Date: November 18th 2008

From: rakhalsaha@yahoo.com Date: Monday, November 17, 2008


Attachments: text/html(344K), TERROR IN ISLAM.doc(328K), The Games Muslims play.doc(93K),


Terror of Islam

(Warning: This page contains extremely graphic and disturbing images of the recent Beersheba bus bombings, the suicide bombing in Moscow, the terrorist acts against Russian aircraft, the Beslan Russia school atrocities, and the Nepalese beheadings in Iraq. The images are set along side excerpts from author CRAIG WINN’S Prophet of Doom: Islam's Terrorist Dogma in Muhammad's Own Words.)
What kind of people would conceive and perpetrate a scheme that would lead to the burning, mutilation and death of 350 young children as was done in the school this week in Russia? What dogma was responsible for motivating Islamic women earlier this week to strap bombs to their bodies and board two Russian aircraft filled with passengers for the purpose of blowing them up and killing everyone?
What doctrine was professed by the suicide bombers who shouted “Allahu Akbar” before they murdered 20 Jews this week in Beersheba, Israel? Was it the same religion professed by the Muslims who decapitated a Nepalese worker in Iraq, and blew out the brains of a dozen more, while shouting verses from the Qur’an? Could Islam be the reason the Islamic cleric in Iraq motivated his Jihadist militia to torture, rape and desecrate Iraqis who wouldn’t join in the terrorist raids, piling hundreds of mutilated and naked bodies behind a mosque?
When Osama bin Laden praised Allah and Islam for the success of the 9/11 terrorist attack and said “I am following in Muhammad’s footsteps,” do you think that he might have been telling us something important? Could it have been a confession? Since the first bombing of the World Trade Center in ’93 was perpetrated by Shiek Ar-Rahman, the world’s foremost authority on the Qur’an, might we assume that Islam’s scriptures condone terror? Are these vicious attacks perpetrated in the name of Islam and Allah unrelated? Are they just the misguided acts of random people, or do those we call terrorists, rebels, and insurgents have something in common—Islam perhaps?
Since the answer is so obvious, why is it that our media and politicians are more worried about not offending the murders, and calling them what they are, “Muslims,” than they are with protecting the lives of Islam’s next victims? How is it that we are at war with a tactic, rather than with the religion that inspires its followers to use the tactic? Declaring war on terror is like declaring war on drugs rather than understanding and condemning the reason people sell and use drugs.
The most important question is: how many innocent people are going to die at the hand of Islam before we hold Islam accountable? Good Muslims murdered 3,000 American’s on 9-11, but that wasn’t sufficient. Muslims murdered 3 million people in the Sudan, so even that’s not enough. When Muslims deploy nuclear bombs and radiological dispersion devices in America’s largest cities, do you think our politicians and media will identify the perpetrators by name or by tactic?
I have some bad news. I know the answer. Our politicians and our media are not going to change—they are not going to tell or report the truth—because we are not willing to hold them accountable. As a result, good Muslims will continue to follow Muhammad’s example and Allah’s orders. They will continue to murder and mutilated, fight and terrorize. They will destroy America just as they have destroyed themselves.
For those who have been deceived into believing that “the terrorists have hijacked their religion” rather than their religion corrupting them, you need to read Prophet of Doom—the best documented and most comprehensive, contextual, and chronological presentation of Muhammad’s creation of Islam ever written. With so much at stake, the lives of millions of innocent people, it’s odd that I would have to encourage you to face reality and to come to grips with why Muslims are killing us. And recognizing that most who read this photo essay will be too preoccupied with other things to learn the truth, I’ll tempt you into reading with excerpts from the book which could save your nation and your life.
The two stories that you are about to read are derived from Muhammad’s Sira, or Biography, Islam’s Ta’rikh, or History, and the Muslim Hadith, or Reports that were recited during Islam’s formation. They paint a horrible picture, almost too revolting for words. But they are Islam—fundamental and uncorrupted Islam. These stories epitomize the lessons Allah taught in the Qur’an’s 8th surah called “The Spoils of War.”
First the surah, then the stories: Muhammad claims his god said some things you’d expect to read in Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Each of the following quotes is from the “Spoils of War” surah. It explains why Muslims are willing to kill to achieve their monopoly.
Qur’an 008.001 “They ask you about the benefits of capturing the spoils of war. Tell them: ‘The benefits belong to Allah and to His Messenger.’ So fulfil your duty to Allah and the Prophet.” Qur’an 008.005 “Your Lord sent you from your homes to fight for the true cause.” Qur’an 008.007 “Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: ‘Wipe the infidels out to the last.’” Qur’an 008.012 “I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle. Qur’an 008.015 “Believers, when you meet the unbelievers in battle, do not turn your back on them for any Muslim who retreats will bring the wrath of Allah on himself and will abide in Hell.” Qur’an 008.072 “Those who accepted Islam and left their homes to fight in Allah’s Cause with their possessions and persons, and those who gave them shelter and aided them are your allies. You are only called to protect Muslims who fight.” Qur’an 008.073 “The infidels aid one another. Unle
ss you do the same there will be anarchy in the land. Those who accepted Islam and left their homes to fight in Allah’s Cause are good Muslims.” Qur’an 008.057 “If you meet them in battle, inflict on them such a defeat as would be a lesson for those who come after them, that they may be warned.” Qur’an 008.059 “The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them. They are your enemy and Allah’s enemy.” Qur’an 008.071 “He will give you mastery over them.” Qur’an 008.039 “So, fight them till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam.”
Now, for the first of two stories, both documented from and revealed in the Islamic scriptures:
Darkness was about to descend upon Islam. Ishaq:461 “Just before the noon prayers, Gabriel came to the Apostle wearing a gold turban. He was riding a mule. He said, ‘Have you laid down your wea-pons and stopped fighting,Muham-mad?’ ‘Yes,’ he replied. Gabriel said, ‘The angels have not laid down their arms! I’ve just re-turned from pur-suing the enemy. Allah commands you to march to the Qurayza. I, too, will attack the Jews and shake them out of their homes.’” Angels in turbans, lumbering on donkeys, wielding swords, commanding Arabs to slaughter Jews —it’s quite a picture.
Aisha, the prophet’s child wife, put down her dolls long enough to give us this report: Tabari VIII:29 “Muhammad pitched a round tent over Sa’d [the wounded anti-Semite] in the mosque. He laid down his sword, having just returned from the Trench. Then Gabriel came to him and said: ‘Have you aban-doned the fight? By Allah, the angels have not yet put down their weapons! Go out and fight the Jews!’ So he called for his breastplate and put it back on. Then he went out and the Muslims fol-lowed him.”
I would be re-miss if I did not share Bukhari’s theory on the arrival of the ange-lic tormentors: Bukhari: V5B59N443-8 “When the Prophet returned from the Trench, laid down his arms and took a bath, Gabriel came to him covered in dust. “Why have you laid down your sword? We angels have not set them down yet. It’s time to go out against them.’ The Prophet said, ‘Where to go?’ Gabriel said, ‘This way,’ pointing to-wards the Qurayza. So the Prophet went out to besiege them.” And: Bukhari: V5B59N444 “The dust rose in the streets of Medina as Gabriel’s regiment marched through. The angels joined Allah’s Apostle in attacking the Qurayza Jews.”
Putting terror and piracy ahead of teaching and prophecy: Ishaq:461/Tabari VIII:28 “The Messenger commanded a crier to announce that all should heed and obey. He ordered that none should perform the afternoon prayer until after they reached the Qurayza settlement. The Prophet sent Ali ahead with his war banner against the Jews, and the Muslims hastened to it. Ali advanced toward their homes and heard insulting language from the Jews about Allah’s Messenger. Ali ran back and told the Prophet that the Jews were rascals and that there was no need for him to go near those wicked men. ‘Why?’ Muhammad asked. ‘Have you heard them insult me?’ ‘Yes,’ Ali answered. ‘Had they seen me,’ Allah’s Apostle replied, ‘they would not have said anything of the sort.’”
This next passage is illuminating. The Bible suggests that Lucifer was beautiful. Islam agrees. Ishaq:461/Tabari VIII:28 “Before reaching the Qurayza, Muhammad greeted his Companions. ‘Has anyone passed you?’ he asked. ‘Yes, Prophet,’ they replied. ‘Dihyah ibn Khalifah passed us on a white mule with a brocade covered saddle.’” The tran-slators of Tabari’s History con-firm: “Dihyah was a rich merchant of such beauty, the angel Gabriel is said to have assumed his features. When he arrived in Medina, every woman came out to look at him.” “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘That was Gabriel. He was sent to the Qurayza to shake their homes and terrorize them.’” Billions have been conned into believing that a dust covered, sword wielding terror-ist was God’s messenger to mankind.
War was more important than prayer to Islam’s dark spirit: Tabari VIII:29 “The Holy Prophet (peace be unto him) said, ‘No one should pray the afternoon prayer until they are in the territory of the Qurayza because warfare against the Jews is incumbent upon Muslims.’” Ishaq:461 “The Muslims had been totally occupied with warlike preparations. They refused to pray until they had come upon the Jews in accordance with Muhammad’s order. Allah did not find fault with them in His Book, nor did the Messenger reprimand them for it.” Postponing a prayer so that they could besiege innocent families was so religious of them. They were setting a fine example for terrorists everywhere. And it’s pretty hard to misinterpret this prophetic decree: “Warfare against the Jews is incumbent upon Muslims.”
Demonstrating his deep-seated racial hatred, Muhammad unleashed what we would call hate speech: Tabari VIII:28 “When the Messenger approached the Jews, he said, ‘You brothers of apes! Allah shamed you and cursed you.’” Muhammad’s mouth was as foul as his manners. Bukhari:V5B59N449 “On the day of the Qurayza siege, Allah’s Apostle said to Hassan, ‘Abuse them with your poems, for Gabriel is with you.’” When it came to racial hatred, Islam’s prophet was a full service provider.
Demonstrating the lack of objectivity Islam inspires, those who recorded this Hadith said that the Jews responded sarcastically to Muhammad’s slur. “They said, ‘Abu al-Qasim, you have never been one to act impetuously or violently.’”
Ishaq:461/Tabari VIII:29 “Muhammad besieged them for twenty-five nights. When the siege became too severe, Allah terrorized them. Then they were told to submit to the judgment of Allah’s Messenger.” Muhammad and Allah had become indistinguishable. And that’s because, together with Lucifer, they were now Islam’s Unholy Trinity—a false god, a false prophet, and a demonic spirit. Their personas were one.
Tabari’s Hadith says: “Abu Lubaba gave a sign that it would mean slaughter. So they said, ‘We will submit to the judgment of Sa’d.’” Since Sa’d’s dying wish was to see the Jews massacred, and since he was the most fervent Jew hater in the land, I find this request less than credible.
“The Holy Prophet said, ‘Submit to his judgment.’ So they submitted. The Messenger of Allah sent a donkey with a saddle padded with palm fiber, and he was mounted on it.”
That’s obviously not how it happened, so let’s check the Sira: Ishaq:461 “After the siege exhausted and terrorized them, the Jews felt certain that the Apostle would not leave them until he had exterminated them. So they decided to talk to Ka’b Asad. He said, ‘People of the Jews, you see what has befallen you. I shall propose three alternatives. Take whichever one you please.’ He said, ‘Swear allegiance to this man and accept him; for, by Allah, it has become clear to you that he is a prophet sent from Allah. It is he that you used to find mentioned in your scripture book. Then you will be secure in your lives, your property, your children, and your wives.’” Getting one out of three right wasn’t bad for a Muslim: Muhammad was Allah’s prophet.
However, there is no mention of an Arab prophet in the Hebrew Scriptures, much less of a coming terrorist thug. But consider the gall it took to suggest this delusional alternative to the besieged Jews—especially after what they had endured at the hands of the wannabe “messiah.” And even the Qur’an admits that the Jews had repeatedly rejected Muhammad’s assertions as being preposterous. They had disclaimed his bastardization of their Torah, and they had been repulsed by his warmongering nature and grotesque immorality. Just imagine swearing an oath to a “religious prophet” so that he would not kill you, steal your property, enslave your children, and rape your women. Sure, a Muslim would do it; they’re trained to lie, but not a Jew.
Ishaq:462/Tabari VIII:30 “The Jews said, ‘We will never abandon the Torah or exchange it for the Qur’an.’ Asad said, ‘Since you reject this proposal of mine, then kill your children and your wives and go out to Muhammad and his Companions as men who brandish swords, leaving behind no impediments to worry you. If you die, you shall have left nothing behind; if you win you shall find other women and children.’ The Jews replied, ‘Why would we kill these poor ones? What would be the good of living after them?’” While I don’t believe a word of this, if it were true, it provides a window into the depraved character of the first Muslims as well as to the godly nature of these Jews.
In the third alternative, Asad asked the Jews to violate their Sabbath and attack Muhammad by surprise. It was another ploy. Muslims like to call infidels ungodly when they fight on holy days or in sacred months, yet they do so with glee. And if memory serves me right, in their last major offensive against the Jews in 1974, Muslims launched a surprise attack on Yom Kippur. Tabari VIII:30 “The Jews said, ‘We will not profane our Sabbath.’”
Ishaq:462 “Then the Jews asked Muhammad, ‘Send us Abu Lubaba, one of the Aws,’ for they were confederates, ‘so that we can ask his advice.’ The Prophet complied and the Jews grabbed hold of him. The women and children were crying, so he felt pity for them. They said, ‘Abu, do you think we should submit to Muhammad’s judgment?’ ‘Yes,’ Lubaba said. But he pointed with his hand to his throat, indicating that it would be slaughter. Lubaba later said, ‘As soon as my feet moved, I knew that I had betrayed Allah’s Apostle. Lubaba rushed away and tied himself to a pillar in the mosque. He cried, ‘I will not leave this spot until Allah forgives me for what I’ve done. I betrayed His Apostle.’” This confirms Muhammad had intended to slaughter the Jews from the very beginning. There would be no Islamic peace this time—no surrendering, no being looted and then exiled.
Ishaq:462/Tabari VIII:32 “I heard Allah’s Apostle laughing at daybreak; so I said, ‘Why are you laughing, Prophet? May Allah make you laugh heartily!’ He replied, ‘Lubaba has been forgiven.’” Consider the character of a man who would laugh at such a time. This reminds me of Hitler, who in Mein Kampf said, “I have become incapable of pity.” And the similarities don’t end there. Hitler turned his command posts into mini brothels from which he orchestrated the extermination of 6 million Jews. This last conversation took place in one of the many apartments that comprised Muhammad’s mosque—his command center. When Umm Salama, the wife with whom der prophet was being intimate, heard that Abu had been forgiven, she asked, “‘Can I give him the good news?’ He said yes, so she went and stood at the door of her room and said, ‘O Lubaba, rejoice, for Allah has forgiven you.’”
Another treasure from this dark dawn also smacks of Hitler and his Nazi goons. Muhammad had personal guards like der fuhrer’s Storm Troopers and S.S. Ishaq:463 “Amr went passed the Apostle’s guards who were commanded that night by Maslama. He challenged him.” Last time I checked, the founders of Christianity and Judaism, Yahshua and Moses, didn’t have guards. Muhammad not only had them, Maslama, his senior guard, was none other than the assassin who had murdered the first Jewish journalist. Remember: “I will kill him for you.”
The Islamic world appears to have used Gestapo tactics. After Maslama interrogated Amr at the door of Muhammad’s mosque: Ishaq:463 “Amr vanished into the night. It is not known to this day what happened to him. Some allege that he was bound with a rotten rope and cast away.”
Ishaq:463/Tabari VIII:33 “In the morning, the Jews submitted to the judgment of Allah’s Messenger. The Aws leapt up and said, ‘Muhammad, they are our allies. You know what you did the other day with the allies of the Khazraj! (Before besieging the Qurayza, the Messenger had besieged the Qaynuqa, who were the confederates of the Khazraj. They had submitted to his judgment and were banished.) Therefore, when the Aws spoke to him, the Messenger said, ‘People of the Aws, will you not be satisfied if one of your own men passes judgment on them?’ Yes,’ they proclaimed. So the Prophet said, ‘It shall be entrusted to Sa’d [the Jew-Hater] Mu’adh.’”
Sa’d had been so fat his armor failed to protect his extremities. He had been shot with an Arab arrow during the battle of the Trench. To say he was a militant would be too kind. Bukhari:V5B59N448 “Sa’d said, ‘O Allah! You know that there is nothing more beloved to me than to fight in Your Cause against those who disbelieve Your Apostle. O Allah! I think you have put to an end the fight between us and the infidels. But if there still remains any fight with the infidels, then keep me alive till I fight against them for Your sake.’” Sa’d was hardly a saint.
Ishaq:463/Tabari VIII:33 “The Prophet had placed Sa’d in the tent of a Muslim woman in his mosque. She nursed his wound and earned merit for herself by serving Muslims. When Sa’d was struck by the arrow, Muhammad said, ‘Put him in Rufaydah’s tent, so that I can visit him from nearby.’ Then the Prophet appointed him judge over the Qurayza Jews. His tribesmen lifted him onto a donkey on which they had put a leather cushion, for he was a stout, corpulent man. En route to Muhammad, the Aws said, ‘Treat our client well for the Prophet has put you in charge of this matter. After many requests, Sa’d said, ‘The time has come for Sa’d, in the Cause of Allah, not to be influenced by anyone’s reproach.’ Some of the people who heard him, announced the impending death of the Qurayza before Sa’d Mu’adh reached them because of the words he had said.” Islam's dark spirit had it in for the Jews. For Sa’d to gain entry into his brothel, Sa’d would have to support his agenda.
Ishaq:463/Tabari VIII:34 “When Sa’d reached the Messenger of Allah and the Muslims, the Prophet said, ‘Arise and go to your master and help him dismount.’ Then Muhammad said, ‘Pass judgment on them.’ Sa’d replied, ‘I pass judgment that their men shall be killed, their women and children made captives, and their property divided.’ Allah’s Apostle proclaimed, ‘You have passed judgment on the Jews with the judgment of Allah and the judgment of His Messenger.’” The Unholy Trinity was pleased.
It’s important for you to know that I have reported every Hadith collected by Tabari, Ishaq, and Bukhari regarding the assault on the Jews. There wasn’t a single word written about Jewish combatants. Three settlements, three sieges, and yet the Jews never struck a blow—not one. There was no excuse. There was no claim of self defense. This was a grotesque act of racially inspired genocide. And the motivation was greed. The Jews embodied everything the Muslims had failed to achieve. They were productive, prosperous, moral, literate, peaceful, honest, discerning, and religious.
Bukhari collected a series of Hadith on this diabolical verdict: Bukhari:V5B58N148-B59N447 “Sa’d came riding a donkey, and when he approached the mosque, the Prophet said, ‘Get up for the best amongst you.’ Then the Apostle said, ‘O Sa’d! These people have agreed to accept your verdict.’ Sa’d said, ‘I judge that their men should be killed and their offspring and women should be taken as captives.’ The Prophet said, ‘You have given a judgment similar to Allah the King’s Judgment.’” A second reveals: Bukhari: V5B59N448 “They then surrendered to the Prophet’s judgment but he directed them to Sa’d to give the verdict. Sad said, ‘I give my judgment that their men should be killed, their women and children should be taken as captives, and their properties distributed.’” A third proclaims: Bukhari:V5B59N362 “The Nadir and Qurayza violated their peace
treaty, so the Prophet exiled the Nadir and then he killed the Qurayza men. He distri-uted their women, chil-ren and property among the Muslims.” And what do you suppose the Muslim militants did to their women? The Qur’an says that they forced them into prostitution. The Hadith says that they raped them. Bukhari:V5B59N459 “I entered the Mosque, saw Abu, sat beside him and asked about sex. Abu Said said, ‘We went out with Allah’s Apostle and we received female slaves from among the captives. We desired women and we loved to do coitus interruptus.’” (Yes, that’s what it says.)
Another Bukhari Hadith goes on to report that Muhammad never grew weary of tormenting Jews: “He exiled all the Jews from Medina. They were the Jews of the Qaynuqa and the Jews of the Haritha and all the other Jews from their homes.”
With something this morally crippled, it’s important to know that there are many confirmations—each destroying the myth Muhammad was a prophet. His Islam was a terrorist manifesto. It was conceived for rape and plunder. And on this day it was doing what it did best. Tabari VIII:34 “Sa’d turned away from the Messenger out of respect. He said, ‘I pass judgment that the men shall be killed, the property divided, and the children and women made slaves.’ Muhammad replied, ‘You have passed judgment on them with the judgment of Allah from above seven heavens.’”
The chorus continues with this refrain: Tabari VIII:39 “After the affair of the Qurayza ended, the wound of Sa’d broke open. Aisha reports: He passed judgment on the Jews and prayed saying, ‘O Allah, You know that there are no men whom I would rather fight and strive to kill than men who called Your Messenger a liar.’”
Before we review what happened next, I want to share the verses I omitted earlier from the 33rd surah: the model for the Holocaust: 033.026 “Allah took down the People of the Scripture Book. He cast terror into their hearts. Some you slew, and some you made prisoners. And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, giving you a land which you had not traversed before. And Allah has power over all things.” Version two: “And He drove the People of the Scripture down from their homes and cast panic into their hearts. Some you killed, and you made some captive. And He caused you to inherit their farms, houses, wealth, and land you have not trodden. Allah is ever Able to do all things.” This Qur’anic verse is among Islam’s most stinging indictments. It confirms its most barbaric act.
But it’s worse than it appears on the surface. Since it was Muhammad who actually perpetrated these crimes, it confirms that Muhammad was Allah. Allah was never anything more than a rock idol, the Black Stone stuck in the wall of the Ka’aba. Muhammad created his persona and his revelations. And that is why Muhammad’s personality, character, behavior, and words are identical to Allah’s. But Muhammad had help. Lucifer, just as Paul had warned, transformed himself into an angel of light.
Pretending to be Gabriel, he struck a bargain with the insecure and covetous Arab. In the exchange, Muhammad was possessed by Lucifer’s most able demon. Working together, the Unholy Trinity established the religion of deceit, death, and damnation.
Muhammad’s behavior was covetous, ruthless, and murderous to be sure. Yet attributing this debauchery to deity was his most vile act. Men have plundered before. Men have robbed before. Men have murdered before. But no god has ever said: “‘God’ drove the unbelievers back in fury, and they gained no advantage. Allah was sufficient to help the believers in battle. He made the People of the Book descend from their homes, and He terrorized them, so that you killed some and made many captive. And He made you inherit their property, homes, wealth, and a country you had not trodden under foot before.”
In the first chapter I included a speech from the Islamic world’s leading imam. Al-Buraik, the Saudi ruling family’s favorite sheik, spoke at a telethon the Fahd family dictators hosted to enrich the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. This esteemed Islamic cleric said, “O, Muslims, don’t take Jews and Christians as allies. Muslim brothers in Palestine do not have any mercy or compassion on the Jews, their blood, their money, or their flesh. Their women are yours to take, legitimately. Allah made them yours. Why don’t you enslave their women? Why don’t you wage jihad? Why don’t you pillage them?” Now you know where he got his material.
And this was the result: Tabari VIII:35/Ishaq:464 “The Jews were made to come down, and Allah’s Messenger imprisoned them. Then the Prophet went out into the marketplace of Medina (it is still its marketplace today), and he had trenches dug in it. He sent for the Jewish men and had them beheaded in those trenches. They were brought out to him in batches. They numbered 800 to 900 boys and men.” The lone prophet of the Islamic religion had the imprisoned Jews brought to him so that he might enjoy the ghoulish spectacle. Even Hitler was too ashamed to visit Auschwitz.
Then in words hauntingly similar to what Jews must have asked as Nazi trains hauled their families off to concentration camps: “As they were being taken in small groups to the Prophet, they said to one another, ‘What do you think will be done to us?’ Someone said, ‘Do you not understand. On each occasion do you not see that the summoner never stops? He does not discharge anyone. And that those who are taken away do not come back. By God, it is death!’ The affair continued until the Messenger of Allah had finished with them all.” If 900 men and boys were dragged out of their imprisonment in “batches” and led into the central market square of Medina to be beheaded in front of Muhammad, the “affair” would have lasted eight to ten hours. Imagine a “prophet” perverted enough to watch until he had “finished with them all.” It’s enough to make you vomit.
Surely, he could not have been this twisted. Tabari VIII:40 “The Messenger of God commanded that furrows should be dug in the ground for the Qurayza. Then he sat down. Ali and Zubayr began cutting off their heads in his presence.” Muhammad was a prophet of a different color.
Tabari VIII:35/Ishaq:464 “Huyayy, the enemy of Allah, was brought out. He was wearing a rose-colored suit of clothes that he had torn all over with fingertip-sized holes so that it would not be taken as booty. His hands were bound to his neck with a rope. When he looked at Muhammad he said, ‘I do not regret opposing you. Whoever forsakes God will be damned.’ He sat down and was beheaded.” The rabbi synthesized the Bible into a single sentence, “Whoever forsakes (separates) himself from Yahweh will be damned (separated) from him.” In the Scriptures, forsaken, damned, and separated are synony-mous. This fine man chose not to separate himself from Yahweh and worship his adversary Satan, so he lost his life but saved his soul. Huyayy is now living eternally with his Creator. Muhammad, the recipient of this message forsook Yahweh and damned himself—choosing instead to form an alliance with Lucifer. Today, Muhammad’s soul is eternally damned in the place of separation, called he
ll—Satan’s paradise.
Ishaq:464/Tabari VIII:36 “According to Aisha, one Jewish woman was killed. By Allah, she was by my side, talking with me and laughing while Allah’s Messenger was killing her men in the marketplace.” Psychologists call this a “gallows laugh.” It’s a common manifestation of extreme stress. So while the reaction of the Jewish woman was excused, the behavior of the Muslim men is not. They were forcing Qurayza women to watch as they severed the heads of their fathers, husbands, brothers, and sons. The level of human depravity depicted here wouldn’t replayed again for 1300 years. Muhammad’s apprentice, Adolf Hitler, forced Jews to remove their kin from cyanide showers, only to place them in the roaring fires of his crematorium. Doctrines demented enough to compel such behavior cannot be tolerated. While the Pope may wish to kiss the Qur’an, I’d prefer to spit on it. But then again, the Pope was wrong about Hitler, too.
Ishaq:464/Tabari VIII:36 “Suddenly an unseen voice called out her name. It said, ‘Where is so and so?’ She said, ‘Here I am.’ ‘Good heavens,’ I cried, ‘what is wrong?’ She said, ‘I am going to be killed because of something I did.’ She was taken away and beheaded. Aisha used to say, ‘I shall never forget my wonder at her good spirits, even when she knew she would be killed.’” The witness of Jews continues to be remarkable.
Tabari VIII:37 “Thabit said, ‘O Allah’s Messenger, Zabir, who was Abu Ar-Rahman, did me a favor, sparing my life, and I owe him a debt of gratitude. I wish to repay him for it. Grant me his life.’ The Prophet said, ‘It is yours.’” The source of this Hadith wants to make sure Muslims didn’t equate this act of “mercy” with the “prophet” being soft on Jews. That is why he said that this man’s real name was “Slave-to-Muhammad’s-First-God-Ar-Rahman.” Ishaq:465 “So Thabit went to him and Zabir said, ‘Why do this? I’ll be an old man without family and children.’ Thabit asked Muhammad for his family and he said, ‘His wife and children are yours.’ But Zabir said, ‘Without my property, how will we survive?” So Thabit asked the Prophet for Zabir’s wealth and it was given to him. Thabit went to Zabir and announced that he had been given all of his property. Zabir said, ‘Thabit, you are two-faced. What has happened to Asad?’ ‘He has been beheaded.’ ‘How about Huyayy?’ ‘He has been killed.
’ And how fares Azzal?’ ‘He has been slain.’ ‘How about the rest of the Qurayza men?’ Thabit said, ‘They have all gone to their death.’ Zabir said, ‘Then for the sake of the favor I once did for you, there is no good in living anymore. So Thabit brought him forward, and they struck off his head. When what he said was reported to Abu Bakr, he replied, ‘He will soon meet his dear ones in the fires of Hell, and there they will dwell forever.’”
In the most tortured words ever uttered in the name of religion: Tabari VIII:38 “The Messenger of Allah commanded that all of the Jewish men and boys who had reached puberty should be beheaded. Then the Prophet divided the wealth, wives, and children of the Banu Qurayza Jews among the Muslims.” Ishaq:465 “When their wrists were bound with cords, the Apostle was a sea of generosity to us.” It’s hard to imagine evil this dark.
Further confirming that he was a terrorist and pirate, not a messenger or prophet, Muhammad’s first biographer said: Ishaq:465 “Then the Apostle divided the property, wives, and children of the Qurayza among the Muslims. Allah’s Messenger took his fifth of the booty. He made known on that day the extra shares for horses and their riders —giving the horse two shares and the rider one. A Muslim without a horse got one share of the spoil. It was the first booty in which lots were cast.” Why lots, you may be wondering? Casting lots is a gambling game, one expressly forbidden by Islam. The reason is two fold. First, the religion of Islam was a joke to these fellows. They simply used it as a tool to justify their disgusting behavior. The first Muslims were less religious than Hitler’s S.S. Second, the mercenaries needed a picking order in which to draft Jewish homes, property, businesses, women, and children. Muhammad didn’t want them squabbling. Some sex slaves were prettier than
others.
In the name of full disclosure, here is the report of Islam’s first historian: Tabari VIII:38 “On that day Muhammad made known the shares of the horsemen and shares of the foot soldiers, and he deducted from these shares his fifth. A horseman received three shares: two shares for the horse and one for its rider. A foot soldier received one share. The cavalry at the battle with the Qurayza numbered thirty-six horses. It was the first booty in which shares were allotted to them. According to this example (Sunnah), the proce-dure of the Messenger of Allah in the divisions of booty became a precedent which was followed in subsequent raids.” Every Islamic apologist could cry out for a thousand years and not undo the damage done by Muhammad and his militants. We put ourselves, our men, women, and children, into harm’s way when we allow Islam to masquerade as a legitimate religion. Fundamental Islam is no different than fundamental Nazism. These crimes must not go unpunished.
As further evidence that militant Islam is fundamental Islam, and that the Islam of Muhammad was built upon the slave trade, we find: Tabari VIII:39 “Then the Messenger of Allah sent Sa’d bin Zayd with some of the Qurayza captives to Najd, and in exchange for them he purchased horses and arms.” Nothing could be more clear. Hitler financed his war machine on booty he stole from the Jews. In slave labor camps he forced Jews to work without pay building planes, tanks, and bombs. Muhammad set the precedent, funding his war effort on the flesh and property of Jews. These men and their methods were identical. And one day, in the not too distant future, this misguided doctrine will be unleashed on a world comprised of six billion souls. Replete with nuclear and biological weapons, a billion people will perish.
The reason Allah approved rape, involuntary sex with prisoners, in the 33rd surah was because Muhammad was about to indulge. Tabari VIII:38 “The Prophet selected for himself from among the Jewish women of the Qurayza, Rayhanah bt. Amr. She became his concubine. When he predeceased her, she was still in his possession. When the Messenger of Allah took her as a captive, she showed herself averse to Islam and insisted on Judaism.” Imagine the horror of being the sex slave of the man who had murdered your father and your brothers. Imagine being forced to have sex with a man who had given your mother up to be raped and had sold your sisters into slavery to buy swords so that he could torment others. It’s chilling—perversity on an unimaginable scale. Muhammad may well have been the most vile human to have ever lived.
The first to chronicle the prophet’s revolting life explains: Ishaq:466 “The Apostle [taking first dibs] chose one of the Jewish women for himself. Her name was Rayhana. She remained with him until she died, in his power. The Apostle proposed to marry her and put the veil on her but she said, ‘Leave me under your power, for that will be easier. She showed a repugnance towards Islam when she was captured.” Muhammad raped Rayhana after killing, enslaving, and plundering her family. If you want to understand the doctrine of submission, put yourself in her sandals and gaze deeply into the eyes of the man who is abusing you.
Ishaq:466 “Allah sent down [a Qur’an surah] concerning the Trench and Qurayza raid. The account is found in the Confederates or Allied Troops. In it He mentions their trial and His kindness to the Muslims. ‘Remember We sent a wind against the armies and they could not see. Allah sent this wind with his angels. Allah said, When they came at you from above and below, and when eyes grew wild and hearts reached your throats, you harbored doubts about Allah. Those in whose hearts is a disease said, ‘What Allah and His Messenger has promised us is nothing but delusion.’’”
Before I comment, let’s read on: Ishaq:467 “Allah addressed the believers and said, ‘In Allah’s Apostle you have a fine example for anyone who hopes to be in the place where Allah is.’” Ishaq:468 “Then Allah said, ‘Some of you have fulfilled your vow to Me by dying; you have finished your work and returned to Me like those who sought martyrdom in prior battles. And some of you are still waiting to capitalize on Allah’s promise of martyrdom. You do not hesitate in your religion and never doubt.’” Ishaq:468 “Allah brought down the People of the Scripture Book. I forced the Qurayza from their homes and cast terror into their hearts. Some you slew, and some you took captive. You killed their men and enslaved their women and children. And I caused you to inherit their land, their dwellings, and their property. Allah can do all things.’”
While I recognize that we have reviewed Allah’s endorsement of genocide in the 33rd surah, Ishaq’s review of the Qur’an ties the Islamic god irrevocably to the event. And there is no question that Ishaq’s interpretation of the surah —as the earliest and best researched—is the most credible in Islam. Moreover, when Allah told Muslims to follow Muhammad’s example he was specifically encouraging terrorism, mass murder, piracy, the slave trade, and rape.
The Qur’an said that its dark spirit deployed killer angels. The first Muslims harbored doubts about Allah. They believed that Muhammad’s message was delusional. Good Muslims vowed to die as martyrs killing infidels. They were mercenaries, as they expected a reward. Allah was presented as an anti-Semite and a terrorist. Islam’s “god” approved genocide and the enslavement of women and children. He even confessed to being a pirate, claiming to have caused Muslims to inherit stolen land, possessions, and homes.
There is no other way to interpret these confessions or to explain them away. The dark spirit, demented prophet, and delusional doctrine that seduced men into perpetrating these heinous acts must be exposed, repudiated, and then banished from the earth. Or tomorrow, men following Muhammad’s example will terrorize you, forcing you into submission. They will rape, rob, enslave, and kill your family. And while the Islamic terrorists will earn their just reward for following Muhammad’s example—“going to the place where Allah is”—the pain they will inflict cannot be undone.
The first Muslims were proud of themselves. Ishaq:468 “Gabriel came to the Apostle when Sa’d was taken. He visited him in the middle of the night wearing an embroidered turban and said, ‘O Muhammad, who is this dead man for whom the doors of heaven have been opened and at whom the throne shook?’” Since Gabriel is “credited” with revealing the Qur’an to Muhammad, it’s odd that he would need to ask the “messenger” about something that happened in heaven. And Sa’d was a thug, a man who loved to kill. He was a racist and a thief. If these behaviors rock Allah’s throne, the Islamic god is a rather nasty fellow.
Ishaq:468 “Sa’d was a fat man but those who carried his funeral bier said that they had never carried a lighter one. Muhammad said, ‘He had angelic pallbearers because the angels rejoiced when Sa’d’s spirit shook Allah’s throne.’” Ishaq:469 “An Ansar recited this poem: ‘The throne of Allah shook for only one man: Sa’d the brave and bold, a glorious leader, a knight ever ready. Stepping into the battle, he cut heads to pieces.” Saint Sa’d, a genuine Muslim hero. Ishaq:469 “The Apostle said, ‘Every wailing woman lies except those who wept for Sa’d.’” Tabari VIII:40 “Aisha, the Mother of the Faithful, was asked, ‘How did the Messenger of God behave?’ She replied, ‘His eye did not weep for anyone.’” Der prophet and der fuhrer were cut from the same cloth.
Ishaq:469 “On the day the Qurayza were slain, one Muslim was martyred. A stone was thrown on him and it inflicted a shattering wound. The Apostle said, ‘He will have the reward of two martyrs.’” In Islam you get bonus points for killing, robbing, and enslaving Jews (or any non-Muslims for that matter)
These poetic lines were recited during the Islamic Holocaust: Ishaq:470 “We attacked them fully armed, sharp swords in hand, cutting through heads and skulls.” This could serve as Islam’s byline: Ishaq:471 “We were steadfast trusting in Him. We have a Prophet by whom we will conquer all men.” All means all, that’s all “all” means. So this could serve as Islam’s byline: “We have a Prophet by whom we will conquer all men.”
Ishaq:472 “Muhammad’s Companions are the best in war.” Ishaq:473 “Muhammad and his Companions humiliated every doubter.” Ishaq:475 “Allah commanded that horses should be kept for His enemy in the fight so they might vex them. We obeyed our Prophet’s orders when he called us to war. When he called for violent efforts we made them. The Prophet’s command is obeyed for he is truly believed. He will give us victory, glory, and a life of ease. Those who call Muhammad a liar disbelieve and go astray. They attacked our religion and would not submit.”
The last was a full service sonnet. It contained an incentive to amass weapons and incentive to use them, a command to annoy the enemy and a command to fight them. It encouraged and acknowledged violence. It even admitted that violence was perpetrated for money—to gain a life of ease.
Ishaq:479 “Slain in Allah’s religion, Sa’d inherits Paradise with the martyrs. His was a noble testimony. When he pronounced his verdict on the Qurayza, he did not judge on his own volition. His judgment and Allah’s were one. Sa’d is among those who sold his life for the Garden of Bliss.” Considering the verdict called for genocide, larceny, and enslavement, Allah’s complicity in these crimes is bothersome.
This, too, is hideous: Ishaq:481 “The Apostle slew them in their own town. With our troops he surrounded their homes. We shouted out cries in the heat of battle. The Jews were given the Scripture and wasted it. Being blind, [the illiterate man said] they strayed from the Torah. You Jews disbelieved the Qur’an and yet you have tasted the confirmation of what it said. May Allah make our raid on them immortal. May fire burn in their quarter. They will no longer ruin our lands. You have no place here, so be off!”
I saved the worst for last …Ishaq:480 “The Qurayza met their misfortune [now there’s an under-stated word]. In humiliation they found no helper. A calamity worse than that which fell upon the Nadir befell them. On that day Allah’s Apostle came to them like a brilliant moon. We left them with blood upon them like a pool. They lay prostrate with the vultures circling round.”
Here is one more story. It is very similar to the previous one. And it is similar to the photo essay on Islam which prompted me to share them both with you:
Year seven of the Islamic Era got off to a horrendous start. The prophet, without provocation, led a terrorist raid to torment another Jewish community. Tabari VIII:116/Ishaq:510 “After his return from Hudaybiyah, Allah’s Messenger marched against Khaybar. He halted with his army in a valley between the people of Khaybar and the Ghatafan tribe to prevent the latter from assisting the Jews.” The motivation for the attack was obvious. Muhammad’s militant and mercenary horde was up in arms over his capitulation at Hudaybiyah. Out of control, they would have turned against their warlord if he hadn’t found a way to satiate their growing lust for blood, babes, and booty.
For those who think this conclusion is unfair and overly cynical, consider the facts. When the Muslims failed to capture the Meccan caravan at Badr, the prophet stole property and possessions of the Qaynuqa Jews. Following the Uhud defeat, he immediately plundered the Nadir Jews. The siege of the Trench was not only the third in a series of four battles without booty; it was also bloodless. So Islam’s demented dictator provided slaughter, sex, and spoil by mur-dering, enslaving, and robbing the Qurayza. The Jews had become easy prey. So following the bootyless and bloodless “peace” of Hudaybiyah, Muhammad set out to terrorize the only Jewish community within reach that he hadn’t previously sacked and plundered—Khaybar. It was their turn to feel the wrath of Islam.
Incidentally, neither Allah, Muhammad, Ishaq, Tabari, Bukhari, nor Muslim made an attempt to justify Islam’s ruthless assault on the Khaybar Jews. They knew the truth and didn’t try to disguise it. Islam was no longer a religion; it was a terrorist dogma. The first Muslims weren’t disciples; they were merce-naries. Muhammad wasn’t a pro-phet; he was a pirate. Allah wasn’t a god; he was the Devil incarnate. And together, they were about to prove that they were a blight on humankind.
As transparent as ever, these words, directly from Muhammad’s lips, demonstrate that he was working for the Prince and the Power of the Air, the Lord of Devils, the Prince of Darkness, the Great Deceiver, the Adversary—Satan. Ishaq:510 “When the Apostle looked down on Khaybar he told his Companions, ‘O Allah, Lord of the heavens and what they overshadow, and Lord of the Devils and what into error they throw, and Lord of the winds and what they winnow, we ask Thee for the booty of this town and its people. We take refuge in Thee from its evil and the evil of its people. Forward in the name of Allah.’ He used to say this of every town he raided.”
Serving Lucifer was no easy task. Good and evil had to be redefined so that the good people of Khaybar, who were just going about their lives trying to make an honest living, had to be called “evil.” And the bad terrorist thugs lurking in the hills above them, armed to the teeth and ready to pounce on the on the unsuspecting village, murdering, enslaving, robbing, and raping, had to be called “good.”
Ishaq:511 “When the Apostle raided a people he waited until morning, and then he attacked. We came to Khaybar by night. When morning came and he did not hear the call to prayer, he rode and we rode with him. We met the workers of Khaybar coming out in the morning with their spades and baskets. When they saw the Prophet and our army they cried, ‘Muhammad with his force.’ They turned tail and fled. The Apostle yelled, ‘Allahu Akbar! Khaybar is destroyed.’ When we arrive at a people’s square, it is a bad morning for them.”
All of the deceptions, justifications, and apologies ever spoken would be insufficient to make this horrible day appear religious. And it does not stand alone. Khaybar was but one of seventy-five merciless raids instigated by the first Muslims. Armed raiders attacked civilians for no other reason than to seize their possessions. “Allahu Akbar!” was the terrorists’ “Prayer of Fear.”
Ibn Ishaq’s compilation of Islamic scripture—the inspired Sira, or biography of the prophet—is the earliest and most accurate accounting of Muhammad’s life and of the formation of Islam. It was compiled a century before Tabari, Muslim, and Bukhari. But for those who might want to dismiss the Hadith report on the basis that it sounds too condemning of the prophet, consider these confirming words from imam Bukhari. Of his collection, Islamic sages wrote: “Second only to the Qur’an, Bukhari’s Hadith is the most important book in Islam.” He claims: Bukhari:V5B59N510 “Allah’s Apostle reached Khaybar at night. It was his habit that, whenever he reached an enemy at night, he would not attack them till it was morning. When morning came, the Jews came out with their spades and baskets. When they saw the Prophet, they said, ‘Muhammad! O dear God! It’s Muhammad and his army!’ The Prophet shouted, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Khaybar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a nation, evil will be th
e morning for those who have been warned.’”
The more you know, the worse it gets. This is why Islamic leaders must keep good people from reading these words. It is why they lie to themselves, to our citizens, the media, and politicians alike. Islam is self destructive, mutilating its own credibility.
The Hadith said Muhammad made a “habit” of this perverse behavior. The Jews were his enemy, although none had lifted a finger in violence towards him. The Jews were farmers, going to work with gardening tools, and yet Muhammad led a surprise “attack” against them with his “army.” He professed “destruction,” not salvation. But it’s his last line that’s especially haunting. With Islam, the nations of the world are approached by “evil.”
Muhammad’s ruthless terror campaign against the townships of Qurayza and Khaybar was worse than Osama bin Laden’s assault on New York and Washington. The first Islamic terrorist was more destructive, savage, and sadistic than his later-day incarnations in the Taliban, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, Black September, Jemaah Islamiyah, al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, al-Qaeda, and Islamic Jihad. And Muslims know it. In their media, in their mosques, and in their madrassa, they compel young boys and girls to follow Muhammad’s example. When they bomb our buildings, blow holes in our ships, hijack or planes, and kidnap our people, they are doing what their prophet did. Islam cannot coexist with civilized people. It is a terrible disease. Through indoctrination Islam destroys Muslim minds, corroding them. By way of its grotesque immorality and criminal nature it attacks Muslim hearts, corrupting them. Worst of all, by way of deceit and deception Islam beguiles Muslim souls, dam
ning them.
To add insult to injury, Bukhari noted: Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer [the Prayer of Fear] near Khaybar when it was still dark. He said, ‘Allahu-Akbar!’ [Allah is Greatest] Khaybar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a hostile nation to fight, then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.’ Then the inhabitants of Khaybar came out running on their roads. The Prophet had their men killed; their children and woman were taken as captives.” Calling the Jews a hostile nation is a farce. Muhammad and his Muslim militants, according to their own accounting, had either murdered, terrorized, enslaved, or raped tens-of-thousands of Jews yet the Jews had killed but one Muslim. Even that was self-defense, allegedly occurring during the Islamic siege of the Qurayza.
The warning these Jews were given before evil befell them was no different than Muslims provide today. The 9/11 terrorists shouted “Allahu Akbar” before they slaughtered thousands. By proclaiming the Prayer of Fear, Islamic terrorists tell us who they are, what they believe, who they serve, and why they kill.
There is nothing Islam could do to make their terrorist nature more obvious: Bukhari:V5B59N516 When Allah’s Apostle fought the battle of Khaybar, or when he raided any other people, we raised their voices crying, ‘Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! None has the right to be worshipped except Allah.’ [Muslims will continue to terrorize until every soul submits to Islam.] #

- _____-----_------___-_______--------______


The Games Muslims play
[Downloaded from TheReligionofPeace.com sites]

GIVEN Islam's violent history and the unfavorable contrast of its oppressive practices against 21st Century values, Muslims are hard-pressed to repackage their faith in the modern age. Some of its leading apologists have come to rely on tricks involving semantics and half-truths that are, in turn, repeated by novices and even those outside the faith.
This is a document (that we hope to improve on and expand over time) that exposes some of these games and helps truth-seekers find their way through the maze of disingenuous (often blatantly false) claims about Islam and its history.
“If Islam were a violent religion, then all Muslims would be violent.”
“Other religions kill, too.”
“Muhammad preached 'no compulsion in religion'” (Qur'an: 2:256)
The Crusades
“Muhammad never killed anyone.”
Islam teaches 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' (Qur'an 5:32)
"Muslims only kill in self-defense.”
The million dollar wager that "Holy War" isn't in the Qur'an.
"Verses of violence are taken out of context."
"Islam must be true, because it is the world’s fastest growing religion."
 “If Islam were a violent religion, then all Muslims would be violent.”
The Muslim Game:
MOST Muslims live peacefully, without harming others, so how can Islam be a violent religion? If Islam were the religion of terrorists, then why aren’t most Muslims terrorists?
The Truth:
SIMPLY put, because it’s wrong to kill people, regardless of what Islam may or may not teach.
All religions align in some form or fashion with intuitive utilitarian principles. Many Muslims in the West often hold an interpretation of Islam that is much closer to Judeo-Christianity than to the actual way of Muhammad, since that is how their religion is presented to them. They only know the biographical details of their prophet that are in line with moral restraint, and not the ones that speak of hedonism, deception, power and violence.
Decent Muslims are that way because they are more loyal to the moral law written in their hearts rather than to the details of Muhammad’s religion. They filter out evidence to the contrary – when they may encounter it – and truly believe that their religion is inclusive of the many freedoms and values that are cherished in the West (perhaps never questioning why they are not found in Muslim lands).
Although it is a broad religion, it is no coincidence that the purists in Islam – those most prone to taking the words of Muhammad literally – are almost always the more dangerous. They may be called ‘extremists’ or ‘fundamentalists,’ but, at the end of the day, they are always the more dedicated to the Qur’an and following the path of Jihad as mandated by Muhammad.
Of course, the same question can easily be turned around. If Islam is a religion of peace, then why is it the only religion that consistently produces religiously-motivated terrorist attacks? Why are thousands of people able to cut off an innocent person’s head or fly a plane into a building while screaming praises to Allah? Where’s the outrage among other Muslims when this happens… and why do they get more worked up over cartoons?


 “Other religions kill, too.”
The Muslim Game:
BRINGING other religions down to the level of Islam is one of the most popular strategies of Muslim apologists when confronted with the spectacle of Islamic violence. Remember Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber? Why pick on Islam if other religions have the same problems?
The Truth:
BECAUSE they don’t. Regardless of what his birth certificate may or may not have said, Timothy McVeigh was not a religious man. At no time did he credit his deeds to religion, quote Bible verses, or claim that he killed for God. The so-called “members of other faiths” alluded to by Muslims are nearly always just nominal members who have no active involvement.
They are neither inspired by, nor do they credit religion as Muslim terrorists do, and this is what makes it a very different matter. Islam is associated with Islamic terrorism because that is the association that the terrorists themselves choose to make. Muslims who compare crime committed by people who happen to be nominal members of other religions to religious terror committed explicitly in the name of Islam are comparing apples to oranges.
Yes, some of the abortion clinic bombers were religious (as Muslims enjoy pointing out), but consider the scope of the problem. There were five deadly attacks over a 35-year period in the U.S. Seven people died. This is an average of one death every five years.
By contrast, Islamic terrorists have staged over seven thousand deadly attacks in just the five years following September 11th, 2001. If one goes back to 1971, when Muslim armies in Bangladesh began the mass slaughter of Hindus, through the years of Jihad in the Sudan, Kashmir and Algeria, and the present day Sunni-Shia violence in Iraq, the number of innocents killed in the name of Islam probably exceeds five million over this same period.
In the last six years, there have been perhaps a dozen or so religiously-inspired killings by people of all other faiths combined. No other religion produces the killing sprees that Islam does nearly every day of the year. Neither do they have verses in their holy texts that arguably support it. Nor do they have large groups across the globe dedicated to the mass murder of people who worship a different god. Muslims may like to pretend that other religions are just as subject to "misinterpretation" as is their “perfect” one, but the reality speaks of something far worse.
 Muhammad preached “No compulsion in religion.” (Qur’an, V.2:256)
The Muslim Game:
MUSLIMS quote verse 2:256 from the Qur’an to prove what a tolerant religion Islam is. The verse reads in part, “Let there be no compulsion in religion; truth stands out clearly from error…”
The Truth:
THE Muslim who offers this verse may or may not understand that it is from one of the earliest Suras (or chapters) from the Medinan period.
It was “revealed” at a time when the Muslims had just arrived in Medina after being chased out of Mecca. They needed to stay in the good graces of the stronger tribes around them, many of which were Jewish. It was around this time, for example, that Muhammad decided to have his followers change the direction of their prayer from Mecca to Jerusalem.
But Muslims today pray toward Mecca. The reason for this is that Muhammad issued a later command that abrogated (or nullified) the first. In fact, abrogation is a very important principle to keep in mind when interpreting the Qur’an – and verse 2:256 in particular – because later verses (in chronological terms) are said to abrogate any earlier one with which they contradict.
Muhammad’s message was far closer to peace and tolerance during his early years at Mecca, when he didn’t have an army. This changed dramatically after he attained the power to conquer, which he eventually used with impunity to bring other tribes into the Muslim fold. Contrast verse 2:256 with Suras 9 and 5, which were the last “revealed,” and it is easy to see why Islam has been anything but a religion of peace from the time of Muhammad to the present day.
There is some evidence that verse 2:256 may not have been intended for Muslims at all, but is instead meant to be a message to other religions concerning their treatment of Muslims. Verse 193 of the same Sura instructs Muslims to "fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion is only for Allah." This reinforces the narcissistic nature of Islam, which places Muslims above non-Muslims, and applies very different standards to both groups.
Though many Muslims today reject the practice of outright forcing others into changing their religion, forced conversion has been a part of Islamic history since Muhammad first picked up a sword. As he is recorded in many places as saying, "I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah..."
Interestingly, even the Muslims who quote 2:256 usually believe in Islamic teachings that sound very much like religious compulsion. These would be the laws punishing apostasy by death, and the institutionalized discrimination against religious minorities under Islamic rule that is sometimes referred to as “dhimmiitude.”
Dhimmitude prohibits non-Muslims from sharing their faith and even includes the extortion of money from them in the form of a tax called the jizya. Those who refuse to pay this arbitrary amount are put to death. If this isn’t compulsion, then what is?
 The Crusades
The Muslim Game:
Muslims love talking about the Crusades… and Christians love apologizing for them. To hear both parties tell the story, one would believe that Muslims were just peacefully minding their own business in lands that were legitimately Muslim, when Christian armies decided to wage holy war and kill “millions.”
The Truth:
EVERY part of this myth is a lie. Even by the rules that Muslims claim for themselves, the Crusades were perfectly justified, and the excesses (though beneath Christian standards) pale in comparison with the historic treatment of conquered populations at the hands of Muslims.
Here are some quick facts…
THE first Crusade began in 1095… 460 years after the first Christian city was overrun by Muslim armies, 457 years after Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies, 453 years after Egypt was taken by Muslim armies, 443 after Muslims first plundered Italy, 427 years after Muslim armies first laid siege to the Christian capital of Constantinople, 380 years after Spain was conquered by Muslim armies, 363 years after France was first attacked by Muslim armies, 249 years after Rome itself was sacked by a Muslim army, and only after centuries of church burnings, killings, enslavement and forced conversions of Christians.
By the time the Crusades finally began, Muslim armies had conquered two-thirds of the Christian world.
Europe had been harassed by Muslims since the first few years following Muhammad’s death. As early as 652, Muhammad’s followers launched raids on the island of Sicily, waging a full-scale occupation 200 years later that lasted well over two centuries and was punctuated by massacres, such as that at the town of Castrogiovanni, in which 8,000 Christians were put to death. In 1084, ten years before the first crusade, Muslims staged another devastating Sicilian raid, burning churches in Reggio, enslaving monks and raping an abbey of nuns before carrying them into captivity.
In theory, the Crusades were provoked by the harassment of Christian pilgrims from Europe to the Holy Land, in which many were kidnapped, molested, forcibly converted to Islam or even killed. (Compare this to Islam’s justification for slaughter on the basis of Muslims being denied access to the Meccan pilgrimage in Muhammad’s time).
The Crusaders only invaded lands that were Christian. They never attacked Saudi Arabia or sacked Mecca as the Muslims had done (and continued doing) to Italy and Constantinople.
The period of Crusader “occupation” (of its own former land) was stretched over less than two centuries. The Muslim occupation is in its 1,372nd year.
The period of Crusader “aggression” compresses to about 20 years of actual military campaign, much of which was spent on organization and travel. (They were from 1098-1099, 1146-1148, 1188-1192, 1201-1204, 1218-1221, 1228-1229, and 1248-1250). By comparison, the Muslim Jihad against the island of Sicily alone lasted 75 grinding years.
Unlike Jihad, the Crusades were never justified on the basis of New Testament teachings. This is why they are an anomaly, the punctuation of fourteen centuries of relentless Jihad that began long before the Crusades and continued well after they were over.
The greatest crime of the Crusaders was the sacking of Jerusalem, in which 30,000 people were said to have been massacred. This number is dwarfed by the number of Jihad victims, from India to Constantinople and Narbonne, but Muslims have never apologized for their crimes and never will.
What other religion calls sin and excess, Islam calls the will of Allah.
 "Muhammad never killed anyone.”
The Muslim Game:
IN order to give others the impression that Muhammad was a man of peace, Muslims sometimes claim that he never killed anyone. By this, they mean that he never slew anyone with his own hand (except in battle… which they may or may not remember to mention).
The Truth:
BY this logic, Hitler never killed anyone either. Obviously, if you order the execution of prisoners or the murder of critics by those who are under your command, then you are at least as guilty as those who carry out your orders. In Muhammad’s case, the number of people that he had murdered were literally too many for historians to fully know.
There were the men taken prisoner at Badr (including one who cried out for his children at the point of execution), a mother of five (stabbed to death for questioning Muhammad’s claim to be a prophet), dozens of Jewish citizens, including poets and merchants who were accused of mocking Islam, numerous adulterers, at least one slave girl, 800 Qurayza men and boys taken captive and beheaded on Muhammad’s order, and an unfortunate individual who was tortured to death so that the prophet of Islam could discover his hidden treasure and then “marry” his freshly-widowed wife. Indirectly, Muhammad is also responsible for the millions upon millions of people who have been slaughtered down through the centuries by those carrying on his legacy of Jihad. Not only did he kill, he is truly one of the bloodiest figures in history.
 “Just like the Bible, the Qur’an also says ‘Thou Shalt Not Kill.’”
(Qur’an, V.5:32)

The Muslim Game:
MANY Westerners prefer to believe that all religion is either equally bad or equally good, and eagerly devour anything that seems to support this preconception. The myth usually works to Islam’s advantage as well, since it either raises it to the level of others, or brings the others down to it. To compete with Western religion, Muslims vigorously employ verse 5:32, which is the closest thing they have to the Old Testament command of ‘Thou shalt not kill.”
It reads, in part: “…if any one slew a person… it would be as if he slew a whole people; and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of a whole people…”. (as quoted by the Fiqh Council of North America in their ultimately meaningless “Fatwa against Terrorism”)
The Truth:
OH goodness… if only the Qur’an stopped right there! What would the world be like without large numbers of Muslims eager to commit mass murder in the name of their religion across the globe each day? Think of the lives, money and heartache that would be spared if Muhammad had commanded Muslims to cherish human life in the Judeo-Christian tradition
Unfortunately, nothing could be further from the truth. This fragment of verse 5:32 is what Muslim apologists want non-Muslims to believe is in the Qur’an, rather than the dozens of other open-ended passages that command warfare, beheadings and torture. But even what they usually quote from 5:32 isn’t quite how it appears. Remember all those ellipses? There's something being left out.
Here’s the full text of the verse: “On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land – it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land.”
First, notice the gaping loophole. Killing is allowed in cases of murder or “for spreading mischief in the land.” Murder is pretty straightforward, but “spreading mischief?” If anything begged for a careful and precise explanation, this phrase certainly would. But generations of Muslims are left to apply their own interpretation of what “mischief” means. (Needless to say, the standards vary).
Secondly, note the broader context of this verse. It turns out that this isn’t a command to Muslims after all. It’s a recounting of a rule that was handed down to the Jews. It isn’t an admonition against killing. It’s an indictment against Jews for violating God’s law. “Any one” doesn’t mean “anyone,” but rather “any one” of the Jews.
Rather than encouraging tolerance, Sura 5 as a whole is actually an incitement of hatred with a hint of violence. Jews and Christians are explicitly cursed as ‘wicked’ people with ‘diseased hearts’ and as hateful ‘blasphemers,’ respectively. Muhammad goes on to coyly remind his people that Allah loves those who “fight” in his service (and it’s fairly obvious who the enemy is). Muslims also conveniently leave out the fact that the verse which follows 5:32 actually mandates killing in the case of the aforementioned “mischief.” It even suggests crucifixion and “the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides.” With this being the best that Islam has to offer, it’s not hard to guess why the religion contributes over a thousand deadly terrorist attacks each year.
 “Muslims only kill in self-defense.”
The Muslim Game:
Muslims often claim that their religion only orders them to kill in self-defense (i.e., when their own lives are in danger).
The Truth:
IN fact, self-defense is just one of several conditions under which Muslims are permitted to take the lives of others. The myth of killing only in self-defense is easily disproved from the accounts of Muhammad’s own life as recorded in Islam’s sacred texts (with which Muslim terrorists are only too familiar). Muhammad’s career of killing began with raids on merchant caravans traveling between Syria and Mecca. His men would usually sneak up on unsuspecting drivers and kill those who defended their goods. There was no self-defense involved here at all. This was old-school armed robbery and murder – sanctioned by Allah (according to Muhammad, who also demanded a fifth of the loot).
The very first battle that Muhammad fought was at Badr, when a Meccan army of 300 was sent out to protect the caravans from Muslim raids. The Meccans did not threaten Muhammad, and (turning this Muslim myth on its ear) only fought in self-defense after they were attacked by the Muslims. Following the battle, Muhammad established the practice of executing surrendered captives – something that would be repeated on many other occasions.
The significance of this episode can hardly be overstated, because it lies at the very beginning of the long chain of Muslim violence that eventually passed right through the heart of America on September 11th. The Muslims were not being threatened by those whom they attacked, and certainly not by those whom they had captured. They staged aggressive raids to eventually provoke war, just as al-Qaeda attempts to do in our time.
Muslims try to justify this early violence by claiming that Muhammad and his followers “suffered persecution” at the hands of the Meccans in an earlier episode, in which Muhammad was evicted from the city of Mecca and had to seek refuge at Medina. But even the worst of this persecution did not rise to the level of killing. The only Muslim to have died in Mecca was the elderly mother of a Muslim, and she was said to have been overcome by stress.
Even Muhammad’s own men evidently questioned whether they should be pursuing and killing people who did not pose a threat to them, since it seemed to contradict earlier, more passive teachings. To convince them, Muhammad passed along a timely revelation from Allah stating that “the persecution of Muslims is worse than slaughter [of non-Muslims]” (Sura 2:191). This verse established the tacit principle that the authority of Muslims is of higher value even than the very lives of others. There is no larger context of morality against which acts are judged. The only thing that matters is how an event impacts or benefits Muslims.
Under Muhammad, slaves and poets were executed, captives were beheaded, and adulterers were put into the ground and stoned. None of these were done during the heat of battle or necessitated by self-defense. To this day, Islamic law mandates death for certain crimes such as blasphemy and apostasy.
Following his death, Muhammad’s companions stormed the Christian world - taking the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Europe. They attacked and conquered to the East as well, including Iran, Afghanistan and well into the Indian sub-continent. Few, if any, of these campaigns involved the pretense of self-defense. They were about Jihad.
 "The words, ‘Holy War’, aren’t in the Qur’an.”
The Muslim Game:
IN early 2005, a well-known Muslim apologist named, Jamal Badawi, offered $1 million to anyone who could prove that the Qur’an contained the words, “Holy War.” Whether he actually had the money to put up is somewhat in question, but his intention was to make people believe that Jihad is not advocated in the Qur’an and that the terrorists are somehow tragically mistaken when they wage their campaigns of holy war in the cause of Islam.
So successful is this myth, that it has been repeated on popular television shows, such as “Criminal Minds.” Many now believe that not only is holy warfare not advocated by the Qur’an, but that the word, “Jihad” must not appear in it either, since Jihad has come to mean “Holy War” (most especially by those who kill in the name of Allah).
The Truth:
IN fact, not only is the word “Jihad” mentioned in several places within the Quran, such as the infamous Sura 9 (“Verse of the Sword”), there are over 150 calls to holy war scattered throughout the entire text.
So what’s the catch? Well, when knowledgeable infidels such as Robert Spencer immediately responded to the challenge and went to collect their prize, Mr. Badawi was forced to reveal the fine print on his offer. You see, he wasn’t talking about the concept of holy war. He only meant the exact Arabic phrase, “Holy War.”
And what about “Jihad?” Well, this doesn’t count, according to Mr. Badawi, because technically it can be used in a context that doesn’t mean ‘holy war’ (even if that is not how it was interpreted in Muhammad’s time, nor in ours). "Jihad" is like the word “fight,” which can be used in a benign sense (as in, “I am fighting a craving to call Mr. Badawi a disingenuous hack”).
If “Jihad” is holy without war, then “Qital” must be war without the holy. It is an Arabic term that literally means to wage military combat. But, like Jihad, it is most certainly used within the context of holy war, such as in Sura 2: “Fight against them until idolatry is no more and religion is only for Allah.” Mr. Badawi is even on record as admitting that Qital can be a form of Jihad… but even this doesn’t qualify according to the niceties of his offer.
So, although the Qur’an tells believers to “slay the infidels wherever ye find them,” and “smite their necks and fingertips,” showing “ruthlessness to unbelievers,” and 150 other violent admonitions to fight explicitly in the cause of Allah… the Arabic words “holy” and “war” don’t literally appear side-by-side. (Neither do the German words, “concentration” and “camp,” appear consecutively in Nazi documents, by the way).
My, what a hollow victory this is. One has to wonder whether Mr Badawi sincerely believes that he has a point or if he recognizes this for the shameful word game that it is.
At the very least, people should know that “Jihad” is used within the context of religious warfare time and time again throughout the Qur’an and Hadith, and that, regardless of the exact terminology, Islam’s most sacred texts clearly advocate the sort of holy war that propels modern-day terrorism.
 “Verses of violence are taken out of context.”
The Muslim Game:
VERSES like, “Slay the infidels wherever ye find them,” were issued during times of war, according to the apologists. They accuse critics who use Qur’anic verses to discredit Islam of engaging in “cherry-picking” (pulling verses out of context to support a position, and ignoring others that may mitigate it).
The Muslims who rely on this argument often leave the impression that the Qur’an is full of verses of peace, tolerance and universal brotherhood, with only a small handful that say otherwise. Their gullible audience may also assume that the context of each violent verse is surrounded by obvious constraints in the surrounding text which bind it to a particular place and time (as is the case with many Old Testament passages).
The Truth:
THE truth, unfortunately, is just the opposite. This is why new Muslims and non-Muslims alike, who begin studying the Qur’an and Hadith, are often confronted with an array of disclaimers and warnings by well-meaning Muslims who caution that it takes “years of study” to fully understand the meaning of certain passages. Neophytes are encouraged to seek the counseling of a Muslim scholar or cleric to "help them along" with interpreting what they read. It is not the verses of violence that are rare, however, it is the ones of peace and tolerance. Neither is the “historical context” of these verses of violence at all obvious from the surrounding text (in most cases).
In the Qur’an, ideas and topics often seem to come from nowhere, emerging almost at random in a jumbled mess that bears no consistent or coherent stream of thought. But, with external references to the Hadith and early biographies of Muhammad’s life, it is usually possible to determine when a Qur’anic verse was “handed down from Allah,” and what it may have meant to the Muslims at the time. This is what apologists opportunistically refer to as “historical context.” They contend that such verses are merely a part of history and not intended as imperatives to present-day Muslims.
But “historical context” cuts both ways. If any verse is a product of history, then they all are. Indeed, there is not a verse in the Qur’an that was not given at a particular time to address a particular situation in Muhammad’s life, whether he wanted to conquer the tribe next door and needed a “revelation” from Allah spurring his people to war, or if needed the same type of “revelation” to satisfy his lust for more women (free of complaint from his other wives).
Here is the irony of the “cherry-picking” argument: Those who use “historical context” against their detractors nearly always engage in cherry-picking of their own by choosing which verses they apply “historical context” to and which they prefer to hold above such tactics of mitigation.
Islamic purists do not engage in such games. Not only do they know that the verses of Jihad are more numerous and authoritative (abrogating the earlier ones), they also hold the entire Qur’an to be the eternal and literal word of Allah… and this is what often makes them so dangerous.
 "Islam is the world’s fastest growing religion."
The Muslim Game:
HOW can Islam be a bad religion if it is growing so fast? Doesn’t this mean that it is actually a truthful religion, since so many are accepting it?
The Truth:
IN the first place, the truth of an idea or doctrine is never established by mere belief. Up until the last hundred years or so, the vast majority of people on our planet did not even believe that they were on a planet. Nor did they believe that the earth was spinning at a thousand miles an hour or hurtling around the sun at 67,000 miles an hour. Does this mean that the earth wasn’t doing these things up until people believed that it was?
Secondly, Islam is not "growing faster" than other religions because “people are accepting it,” but rather because the birth rate among Muslims is significantly higher than it is among Christians and others, particularly in the West. Kids can be raised to believe in just about anything, so this hardly constitutes any sort of accomplishment.
Of the so-called “converts” from other religions, only a miniscule number were active believers. Nearly all are really just people who have no faith to convert from – regardless of their nominal designation. In the West and non-Muslim Third World, where all religions are allowed to compete equally, such people (who experience a spiritual awakening) are much more likely to turn to Christianity than to Islam.
Finally, the real reason that Islam is making headway in other faiths, while losing few of its own, is actually something that Muslims should feel a sense of embarrassment over, rather than pride. In truth, it speaks more to the insecurity that Muslims have in their own religion, and the banal immaturity that Islam has, compared with other faiths.
Let’s say that you are playing chess with a six-year-old boy. Instead of following the same set of rules, however, the child is allowed to make up rules that are preferential to him. One of the rules he decides on is that you aren’t allowed to make any moves in his half of the board, but he is allowed to make moves in yours. Another might be that it is impossible for any of his pieces to be taken. Now, if the child is winning the game – which is assured by the conditions that he has imposed – is it really something in which he can take true pride?
The rules that Muslims impose on the “conversion game” are almost exactly like this chess analogy. Other religions are not allowed to operate in Islam’s own territory (i.e., preaching their faith and evangelizing) as Muslims are in others. Neither is conversion away from Islam allowed – on penalty of death.
Watching Muslims gloat over being the “fastest growing religion” is no different than watching a child delude themselves into thinking that they are smarter and better for “beating” a much wiser adult in a game played under manufactured conditions that render the artificial “victory” entirely meaningless. Islam has been playing by its own rules since its inception. It is unlikely that Muslims will soon develop the confidence in their own religion (or the necessary social maturity) to lift the shameful restrictions to which it owes its success and risk competition with other faiths on a level playing field.
As was first mentioned, the truth of a belief or creed is never established by how many followers it has. But when a religion has to be supported by double standards and death threats, there is all the more reason to doubt its veracity.
(Note: Our article does not take issue with the claim that Islam is the fastest growing religion, not because we necessarily believe it, but because others have done a better job of refuting it. See Islam is not the Fastest Growing Religion in the World, for an example.)

= = = = = = = = = =


Copyright © 2006 TATA Communications. All rights reserved.
Click here for the Terms of Service | Anti Spam Policy | Privacy Policy | FAQ's.