AT LEAST 3 YEARS OLD:



"....The Tannatic Midrash Sifre to Numbers in 157 comments on the above quoted commandment of MOSES to kill the Midianite women as well as the male children...."

"....According to the Tannate Rabbis, MOSES therefore had ordered the Israelites to kill all women older than three years and a day, because they were "suitable for having sexual relations." [138]...."

"Said Rabbi Joseph, "Come and take note: A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse....."

"A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse. "A girl three years old may be betrothed through an act of sexual intercourse," the words of R. Meir. And sages say, "Three years and one day old."....."

2- Inhumane slavery as a direct result of the Bible's Jihad:


After the pagans had been defeated and taken as slaves, the Jews had all of them under their possessions:


From http://www.answering-christianity.com/slaves.htm:


Leviticus 25:44-46 "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."

What kind of a human value does the Bible give to slaves? If slaves and their children must be inherited and passed down to newer generations as slaves, then how in the world will they ever gain their freedom? Does the Bible believe in Freedom? Does the Bible believe in liberating human beings from slavery? Apparently it does not.


Let's compare this with the Noble Quran:

Noble Verse 24:33 "Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until God gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is God, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them),"

In this Noble Verse, we see that if a slave requests his freedom from his Muslim master, then his master not only must help him earn his freedom if there is good in the slave, but also pay him money so the slave can have a good start in his free life. We also see in this Noble Verse that slaves are not to be forced into prostitution in anyway.

Allah Almighty in the Noble Quran Commands the Muslims to free their slaves if the slaves want to be free, and to pay them money too so they can have a good jump start in life. In the Bible on the other hand, we see slaves not being allowed to be freed at all, and on the contrary, they and their children must be inherited forever.

3- Conclusion:

Due to the ridiculous and constant attacks that the Christian and Western media bring on Islam, it is time to shed the Light of Truth! Jihad is a Biblical practice before it is Islamic. In Islam, we are Commanded to fight evil where ever it is and by all means! It doesn't always have to be through swords and blood shed. GOD Almighty Commanded the Muslims to fight hard using the Divine Truth of the Noble Quran:

"Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness, with the (Quran). (The Noble Quran, 25:52)"

"Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: For thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance. (The Noble Quran, 16:125)"

The Bible as shown above is responsible for so much blood shed, pedophilia, murders and terrorism. Yet, we don't see any Christian minister (who is very knowledgeable about the book) say anything about it. But when Muslims do commit killing, such as what happened on 9/11, then Hell breaks loose and everyone becomes peaceful and a preacher, and Islam is the only evil thing out there, even though Islam is truly the BEST Peaceful and Just Divine Religion out there if it's practiced right. Such hypocrisy, lies and deceptions by the ministers and other Islamphobics only survives with the "dumb, deaf and blind (2:18)" as Allah Almighty called them in the Noble Quran. But to the reasonable and just people, the Truth is always realized, whether it is sooner or later.
  #5  
07-04-2008
No Where To Run No Where To Run
Registered User
 
: Apr 2008
: 32
No Where To Run is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad

now i gonna explain to you what is the Meaning of Jihad in Islam

What is Jihad and laws of war in Islam?

Jihad means struggling in the name of Allah Almighty. Jihad doesn't always mean a war or battle. Any mean for spreading Islam and the Truth, or to fight for what is right and condemn what is wrong (such as fighting the bad and helping the oppressed even if they were not Muslims) are considered Jihad.

I am doing Jihad right now by maintaining my web site, because it is a tool that can be used for spreading Islam and the Truth. And because it is also a Media tool, it could be used for fighting for what is right and condemning what is wrong.

Islam is not a religion of arms and swords! When Allah Almighty revealed the Noble Quran to Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, and Muhammad became the Messenger of GOD Almighty, Muhammad had to spread Islam to 365 Pagan Arab Tribes. These tribes showed so much hostility toward the Muslims and Islam, and have imposed so many battles against the Muslims.

Later, when Islam was the religion of what we call today Saudi Arabia, and the 365 Pagan Arab tribes mostly converted to Islam, the Muslims had to yet face another type of challenge.

The Nuclear Soviet Union and the United States of America of our days were the Great Empires of the Christian Romans and the Pagan Persians. If you know geography and history well enough, then you would see that the Muslims were trapped between those two big Super Powers.

Hostility and Battles from those two Empires were imposed upon the Muslims. For instance, when our Prophet peace be upon him sent his messenger to "Kisrah", the Emperor of Persia, introducing Islam to him, Kisrah ordered for the Muslims' Messenger to be executed!

Back then, like today, this was considered a coward act. It was the Persians who showed the hostility toward the Muslims and declared the many battles against Islam.

The Christian Romans weren't any better. For instance, in one of their many battles against the Muslims is when they saw the threat to their religion in the Middle East, the King "Herucl", sent out an army of 100,000 men and ordered them to go to "Madina" in what we call today Saudi Arabia to destroy Islam once and for all.

The Muslims were not stable yet at that time, and they only sent out an army of 3,000 men at that time to drive the Christian Romans away from Madina. The battle was named "The battle of Mo'ta" and it took place in Mo'ta, Jordan today.

The Muslims' plan was to meet the Christian Romans far away from Madina, and to have them stray away from Madina. The army of 3,000 men was successful enough to fight the Christian Romans for few days and then to pull away from the battle and headed South of Jordan. The Romans strayed away from Madina and the small army of the Muslims was able to run away through the mountains. More than half of the 3,000 Muslims however were killed in this operation.

The point is that Islam didn't spread by sword with much choice. The wars were imposed upon the Muslims. The Muslims didn't ask for those wars.


Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him never took any personal revenge from anyone.

What does the Qu'ran say about violence? Why does the Noble Quran contain Verses that command the Muslims to fight? See the justified and good reasons behind it.



In regards to Jihad and fighting the hostile enemy, Allah Almighty Made it stal clear in the Noble Quran about being peaceful to ordinary and peaceful non-Muslims, and being very hostile to the hostile enemy:

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"

"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (The Noble Quran, 5:32)"

"Those who invoke not, with God, any other god, nor slay such life as God has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; - and any that does this (not only) meets punishment. (But) the Penalty on the Day Of Judgement will be doubled To him, and he will dwell Therein in ignominy. (The Noble Quran, 25:68-69)"

"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (The Noble Quran, 8:61)"

"If thou dost stretch thy hand against me, to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee: for I do fear God, the cherisher of the worlds. (The Noble Quran, 5:28)"

"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (The Noble Quran, 8:61)"

"If thou dost stretch thy hand against me, to slay me, it is not for me to stretch my hand against thee to slay thee: for I do fear God, the cherisher of the worlds. (The Noble Quran, 5:28)"

"God does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly with those who have not fought you about religion and have not driven you out of your homes. God loves just dealers. (The Noble Quran, 60:8)"

"And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for God. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers. (The Noble Quran 2:193)"

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy handhold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things. (The Noble Quran, 2:256)"

"Again and again will those who disbelieve, wish that they had bowed (to God's will) in Islam. Leave them alone, to enjoy (the good things of this life) and to please themselves: let (false) hope amuse them: soon will knowledge (undeceive them). (The Noble Quran, 15:2-3)"

"Say, 'The truth is from your Lord': Let him who will believe, and let him who will, reject (it):......(The Noble Quran, 18:29)"

"If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then COMPEL mankind, against their will, to believe! (The Noble Quran, 10:99)"

"Say: 'Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger: but if ye turn away, he is only responsible for the duty placed on him and ye for that placed on you. If ye obey him, ye shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only to preach the clear (Message). (The Noble Quran, 24:54)"

"Say : O ye that reject Faith! I worship not that which ye worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship, Nor will ye worship that which I worship. To you be your Way, and to me mine. (The Noble Quran, 109:1-6)"

2:- now what its the reason for Jihad ?

The reason for "Jihad" Noble Verses:- The so-called "Jihad" Noble Verses came for specific times and places. They don't apply for all times and everybody! I can't slay you, a non-Muslim, just because you're not a Muslim. The pagan Arabs were very hostile people and only knew the sword as an answer. Many wars were imposed upon the Muslims, and thus, it is only normal and natural to find Noble Verses that deal with these specific hostile situations. But the Message of the Noble Quran is PEACE, as clearly proven in Noble Verses 2:190, 8:61 and 5:28 above.

2- The laws of war in Islam:

Muslims are forbidden from attacking others who do not attack them:

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"

Fighting in the cause of GOD Almighty those who fight us is what "Jihad" is all about. I can't go and kill a non-Muslim just because he is a non-Muslim. That is absolutely forbidden in Islam:

"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (Noble Quran 5:32)"

"Those who invoke not, with God, any other god, nor slay such life as God has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; - and any that does this (not only) meets punishment. (But) the Penalty on the Day Of Judgement will be doubled To him, and he will dwell Therein in ignominy. (The Noble Quran, 25:68-69)"

Jihad can only be declared when the Muslims are attacked. Muslims are not allowed to attach those who do not attack them. And even when war breaks out, if the enemy offers an honest peace, then we should accept it and end the blood shed:

"But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things). (The Noble Quran, 8:61)"

And if a treaty of peace was made, then we must honor that treaty to the end:

"Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If God had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: Therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then God Hath opened no way for you (to war against them). (The Noble Quran, 4:90)"

"How can there be a league, before God and His Apostle, with the Pagans, except those with whom ye made a treaty near the sacred Mosque? As long as these stand true to you, stand ye true to them: for God doth love the righteous. (The N

-
Did Islam spread by the sword? If so, was that Jihad?
Please visit Why did Muhammad take up arms and Christ didn't? Why did Islam spread by the sword if it were indeed a Religion of Truth, and Christianity didn't? Jesus killed his enemies.

The Muslims did not start any battle with anyone. It was the infidels from the 365 Arab Pagan tribes, and later the Persian and Roman Empires who waged wars against the Muslims. So, yes, since the Muslims were not the aggressors, then this was Jihad; "Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)"
  #6  
07-04-2008
   Ibrahim Al Copti
Ibrahim Al Copti Ibrahim Al Copti
Moderator
 
: May 2005
: 2,143
Ibrahim Al Copti is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad

Dear "no way"
hope u are doing fine !!

please my dear, u need to pay more attention to the title of the subject

first it speaks about "history of" not "reasons for" Jihad
So, u really don't need to explain out from the Quran the meaning of Jihad , but u need to expain Muhammad behavior, deeds, raids, killing and so forth

secod, the subject is about Jihad, which happened to be a Muslim term not mentioned anywhere in the whole bible

So don't project you Muslim ideas to the texts of the bible

for example this one
:
"All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman. (From the NIV Bible, 2 Chronicles 15:13)"
because if u just happen to read the whole text, u will notice that this was not YHWH's order

:
At that time they sacrificed to the LORD seven hundred head of cattle and seven thousand sheep and goats from the plunder they had brought back. 12 They entered into a covenant to seek the LORD, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul. 13 All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...=15&version=31
so, simply put, the people were trying to fix their old misdeeds by showing honesty to the extremes

and as u will also notice that these were not acts of Jihad against other nations . this was a decision made by Israelis against their own people

so, I will simply ignore the rest of your misunderstanding of our bible's text an
the rest of your reply concerning the Quran, I will go over it and get back to u

God bless
__________________
( 8: 32)


(2)
  #7  
08-04-2008
   Ibrahim Al Copti
Ibrahim Al Copti Ibrahim Al Copti
Moderator
 
: May 2005
: 2,143
Ibrahim Al Copti is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad

Dear "no way"
back to the main subject

you said

:
Christians often refer to Islam as a terrorist religion,
Indeed it is

:
One simple Question: Did the disbelievers in the land of Palestine during the times of Moses start any war with the Hebrews who ORIGINALLY came from Egypt?? Absolutely Not!
Absolutely it was their land
they originally lived in the land of Palestine before going to Egypt (read Genesis 46)
They came down to Egypt because of the famine



:
Also, according to the Talmud's historical elaborations on Numbers 31:17-18 above, Moses gave direct orders for his men to have SEXUAL INTERCOURSE with every VIRGIN GIRLS who was AT LEAST 3 YEARS OLD:

"....The Tannatic Midrash Sifre to Numbers in 157 comments on the above quoted commandment of MOSES to kill the Midianite women as well as the male children...."

"....According to the Tannate Rabbis, MOSES therefore had ordered the Israelites to kill all women older than three years and a day, because they were "suitable for having sexual relations." [138]...."

"Said Rabbi Joseph, "Come and take note: A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse....."

"A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse. "A girl three years old may be betrothed through an act of sexual intercourse," the words of R. Meir. And sages say, "Three years and one day old."....."
Absurd, what does this have to do with Islamic Jihad ?
Is there really written in the Talmud? .. how about the Mishnah ?
which book?
Is the Talmud a Christian book?
Is the Talmud an inspired book?
How does it relate to Christianity, is it part of the Old Testament that or the Tanakh that we believe in?



:
Noble Verse 24:33 " . But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is God, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them),"
Here I have a question, why Allah would be forgiving to whoever compels his slave girls to prostitution?
Of course the text does not say: (to them)

:

"Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: For thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance. (The Noble Quran, 16:125)"

But when Muslims do commit killing, such as what happened on 9/11, then Hell breaks loose and everyone becomes peaceful and a preacher, and Islam is the only evil thing out there.
So you are blaming the victims for crying out and telling the truth.?

Were the attackers in 9/11 misguided or true Muslims?

:
Jihad means struggling in the name of Allah Almighty. Jihad doesn't always mean a war or battle.
This does not cancel the truth about the physical part of the Jihad. Does it?

:
Any mean for spreading Islam and the Truth, or to fight for what is right and condemn what is wrong (such as fighting the bad and helping the oppressed.
You nailed it, jihad is to spread Islam. Thank u mate
What if the Islam was itself the oppressor, that forced an evil religion on peaceful people ?

:
Noble Quran about being peaceful to ordinary and peaceful non-Muslims, and being very hostile to the hostile enemy:
Why then they invaded my country (Egypt) in the 7th century AD?
Were the Egyptians hostile ?

:
Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. (The Noble Quran, 2:190)
This was one of the middle stages of Jihad
So what are the stages of Jihad according to Muslim fiqh and Law

Let us see (this taken from Fiqh Al Jihad = Jihad Discipline by Shialk Yaser Borhami)
http://mechristian.files.wordpress.c...d-displine.doc
:
:-
: :  ]:77[.
 :" : " .
:   ]:77 [.
- - : :  ]:39[ . .
: .
: : :  ]:190[ .
: :   ]:36[ :   ]:5[ :   ]:29[ :   ]:39[.

.
:" " [ ] . . .
Jihad in the life of Muhammad was in four stages
The Meccan stage (in Mecca):
During this time and for 15 years Muhammad was so peaceful and wrote a peaceful Quran like

I (Muhammad) am but a plain warner. (67:2; passim)

We have not sent thee (Muhammad) as a warden over them. (17:54)
So proclaim that which thou art commanded, and withdraw from the idolaters. (15:94; cf. 15:94-99)
And bear with patience what they utter, and part from them with a fair leave taking. (73:10)
... And to be of those who believe and exhort one another to perseverance and exhort one another to pity! (90:17)
Call unto the way of the Lord... and reason with them in a better way.... Grieve not for them and be not in distress because of that which they devise. (16:125-127)
Repel evil with that which is better. (23:96)

All of the above passages are Meccan passages, i.e., passages Muhammad received while he proclaimed Islam in Mecca. As long as he remained in Mecca, he responded to his enemies peacefully and with restraint

The second stage was the early Medina time
In A.D. 622 Muhammad moved from his home in Mecca to Medina, where Arab tribes had invited him to reside and where they became members of the new Islamic movement. So important is this event in Islamic history it is called the hijrah (emigration)
During this early mid stage, Muslims were permitted to fight if they want to (with no obligation)
Quran (22: 39): Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed, and most surely Allah is well able to assist them.

Then the third stage, when Muslims were ordered (as an obligation) to fight back the infidels if they fought them the defensive Jihad
Quran (2: 190): And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.

Then the final product of Muhammad came with the 4th stage (late in Medina time), which is the offensive Jihad. Muslims were ordered to fight all non-believers

Quran 9: 36 and fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

Quran 9: 5 So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate (basically become Muslims), leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Quran 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.

Quran 8: 39 And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah; but if they desist, then surely Allah sees what they do.

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

Quran 47: 4 So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.

The Muhammad also said it frankly

:
- 1399- - - - - - - - - - . . 1457 6924 7284 - 10666 14118
"I was ordered to fight people until they say La ilaha illa Allah (no God but Allah) , and if they say it, then they protect their blood and their property from me except for its dues, and Allah, The Almighty, The Supreme, will judge them."

Also the well known Egyptian scholar, Sayyid Qutb, notes the four stages in the development (Sayyid Qutb, Milestones, Revised Edition, especially ch. 4, Jihaad in the Cause of God)

That settles the Jihad Issue
The final (4th) version of Jihad is the legitimate one, other stages were abrogated
All peaceful Quranic (Meccan) verses are cancelled by the newer ones

This a quick example of how abrogation works
Quran 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.

Muslim scholars says:

:
This verse abrogated all forgiving verses concerning Christian and Jews
http://www.altafsir.com/Eidah_AlQura...arch=yes&img=G
.
This Muslim website had a good enlightenment on the subject

:
I have a question about offensive Jihad. Does it mean that we are to attack even those non-Muslims which don't do anything against Islam just because we have to propagate Islam?

http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=12128

if a country doesn't allow the propagation of Islam to its inhabitants in a suitable manner or creates hindrances to this, then the Muslim ruler would be justifying in waging Jihad against this country, so that the message of Islam can reach its inhabitants, thus saving them from the Fire of Jahannum. If the Kuffaar allow us to spread Islam peacefully, then we would not wage Jihad against them.

No further comments needed

fighting the global war against all humans is part of the Islamic theology

God bless u to see the truth ++
__________________
( 8: 32)


(2)

Ibrahim Al Copti 08-04-2008 02:19 AM
  #8  
08-04-2008
No Where To Run No Where To Run
Registered User
 
: Apr 2008
: 32
No Where To Run is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad

dear Ibrahim Al-Salamu Alaykom Wa Rahmatoo Allah wa Barakatoh
how you doing today?
you said
fighting the global war against all humans is part of the Islamic theology

Dear Ibrahim

Islam has the highest morals and believes with all their means. Islam is all about declaring that there is no God but only one Allah and Mohammad is the Prophet of Allah. Islam tied and gathered the Justice that is in (Torah) and Judaism, and the Mercy and Love in the Bible, that will never meet unless in Islam. Justice and Mercy!

I would recommend you to go and search, you will find that all the books witness Islam. Study the religion of Islam before you judge! And be wise in what you say or think and do not humiliate yourself. Even if you dont believe in God, I would recommend you to rethink about what you believe and look who created the world. Read the scientific books that declares there is no God and you will see the witness in your eyes; that they didnt even prove till now what is the beginning of the creature (the Universe)

At the end, I would like to tell you that I respect you and love you because Allah ask me to do that, and whether you like me as a Muslim or not. I will still follow Allahs orders, and my eyes and aims would be for pleasing Allah not you.

Wa Al-Salamu Alaykom Wa Rahmatoo Allah wa Barakatoh.
  #9  
08-04-2008
   Ibrahim Al Copti
Ibrahim Al Copti Ibrahim Al Copti
Moderator
 
: May 2005
: 2,143
Ibrahim Al Copti is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad


Dear"no way"
I hope u are doing OK

u said
:
I would like to tell you that I respect you and love you because Allah ask me to do that
It is mutual my friend, but unfortunately Allah does not say love your enemies

read this story from Sahih Al Bukhari

:
Volume 3, Book 39, Number 531:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

Umar expelled the Jews and the Christians from Hijaz. When Allah's Apostle had conquered Khaibar, he wanted to expel the Jews from it as its land became the property of Allah, His Apostle, and the Muslims. Allah's Apostle intended to expel the Jews but they requested him to let them stay there on the condition that they would do the labor and get half of the fruits. Allah's Apostle told them, "We will let you stay on thus condition, as long as we wish." So, they (i.e. Jews) kept on living there until 'Umar forced them to go towards Taima' and Ariha'.
In Sahih Muslim

:
Book 037, Number 6668:
Abu Burda reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: There would come people amongst the Muslims on the Day of Resurrection with as heavy sins as a mountain, and Allah would forgive them and He would place in their stead the Jews and the Christians. (As far as I think), Abu Raub said: I do not know as to who is in doubt. Abu Burda said: I narrated it to 'Umar b. 'Abd al-'Aziz, whereupon he said: Was it your father who narrated it to you from Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him)? I said: Yes.
And In Sahih Muslim too
:
Book 026, Number 5389:
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Do not greet the Jews and the Christians before they greet you and when you meet any one of them on the roads force him to go to the narrowest part of it.
also in Shaih Muslim

:
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.

And in Muwtta Malik
:
Book 45, Number 45.5.17:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Ismail ibn Abi Hakim that he heard Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz say, "One of the last things that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said was, 'May Allah fight the jews and the christians. They took the graves of their Prophets as places of prostration . Two deens (religions) shall not co-exist in the land of the Arabs.' "

I have no comments

God Bless
__________________
( 8: 32)


(2)
  #10  
08-04-2008
   Ibrahim Al Copti
Ibrahim Al Copti Ibrahim Al Copti
Moderator
 
: May 2005
: 2,143
Ibrahim Al Copti is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad

How the Jihad ravaged Christian Byzantium for 800 years, and how valiantly the Byzantine Christians held back the Arab and Turkish hordes, saving Europe from Islam

While the Zoroastrian Persians were defeated and were being subjugated, the Muslim hordes turned on their other neighbor the Christian Byzantines. The two armies met at the battlefield of Heiromyak.

Lessons from the Battle of Heiromyak (Al Yarmuk)

At the Battle of the Yarmuk (river), between the Muslim Arabs and the Byzantines, the Muslim Arabs were losing the battle in the initial stages. When the victory seemed certain for the Byzantines, the Muslims took recourse to subterfuge, when they realized that victory could not come to them through straight warfare, they used a contingent of women to attack the Byzantine troops who charged at the Byzantine army shrieking and hollering. This contingent was led by Hind Bint Utbah, the wife of Abu Sufyan, who was the chieftain of Mecca. Not used to facing ladies as an adversary, the Byzantines were at a loss to respond and the confused Byzantine generals ordered their troops not to molest the women and to withdraw.



The Muslims have used subterfuge and ruthless cruelty to win wars against all adversaries. At the battle of Yarmuk (Heiromyak) when the warriors of the Holy Cross began prevailing over those of the Crescent, the Muslims resorted to subterfuge. One of the Arab-Muslim generals Khalid-ibn-Walid disguised himself as a woman in a hijab, embraced the Byzantine General Harbees and crushed his ribs, thus murdering him using deceit. With their General dead, the Byzantine army became leaderless, and the fortunes of the battle started going in favor of the Muslim Arabs. So much for allah giving the Muslims victory in war!

When the Arab Muslims saw that this tactic using women as a deceptive front was working, they sent in the main contingent of Arab men dressed as women in hijabs (the black tent like gown worn by Muslim women) to charge at the Byzantines, and in the process one of the Arab generals Khalid-ibn-Walid disguised as a woman in a hijab, embraced the Byzantine General Harbees and crushed his ribs, thus killing him. With their general dead, the Byzantine army became leaderless, and the fortunes of the battle started going in favor of the Muslim Arabs. This is how the tricky and insidious Muslims won the battle of Yarmuk. Another example of Allah intervening to give the Muslims victory in war (sic)!


The Byzantine Christian city of Caesarea had walls that were sixteen feet high with many turrets and had withstood the Arab Muslim siege of more than eight months, so the Muslims used this devious way to infiltrate the city and once inside they ruthlessly slaughtered its determined inhabitants to the last man, except for a few who managed to reach the port and board the ships and flee to safety. So much for allah giving them victory. This proves that Arab Muslims can stoop to any depth to gain a victory which they allege some allah helps them.

With their guileful victory at Heiromyak, the Muslim wasted no time in fanning out in to the now defenseless Syria, and started storming one town after another making their way first to Jerusalem and then onwards to Bethlehem, Nazareth, Tiberias, Cana, Tyre, Sidon Damascus to the Byzantine mercantile capital in the Levant the metropolis of Caesarea. In those days Caesarea was a strongly fortified by twins tier of walls with innumerable turrets. These had been built to stave of the repeated Persian (Sassanid) assaults that were launched at it. Because of the strong battlements, the Sassanids failed to take Caesarea, but that could not prevent the lustful eyes of the Muslims from falling on this prosperous city.

Lessons from the Battles of Caesarea, Babylon (a city in Byzantine Egypt), and Alexandria

When the Muslims reached Caesarea, they tried to take the city by storm, but were repulsed. They set down to a lengthy siege, but that too proved ineffective. Caesarea, which was then a bustling city of more than 300 busy streets. It was a port city and so the siege could not be complete on the sea facing side of the city, which continued to receive supplies and reinforcements from Constantinople. Here the Arab Muslims who had besieged the city had observed that some men furtively made their way from the city walls during some nights. The Muslims waylaid these men and to their delight they turned out to be Bedouins who although non-Muslims were of the same ethnic stock as the Muslim Arabs.

These Bedouins were in the employ of the Byzantines had as sweepers at Caesarea. Now as captives in the hands of their Arab compatriots, they did not take long to crack and fall prey to the threats and bribes of their Arab compatriots. These sweepers decided to betray their Byzantine masters and showed the Arab Muslim besiegers the way to infiltrate into Caesarea through its sewers.

The Byzantine Christian city of Caesarea had walls that were sixteen feet high with many turrets and had withstood the Arab Muslim siege for more than eight months, so the Muslims used this devious way to infiltrate the city and once inside they ruthlessly slaughtered its determined inhabitants to the last man, except for a few who managed to reach the port and board the ships and flee to safety. So much for allah giving them victory. This proves that Arab Muslims can stoop to any depth to gain a victory which they allege some allah helps them.



And once the Muslim hordes stormed the city of Caesarea, they not just slaughtered all soldiers on whom they could lay their hands, but decapitated all the males and to instill terror in the minds of the womenfolk, the Muslims tore open the abdomens of the Byzantine soldiers and ripped out their hearts, and other victuals and paraded them through the streets that had been a few days before being so brutalized had been a panorama of wealth and prosperity.

This savagery so horrified the Byzantine Christians that it came to haunt Christendom for many centuries and was ossified in our memory. When the Crusader counterattack rolled back the Muslim invaders from the eleventh century (1096- 1291 C.E.), the crusaders paid back the Muslims in their own coin and perhaps more so when they roasted the captured Muslims and devoured them whenever the crusader army ran short of food supplies.

Only with the crusades, did the pigeons of Muslim barbarity come home to roost, as they would once again when the Mongols sacked and slaughtered the entire city of Baghdad, and as it would once again as todays war on terror reaches its predictable zenith when we will see the wholesale vaporization of the Muslim population across the Middle East and the Muslim world. A scenario too horrendous to contemplate today, but which will soon come to pass, within one generation as our final response, after the Jihadis launch their first (and hopefully their last) nuclear terror attack against us in the West.

Why and how Christian Byzantine survived for eight centuries, while Zoroastrian Persia fell to the Muslims in seventeen years

These initial Muslim attacks against Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Nazareth, Tiberias, Cana, Tyre, Sidon Damascus and Caesarea were fierce and bloodied, but even they could not overwhelm Constantinople, although the city was besieged by the Muslims twice in the 7th century. But the empire held its own by locking the Muslims at the Cilician gates in South Eastern Turkey.

After their initial successful attacks in the 7th century against Bethlehem, Nazareth, Damascus up to the Byzantine mercantile capital in the Levant the metropolis of Caesarea, the Muslim Arabs could advance no further on land against Byzantium as the Byzantines held off the Muslims at the Cilician gates in South Eastern Turkey. So the Muslims took the sea route using which they overwhelmed the island of Rhodes and demolished the colossus of Rhodes (the huge statue that the Greeks had erected there in ancient times. In doing this the Jihadis of the 7th century were laying down a precedent for their modern-day counterparts, the Taliban, who in a similar vandalizing frenzy destroyed the Bamiyan Buddhas).

The Muslim Arabs twice besieged Constantinople in 674 and 717, but the city was relived of the Arab siege by the skillful use of a new weapon called Greek Fire which the Byzantines used in both naval and land warfare. The Arabs lacked a strong navy and these two factors their naval strength and the new weapon Greek Fire gave the Byzantines a series of victories over the infidel Saracens for the next four centuries from 640 till 1071.

Turks the new threat to Christendom

But after holding off the Muslim Arab hordes at the Cilician Gates for four hundred years, the Empire received an unexpected shock when the Seljuk Turks who were then recent converts to Islam, under their chieftain Alp Arslan thrust into Byzantine through its backdoor in Armenia when they defeated the Byzantines at the battle of Manzikert.

These newly converted Turkish Muslims could have overwhelmed Constantinople in 1071 itself, had it not been for the Crusaders who marched through Constantinople into the Middle East at the end of the eleventh century to temporarily roll back the Turkish threat and liberate the Holy Land from the Saracens (infidel Muslims). But the battle of Manzikert held a new fearsome reality. After four centuries of Muslim-Christian warfare, the Arabs had been stemmed, but in the Turks, Christendom faced a new existential threat. A threat that was to work its way through the next nine centuries from 1071 up to 1918 and bedevil Eastern Europe.

We shall treat the Crusades the valiant counter-attack by the Christians of Europe against the Muslims in a separate chapter. Suffice it to note here that the Crusades that started in 1096 and went on till 1291, gave a last breath of life to the failing Byzantine Empire. Thus while the Zoroastrian Sassanian empire fell within a mere seventeen years from 634 to 651, the Christian Byzantine Empire that had been attacked at the same time, fought back for the next eight centuries till this last Christian Empire in Asia finally succumbed to the Muslims when the Uthman (Ottoman) Turks stormed its capital Constantinople in 1453.

Lessons from the two Arab Sieges of Constantinople (674-678 and 717-718 C.E.)

After their initial victories at the Battle of the Yarmuk river, the Arabs diverted their focus on attacking Sassanid Persia for a brief period from 634 to 651. When the Arabs subjugated Persia

To circumvent this stalemate, the Arabs built a makeshift fleet and attacked Constantinople, the Byzantine capital from the sea and besieged it. The Arabs laid the first siege in 674. This siege lasted for four years till 678. But this siege was unsuccessful and the Arabs had to withdraw with many fatalities. They laid a second siege in 717 which lasted for one year till 718 but this time too they were unsuccessful.

During the second Muslim Arab siege of Constantinople, too the Arabs could not make any headway. And the Byzantines again defeated the besieging Arabs with the use of a superior weapon named Greek Fire. This was a highly combustible liquid that caused painful burning to those that it struck. This was comparable to modern-day napalm. The Byzantines used this weapon in large quantity on the besieging Arabs in both the sieges of 674-678 and 717-718. The Arabs tried hard to learn the secret of making of the Greek Fire, but they did not succeed and had to succumb in large numbers to this new weapon used skillfully by the Byzantines.

The effect of the Greek Fire can be gauged by the fact that out of the more than three hundred thousand Arabs who attacked Constantinople, only about twenty thousand returned. All the others had been consigned to hell by Greek Fire.

This is a lesson for the Americans today, who have superior fire power over the Jihadis. It is futile to engage the ferocious and madly motivated Jihadis in hand-to-hand combat. We need to wipe out the Jihadis in millions, using neutron and nuclear weapons. Only this can secure the civilized world a victory by decimating the beastly Jihadis, in the same way as the Byzantines decimated the attacking Arab Muslims in their thousands and saved not just Constantinople, but Europe itself from the first attack of Islam in the seventh and eight centuries.

At the battle of Manzikert, the Muslim Seljuk Turks attacked the Byzantines at noon and then feigned a retreat by retreating to higher ground to catch the Byzantine army in the valley from where the Turkish Archers picked off the Byzantine troops at will. But the Byzantines kept up the attack, and by sunset the Battle was still undecided. Romanus, the Byzantine emperor, decided to retire to his camps, after the Turks sounded the bugle, heralding the end of the days hostilities, as was the Turkish custom to do so to announce the beginning and end of a days battle. But the Turks had decided on subterfuge to ensnare the Byzantines who trusted the age old Turkish custom. Once the Byzantine army began disengaging and withdrawing to its camp, the Turks attacked from the rear after an encircling cavalry advance. The Byzantine army was caught between two pincers of attack and by midnight, their fate was sealed with the capture of the Byzantine emperor Romanus by Alp Arslan the chieftain of the Seljuk Turks.

he baton of Jihad passes to the Seljuk Turks

The Arab Jihad had earlier lost its steam when it met another serious defeat a thousand miles away at Poiters in 732 at the hands of the Franks. Arab attacks on Europe ended by the middle of the eight century, when the internecine quarrels between different parts of the Caliphate broke out, some of which were along Shia-Sunni lines. The next impetus for the Jihad was in the eleventh century, when the baton of Jihad passed to the Seljuk Turks.

The misfortune of the victims of Islam, victimizing other non-Muslims after their conversion

The Seljuk Turks who were following a religion based on nature worship, with Zoroastrian overtones, had been subjected to Islamization by the Islamized Persians between 651 and 751. The attacks on them were led by many Persian- Zoroastrian converts to Islam. The notable among these attackers was one who had assumed the name Abu Muslim. He was born to Zoroastrian parents, but had discarded his ancestral faith and embraced Islam. His conversion apparently was not whole-hearted and he nursed a desire for revenge against the Muslim occupiers of Persia.

He plotted his way to overthrow the Muslim rulers by pretending to embrace Islam, attacking the non-Muslim Turks and then when he had become powerful enough he plotted to overthrow the Abbasid Caliphate at Baghdad. He succeeded in his first objective of defeating the pagan Turks and converting them forcibly to Islam, but he was betrayed by his confidants and his hidden motives were found out by the Caliph, who tricked him into captivity and tortured him to death.

The point here is that the converted Zoroastrians, forced Islam on the pagan Turks, who in turn attacked Byzantine after embracing Islam. So the bloodied mentality of Islam kept on the aggressive march of Islam although its leaders changed from the Arabs, who originally had been converted by force, to the Zoroastrian Persians, to the pagan Turks.

The Battle of Manzikert between the Byzantines and the Seljuk Turks led to the Islamization of South Armenia and its incorporation into Turkey

These new converts to Islam, merged their natural tribal ferocity, with the fanaticism of Islam. This was a potent and fearsome combination. After the Arabs had failed to break the Cilician Gates, or to take Constantinople by storm, the baton of the Jihadi aggression passed to the Seljuk Turks, who steadily and successfully began to corrode at the north eastern fringes of the Byzantine Empire in Armenia.

The Seljuk Turks began harassing the Christian population of Armenia. The tyranny of the Turks on the Armenians took many bloody turns in the next millennium, and whenever possible, the Turks indulged in the wholesale slaughter of the Armenian Christian male population while the womenfolk were made captives and marched off to be held as concubines in the Turkish seraglios and harems.

This area of the Caucasus (or Kavkaz) has been the frontier of a clash of civilizations since those days till today. Beslan in Russian Ossetia where the school kids were massacred is not far from Manzikert, which was the first major site of the Muslim-Christian clash in 1071.


After their victory at Manzikert, the Seljuk Turks faced no more resistance from the Byzantines to infiltration into the hitherto Christian Anatolia, and in a few decades they could wrest control of Anatolia from the Byzantines, and approach Constantinople from the Asian side of the Bosporus. They were now also in charge of the routes of the Christian pilgrims through Anatolia to the Holy Land whose pilgrimages they began harassing. As this harassment increased the stories of their depredations began reaching European courts along with the continuous pleas of the Byzantine emperors which became more shrill after Manzikert for succor from Western Europe to battle the Muslim infidels, the seeds for a re-conquest of the Holy Land and the relief of the beleaguered Byzantine empire were sown. The Crusades that began in 1096 (and continued till 1291) were indirectly a fallout of the Battle of Manzikert in 1071.

At the battle of Manzikert, the Byzantine emperor who presided over the fortunes (rather misfortunes) of the Empire was Romanus IV Diogenes. He ascended the throne in 1068. As usual, there were many power cliques at the Byzantine court. This was accentuated by the fact that over the four hundred years from 640 to 1068, the Byzantines had reinforced their army by inducting mercenaries from the Franks, the Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Bulgars, Avars and other Christianized tribal communities in addition to the Greeks and Latins who were always a strong lobby at Constantinople.

These mercenaries served to stave off Arab attacks, but in times of relative peace they also acted as powerful lobbies in the internal politics of Byzantine. To counter balance them, some Byzantine emperors had included contingents from the Seljuk Turks, (who had then recently embraced Islam) to serve as auxiliaries to the Byzantine army. This decision was to prove disastrous at Manzikert.

The betrayal of the Turkish contingents led to the defeat at Manzikert

Romulus split his army into two parts to catch the Seljuks in a pincer move. He led one pincer and the other was led by Joseph Tarchaniotes who was a person of Turkish extraction, and had secretly converted to Islam, the faith embraced by most of his people - the Seljuk Turks. Tarchaniotes commanded the largest contingent of mercenaries, the Turkish Cumans.

While Romanus proceed to subdue one border town after another, that had been occupied by the Seljuk Turks, culminating with the fortress of Manzikert. The Seljuk Turkish chieftain Alp Arslan camped near Manzikert. Romanus awaited his Turkish General to arrive from behind the Turkish camp to overwhelm Alp Arslan. But the traitor Turkish general of the Byzantine army Joseph Tarchaniotes secretly opened parleys with the enemy and defected to the Turkish adversary along with his contingent, and stabbed Romanus in the back.

The battle of Manzikert saw the history of defection of a Muslim contingent and had once again proved that a Muslim soldier can never be loyal to a non-Muslim commander. Something which we Americans and other Westerners should learn from.

The battle of Manzikert saw a repeat of the history of defection of a Muslim contingent, an act that was seen at the Battle of Qadissiyah between the Sassanids and the Arab Muslims, this had once again proved that a Muslim soldier can never be loyal to a non-Muslim commander. Thus the history of defection of a Muslim contingent that was seen at the Battle of Qadissiyah between the Sassanids and the Arab Muslims had once again proved that a Muslim soldier can never be loyal to a non-Muslim master.

We hope that our generals at the Pantagon are reading this when they keep Muslim troops in as Marines and Muslim Clerics (like that traitor James Yee) to fulfill the spiritual (sic) needs of the treasonable Muslim marines. Many such clerics and the marines have betrayed Americans when on duty at Guantanamo and in Kuwait. It is not too late for us to learn and relieve our fighting forces of these treasonable Muslim marines.

to be continued
__________________
( 8: 32)


(2)
  #11  
09-04-2008
   Ibrahim Al Copti
Ibrahim Al Copti Ibrahim Al Copti
Moderator
 
: May 2005
: 2,143
Ibrahim Al Copti is on a distinguished road
: History of Jihad



After innumerable sacrifices, the Crusades rolled back the Muslim aggressors back to its pre-Muslim limit and liberated occupied Antioch, Damascus, Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Nazareth. Which technically passed again into the hands of the Byzantines (although they had little more than formal suzerainty over these areas which were under the tumultuous rule of the truculent Crusaders). But unfortunately, the tide of the Crusades began to be rolled back in 1184 by Saleh-ud-din (Saladin the Accursed) who was an ally of the Turks. But the Crusaders clung on to the coastal towns till 1291, till the Turks under a new Turkish dynasty named Uthman (or Ottoman) gradually pushed their frontiers back to the walls of Constantinople by the middle of the 14th century.

In spite of this defection by an important general of his army to the enemy camp, Romanus continued to march to battle against heavy odds and joined battle at the fortress of Manzikert. Turkish double-cross leads to defeat at the battle of Manzikert

At the battle of Manzikert, the Muslim Seljuk Turks attacked the Byzantines at noon and then feigned a retreat and withdrew to higher ground to catch the Byzantine army in the valley by surprise. From higher ground the Turkish Archers picked off the Byzantine troops at will. But the Byzantines kept up the attack, and by sunset the Battle was still undecided. But when this ruse failed, the Turks tried another one.

The Turks had an ancient custom of sounding a bugle, heralding the beginning and end of a days hostilities. After the bugle was sounded, there was to be no fighting. On that day too at sunset, the Turks sounded the bugle and the Byzantine presumed that the Turks would cease battle as they in fact did. In response, Romanus decided to retire his army to his camps, after the Turks stopped hostilities and began withdrawing.

But the Turks had decided on subterfuge to ensnare the Byzantines who trusted the age old Turkish custom. Once the Byzantine army began disengaging and withdrawing to its camp, the Turks did a surreptitious encircling cavalry advance and attacked the astonished Byzantines from the rear. The Byzantine army was caught between two attacks and my midnight, their fate was sealed with the capture of their emperor Romanus by the Turkish chieftain Alp Arslan.

After the deception on the battlefield, Turks indulged in deception in diplomacy too

Having the Byzantine emperor himself as a captive, the Turkish chieftain treated him decorously and entertained him as a royal guest. With this deception, Alp Arslan promised to set Romanus free for only a withdrawal by the Byzanines to the pre-war lines. Arslan did not even ask for the surrender of the Fortress of Manzikert. With the surprisingly lax terms, Romanus was lulled into a false sense of security from his friendly captor.




The Seljuk Turks were now in charge of the routes of the Christian pilgrims through Anatolia to the Holy Land whom the Turks began to harass. As this harassment increased the stories of their depredations began reaching European courts along with the pleas of the Byzantine emperors which became more shrill after Manzikert for succor from Western Europe to battle the Muslim infidels. Thus the seeds for a re-conquest of the Holy Land and the relief of the beleaguered Byzantine empire were sown. The Crusades that began in 1096 (and continued till 1291) were indirectly a fallout of the Battle of Manzikert in 1071.

The terms of the treaty which the Turks imposed on the Byzantines included that Romanus order the Byzantine army to withdraw from the whole of Anatolia up to Constantinople, in return for a promise from Alp Arslan that the Seljuk Turks would not harass the Christian population in Armenia who were under Byzantine rule.

For Romanus who was then a captive, there was no option but to accept these terms, as a condition to regain his freedom. Romanus also needed his forces to tackle the internal rivalries at Constantinople while feeling assured that Alp Arslan would not pose a threat to his eastern frontier.

This treaty sealed the fate of the Byzantine presence in Anatolia, which was till then a part of Southern Armenia but henceforth was to become the domain of the Turks to be known as Turkestan (land of the Turks) or Turkey. The Seljuk Turks faced no more resistance to infiltration into the hitherto Christian Anatolia, and in a few decades they could wrest control of Anatolia from the Byzantines, and approach the Constantinople from the Asian side of the Bosporus.

The Crusades were a belated Christian response to Muslim aggression that began in 634 with the battled of Yarmuk

The Seljuk Turks were now in charge of the routes of the Christian pilgrims through Anatolia to the Holy Land. As this harassment increased the stories of their depredations began reaching European courts along with the pleas of the Byzantine emperors which became more shrill after Manzikert for succor from Western Europe to battle the Muslim infidels. The seeds for a re-conquest of the Holy Land and the relief of the beleaguered Byzantine empire were sown. The Crusades that began in 1096 (and continued till 1291) were indirectly a fallout of the Battle of Manzikert in 1071.

Lessons from the battle of Manzikert and the fall of Constantinople (1453)
After innumerable sacrifices, the Crusades rolled back the Muslim frontier back to its pre-Muslim limit with the liberation of Antioch, Damascus, Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Nazareth from four centuries of Muslim occupation (640 to 1097). Technically the liberated areas passed again into the hands of the Byzantines (although they had little more than formal suzerainty over these areas which were under the tumultuous rule of the truculent Crusaders). The tide of the Crusades began to be rolled back in 1184 by Saleh-ud-din (Saladin the Accursed) who was a Muslim commander allied to the Turks. But the Crusaders clung on to the coastal towns till 1291, till the Turks under a new Turkish dynasty named Uthman (Ottoman) gradually pushed their frontiers back to the walls of Constantinople by the middle of the 14th century.

The final chapter of the Muslim attack on the Byzantine started with the third Muslim siege of Constantinople (which was the first of its two Turkish sieges, the earlier two being those by Arabs in 674 and 717). This first Turkish siege of Constantinople which began in 1350 was repulsed by the besieged but still spirited Byzantines, but the Turks tried again in 1453, when they finally overwhelmed the city by storm and brought about an end to the Byzantine empire.



The final chapter of the Muslim attack on Christendom started with the third Muslim siege of Constantinople (which was the first of its two Turkish sieges, the earlier two being those by Arabs in 674 and 717). This first Turkish siege of Constantinople which began in 1350 was repulsed by the besieged but still spirited Byzantines, but the Turks tried again in 1453, when they finally overwhelmed the city by storm and brought about an end to the Byzantine empire.

The point is that from their first attacks on Byzantium in 634 at Yarmuk, the Muslims relentlessly attacked the Byzantine empire for a period of eight hundred years. The Muslims faced many defeats at the hands of the Byzantines in this long period. But they never gave up, they kept attacking till, they finally captured the capital city Constantinople in 1453 and the Byzantine power was no more. This has an important lesson for us Americans today. The Muslims never ever give up, till they are done in for. If we want victory and to secure our way of life, we Americans need to keep attacking the Muslims till the Muslims all cease to exist, if not they will keep attacking the USA. There are no soft options in this death struggle with Islam.

Can the modernization of Muslims make them into liberal citizens of a civilized society?

Many malevolent communist wolves disguised in their sheeps clothing who pose as liberals, keep parroting that it is the modernization of Muslims that will make them into liberal citizens of a civilized society(sic)! They advocate providing more funds to the Madrassah (the schools where Islam is taught to young Muslims), so that the Madrassash could buy computers, and other electronic gadgets to expose Muslims to modern technology. Seems fair on the face of it. But this leaves the basic grounding in hate (of the non-Muslims) that Muslim children are bombarded with in the madrassahs.

With the brainwashing they receive through the murderous mentality that the Quran inculcates in Muslims, the addition of modern technology can only transform these hate-driven, revenge seeking kids into more dangerous enemies. They would assemble more deadly bombs, use cellular technology to trigger the bomb blasts, or hack in to the web-compliant systems of sensitive defense installations and worse still assemble a dirty bomb or even a proper nuclear devise.

Educating the Muslims, while keeping their murderous Muslim mentality intact is like giving nuclear claws to a man-eater tiger

Technology increases their capacity to destroy while keeping intact the violent and cruel tendencies built to an instinctive level by the Quran that is thrust on Muslim kids five times a day during ibadat/salat (Muslim congregational prayer) in the Mosques and Madrassahs. With access to technology, they become more effective as Jihadis and can commit mass-murder of non-Muslims using advanced WMD technology instead of using sword-play to behead non-Muslims individually. So educating the Muslims, while keeping their murderous Muslim mentality intact is like giving nuclear claws to a man-eater tiger. A.Q.Khan of Pakistan is a classic case of a nuclear powered man-eater tiger. We have to decide if we want more such nuclear man-eaters so that we can easily end up as the dinner for these man-eaters!


The point is that from their first attacks on Byzantium in 634 at Yarmuk, the Muslims relentlessly attacked the Byzantine empire for a period of eight hundred years. The Muslims faced many defeats at the hands of the Byzantines in this long period. But they never gave up, they kept attacking till, they finally captured the capital city Constantinople in 1453 and Byzantine power was no more. This has an important lesson for us Americans today. The Muslims never ever give up, till they are done in for. So we Americans need to keep attacking the Muslims till the Muslims all cease to exist or give up Islam, if not, they will keep attacking the USA. There are no soft options in this death struggle with Islam.

This much should be enough for us to realize that providing better technology to Muslims, while keeping the murderous mentality of Islam intact is like educating a cannibal with the use of guns. After we do this, the cannibal will be able to hunt us down far more easily and efficiently. He can now use guns (read electronics, nuclear technology) instead of using his clubs spears or swords to do his ghastly acts. So the point is rather than providing more resources and technology to the madrassahs, or to supply Iran with the technology to build a nuclear plant to generate electricity(sic) we need to change the mentality of the cannibal.(read Muslims). And to do this we need to wield the stick (pre-emptive strikes), and not the carrot (appeasement), so that the ass (read Muslims) can be driven away from the path of murder and destruction and be brought to the path of sanity and peace or be made to rest in peace so that the rest of us can pursue peaceful lives.
__________________
( 8: 32)


(2)

« | »

: 1 (0 1 )
 

You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

HTML



The art of Jihad in Islam El-Basha English 3 05-08-2009 06:05 AM
Don't Know Much About History : Everything You Need to Know About American History bu youssif samuel English 0 01-07-2005 11:41 PM
The Modern Middle East: A Political History Since the First World War youssif samuel English 0 16-05-2005 06:10 AM
slam In The Digital Age : E-Jihad, Online Fatwas and Cyber Islamic youssif samuel English 1 13-01-2005 10:09 PM


. 10:53 PM.

- - -

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.