NPR Propaganda Misrepresents Islam

While I was composing another post, NPR's Morning Edition was spewing the standard lies, denying the fatal facts of Islam and condemning FBI training materials which accurately describe Islamic doctrine & practice.  The printed word can not reproduce the arrogant condescension dripping from the narrator's lips as she condemned the training program without demonstrating fallacy or bias.  Lets start with the transcript, when Steve Inskeep introduces the subject.

 Material from FBI courses gives agents a particular view of Muslims in America. It suggests that even mainstream Muslim Americans could be suspect. Rather than being told that terrorists were the problem, some agents were apparently told that Muslims were the problem.

even mainstream Muslim Americans could be suspect

    Define "mainstream Muslim" and enumerate the distinguishing characteristics by which distinguish them from potential suspects.  Do they know and believe Allah's word; his threat and promise? Do they obey Allah and emulate Moe or not?  Can you tell by sight or smell?

terrorists were the problem

    Were the Magnificent 19 Muslims?  The confession of Khalid Sheikh Mohammad indicates that the plotters are Muslims and proud of what they did in Allah's name. The confession indicates that they acted in conformity to religious obligation: Allah's imperatives and Moe's exemplary conduct.

    Was Muhammad bin Abdullah a Muslim?   His bragging about being a terrorist: victory through casting terror, is recorded in two hadith in the collection of Sahih Bukhari: 1.7.331 & 4.52.220. Is mainstream Islam anything other than what he preached and practiced as recorded in the Qur'an [3:151, 8:12, 57, 60; 33:26, 27; 59:2, 13   & hadith?  Allah said that he would cast terror and that he did cast terror, resulting in the death of the men of a Jewish tribe and the enslavement of their widows and orphans. He said that the Jews were more afraid of Moe and his army than they were of him. He commanded Muslims to deal harshly with their victims to strike terror into "those behind them". He commanded them to maximize their military strenth to "strike terror".  But the self-annointed experts of NPR instruct us  that terrorism is not an element of mainstream Islam.  If Islam's canonical texts do not define Islam, what does?

Muslims were the problem

    Without Muslims, Islam would be nothing more than musty books on library shelves. It is Muslims who are the foot soldiers of  Islam. It is Muslims who, in obedience to Allah; in emulation of Moe, stage terror attacks all over the world.

And it came out recently in Wired magazine that a counterterrorism training session at the FBI training center in Quantico, Virginia was teaching agents that Islam was a violent religion and that basically if you are a Muslim and religious, you should be seen as suspect.

Islam was a violent religion

    Where did the instructors get that idea?  Could it be from the Qur'an? [2:216, 190, 8:39,67;  9:29, 111, 123, 47:4, 48:15-20]  Could it be from the hadith? [Riyad-us-Saliheen Book 11, Chapter 234] Could it be Islamic law? [Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9, Hedaya, Volume II, Book IX, Chapter 1] Could it be from Moe's biography? [The Sealed Nectar]

Muslim and religious: suspect

    Exactly why should we suspect anyone who is not a Muslim of plotting an act of Islamic terrorism?  Why should we not be suspicious of Muslims?  Who is more likely than a Muslim to obey Allah and emulate Moe by attempting to cast terror into the hearts of disbelievers?  When you hear hoof beats, do you look for horses or unicorns? 

[...] these were classes on Islamic doctrine that talked about the relationship between Islam and terrorism.

relationship between Islam and terrorism

    Apparently there is something wrong with teaching FBI agents about the relationship between Islam and terrorism. FBI agents must be kept ignorant of Allah's sanctification, imperative & Moe's example of casting terror into the hearts of disbelievers.  Of course, they have no need to know about it.

And let's be fair here, there are different interpretations of Islam, some of them certainly would seem to be violent interpretations of Islam, but most Muslims have argued that overwhelming majorities of Muslims are peaceful and that they have a peaceful religion. So did the training overstate what you can know about the different varieties of this religion?

different interpretations of Islam

    What is the difference between Sunni, Shi'ia & Sufi concerning jihad & terrorism?  Which mainstream school of Islamic law rejects offensive warfare against disbelievers and terrorism?  Al-Shafi'i had something to say about the obligation to perform jihad.Compare what he said to Reliance O9.1.

"The least that the imam must do is that he allow no year to pass without having organised a military expedition by himself, or by his raiding parties, according to the Muslims' interest, so that the jihad will only be stopped in a year for a (reasonable) excuse."

    How does that Shafi'ite fiqh differ from that of Al-Ghazali, a Sufi?

…one must go on jihad (i.e., warlike razzias or raids) at least once a year...

violent interpretations of Islam

    Is anyone better qualified to interpret the Qur'an than the man who first recited it?  How did he interpret it?

Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."

    Allah said "fight them until" Moe said "I have been ordered to fight".  Exactly how can anyone dispute and disprove the obvious?  Would you prefer a second opinion? [Sahih Bukhari 9.84.89, Sunan Abu Dawud 14.2635 ]

majorities of Muslims are peaceful

    Have they not been called to fight yet [48:16, Sahih Bukhari 4.52.79] , or are they hypocrites [9:91...129]? How did the conquests of Syria, Yemen, Egypt, North Africa and India happen if most Muslims are peaceful?

they have a peaceful religion

    If they do, it ain't Islam!  Jihad is defined in Islamic law as "to war against non-Muslims". Islam is not a religion, it is a way of life: intra-species predation. Its religious component is jihad.

Sunan Abu Dawud Book 23, Number 3455:

Narrated Abdullah ibn Umar:

I heard the Apostle of Allah, (peace_be_upon_him) say: When you enter into the inah transaction, hold the tails of oxen, are pleased with agriculture, and give up conducting jihad (struggle in the way of Allah). Allah will make disgrace prevail over you, and will not withdraw it until you return to your original religion.

    Jihad, commerce and agriculture are viewed as alternative economic systems; jihad is preferred over the other two. It becomes clear that jihad is their "original religion".

    The outline below has some quotes from the article in the outer node and the reality in inner nodes.

• One email said that the Prophet Muhammad was being portrayed as a warring military leader.
  • Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 285:

    Narrated Abu Ishaq:

    Once, while I was sitting beside Zaid bin Al-Arqam, he was asked, "How many Ghazwat did the Prophet undertake?" Zaid replied, "Nineteen." [...]

  • This Wikepedia page contains a list of Moe's ghazwat & sariyas, paralleling the table of contents of Guillaume's The Life of Muhammad.
  • According to one calculation, Muhammad himself engaged in 78 battles, of which just one (the Battle of the Ditch) was defensive. 
•  It also cited an instructor as saying that a "true Muslim" had to support or take part in the killing of non-Muslims.
  
  • 3:140. If a wound (and killing) has touched you, be sure a similar wound (and killing) has touched the others. And so are the days (good and not so good), We give to men by turns, that Allâh may test those who believe, and that He may take martyrs from among you. And Allâh likes not the Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong­doers).[Read the context through #186; testing the believers is one purpose of jihad.]
  • 9:111. Verily, Allâh has purchased of the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allâh's Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. It is a promise in truth which is binding on Him in the Taurât (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) and the Qur'ân. And who is truer to his covenant than Allâh? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success . 
  • Sunun Abu Dawud Book 14, Number 2497:

    Narrated AbuUmamah:

    The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: He who does not join the warlike expedition (jihad), or equip, or looks well after a warrior's family when he is away, will be smitten by Allah with a sudden calamity. Yazid ibn Abdu Rabbihi said in his tradition: 'before the Day of Resurrection".  [See 9:38-39.]

  • Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9.1 [...]Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2).  When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others [...] If none of those concerned perform jihad, and it does not happen at all, then everyone who is aware that it is obligatory is guilty of sin, if there was a possibility of having performed it. [...]  As for subsequent times, there are two possible states in respect to non-Muslims.  The first is when they are in their own countries, in which case jihad (def: o9.8) is a communal obligation, and this is what our author is speaking of when he says, "Jihad is a communal obligation," meaning upon the Muslims each year.[...]
• The instructor also told the class, according to a handful of attendees, that Muhammad was an epileptic and the Quran didn't come to him in a series of heavenly visions, but instead was actually part of an epileptic fit.
  • Sahih Muslim Book 007, Number 2654: [...] 'Umar lifted a corner of the cloth and I looked at him and he was emitting a sound of snorting. He (the narrator) said: I thought it was the sound of a camel. When he was relieved of this he said: Where is he who asked about Umra? [...]
  • Sahih Bukhari Volume 3, Book 48, Number 829: [...]By Allah, Allah's Apostle had not got up and nobody had left the house before the Divine Inspiration came to Allah's Apostle. So, there overtook him the same state which used to overtake him, (when he used to have, on being inspired divinely). He was sweating so much so that the drops of the sweat were dropping like pearls though it was a (cold) wintry day. When that state of Allah's Apostle was over, he was smiling and the first word he said, 'Aisha! Thank Allah, for Allah has declared your innocence.' [...] 
  • Sahih Muslim Book 030, Number 5765: [...] How does the the wahi (inspiration) come to you? He said: At times it comes to me like the ringing of a bell and that is most severe for me and when it is over I retain that (what I had received in the form of wahi), and at times an Angel in the form of a human being comes to me (and speaks) and I retain whatever he speaks.[...]
  • Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 119: [...] the Prophet said, "O Um Salama! Don't trouble me by harming 'Aisha, for by Allah, the Divine Inspiration never came to me while I was under the blanket of any woman amongst you except her." 

Obamination: Imagining Moderation in the Party of AllahJohn Brennan,Hezbollah,moderate,terrorist,militant

Rush Limbaugh alerted me to the existence of a Reuters article about how John Brennan would like to boost "moderates" over "hard-liners" among Hezbollah. Since Brennan is a university graduate, I must attribute his attitude to treachery rather than stupidity or ignorance.

Did F.D.R. seek out Moderate Nazis or Kamikazes to counteract their more aggressive brethren? Brennan says that Hezbollah has evolved from pure terrorism to militancy and membership in the Lebanese parliament & cabinet. He appears to think that Reuters readers are not intelligent enough to understand that terrorism & militancy are the same thing and not entirely inconsistent with seeking power through the parliament. Granted, some purists may reject the latter method, but most are willing to operate on parallel tracks. We need to recognize that those tracks run to total conquest; to the concentration of temporal and spiritual power in Muslim hands.

Shi'ia or Sunni, they're all Muslims. They all read from the same Qur'an, which issues a demonic mandate to conquer and dominate the entire world through intimidation and aggression. The main difference is who should rule, a direct descendant of Moe or a popularly chosen caliph from the ummah. So they differ over muta, al-taqiyya & making shrines of graves. Big deal. They all want us dead or enslaved. They all want Israel eradicated. So what if some of them have issues of pragmatism, tactics and scheduling?

So long as Muslims believe that Allah said "fight them" and meant it, as recorded in the Qur'an, a significant number of them will attempt to obey that command, with resulting death and destruction. Anyone who thinks that "moderate", or less aggressive Muslims have the ability and will to stop their more zealous brethren from acting on Allah's word needs psychiatric help.

Asserting that "moderate elements" exist within Moe's War Cult can only be attributed to treachery. Islam is a war cult; war is what Muslims do. They have been waging war for nearly 1400 years, what would make anyone believe that they are about to stop? They are promised victory and great rewards in this life and the next if they wage war. They are threatened with disgrace in this life and damnation in the next if they abstain from waging war. But the likes of Brennan & Obama won't get a clue. They don't want one; they want Islam to triumph over Western Civilization.

If you think that Islam is a "great religion of peace", "hijacked", "twisted"," perverted" or "distorted" by a "tiny minority of militants:, then you are sadly ignorant of the doctrines of orthodox Islam; you have not read and comprehended my blog posts on that subject. I have some clues for you.

• Islamic Terror.chm [30.4KB] A 6 part series from Freedom Ain't Free. New 10/07/08
• Jihad.chm [45KB] A 6 part series from Freedom Ain't Free. New 10/07/08
• What's Wrong With Islam/Muslims.chm [23KB]. New 10/11/08. A single blog post that informs Kuffar and sticks the facts in Islam's eye in the most effective manner. Placed in the public domain for non-commercial use; repost at will.
• Islamic Supremacism [49KB] A 3 part series from Freedom Ain't Free. New 01/02/09. Your only source for information about the origins of Islamic Supremacism. {Allah's damned book.}
• FOMIJihad.chm [163.4KB] The Offensive Jihad thread from the old FOMI anti Islam forum. This thread contains several significant quotes from Fiqh, both ancient and modern. It also has some interesting links to follow. New 01/06/09.
• Know Thine Enemy.chm (188KB) the series of blog posts compiled into an ebook for easy reference.

Al-Nafisi Incites Terrorism

Link to the video.

MEMRI Special Dispatch- No. 2247 02/16/09

Abdallah Al-Nafisi, a Kuwaiti professor, had his speech broadcast by Al-Jazeera TV February 2. The following is a transcript of the English sub titles.

Four pounds of anthrax in a suitcase this big - carried by a fighter through tunnels from Mexico into the U.S. are guaranteed to kill 330,000 Americans within a single hour, if it is properly spread in population centers there What a horrifying idea. 9/11 will be small change in comparison. Am I right? There is no need for airplanes, conspiracies, timings, and so on. One person, with the courage to carry four pounds of anthrax, will go to the White House lawn, and will spread this "confetti" all over them, and then will do these cries of joy. It will turn into a real "celebration."

The WMD is a problem. The Americans are afraid that the WMDs might fall into the hands of "terrorist" organizations like Al-Qaeda and others. There is good reason for the American's fears, because Al-Qaeda used to have in the Herat region... it had laboratories in north Afghanistan. They have scientists, chemists and nuclear physicists. They are nothing like they are portrayed by these mercenary journalists - backward Bedouins living in caves. No, no. By no means. This kind of talk can fool only naive people. People who follow such things know that Al-Qaeda has laboratories just like Hizbullah.

Hizbullah has laboratories in South Lebanon, in which it produces weapons and sells them. Hizbullah has laboratories in South Lebanon, from which it sells weapons to Romania and Hungary.

If they call someone a terrorist, say: "He's a friend of mine." Why? Because these "terrorists" are the world's most God-fearing people. They are the most honorable people in the world, the best people in the world. [Applause.] I have personally met Mullah Omar. I had the honor of meeting with Mullah Omar. This is a man who does not belong to this era. He always refused to meet with Western delegations. He would say to them: "Go to Kabul, I am in Qandahar." "Truly, the polytheists are impure" - if you know what I mean. "Go meet the Foreign minister to talk politics, I am staying here. " This is the kind of people who are suitable for dealing with the West. As for Arafat, Dahlan, and their ilk - they do not benefit the nation in any way.

In the US, there are more than 300,000 militia members, who are calling to attack the federal government in Washington, and to banish the Arabs, the Jews, and the negoes (sic) from the US. These are racist people. They are called "rednecks." The Ku Klux Klan. They are racists. These militias even think about bombing nuclear plants within the US. May Allah grant them success, [Laughter.] even though we are not white, or even close to it, right? They have plans to bomb the nuclear plant at Lake Michigan. This plant is very important. It supplies electricity to all of North Africa (sic). May Allah grant success to one of these militia leaders, who is thinking about bombing this plant. I believe that we should devote part of our prayers to him. We should pray that Allah grants him success, so he can complete this mission, and we will be able to visit him and congratulate him, Allah willing.

Allah stated in the Koran that the hostility between us and (the Jews) is eternal. So whoever talks about Dialogue - cut off his tongue! What Dialogue are they talking about?! There is no room for Dialogue. Allah said that our hostility toward the Jews is eternal, and then along comes someone and talks about brotherhood and so on.... Anyone who contradicts the Koran is an infidel. Accusing people of heresy? Yes. I'm all for it. Yes, I support accusing people of heresy.

We should also defend the resistance, and not remain silent in the face of this organized campaign against the resistance, in the press of the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf, and other Arab newspapers. Thee are voices expressing doubts about the leaders of the resistance. We must confront these (journalists) and prevent them from continuing this, even if it means calling them over the phone, and saying to them: "Do not repeat these despicable things in your columns or your articles, or else we will take the following measures against you." We must resort to pressure with these people. We must not remain silent. We must not leave them to their own devices under the pretext of freedom of expression. This is a fifth column. I, abdullah Fahd Abd Al-Aziz Al-Nafisi, am inciting you to confront, using any means possible, anyone who speaks out against the resistance. Any means possible" - get it?

The Hamas ministers are mujahideen, I know a minister who actually participated in operations.

In Special Dispatch- No. 2281, 03/16/09, MEMRI quotes three "liberal" critics of Abdallah Al-Nafisi. One of them, columnist Ahmad Al-Sarraf, had this to say.

"More importantly, what would we, the Arabs and the Muslims, or [anyone else], gain if a religious fanatic carried out to the letter what this 'great thinker' said? For example, would the world be a more just, good, and peaceful place, or would this be this be the first sign of the coming of the awaited Mahdi, [who is said to arrive] when the world is filled with injustice and oppression?

"What would be the response of the U.S. government and its people if we killed 330,000 innocent Americans in a single hour? Would we then become capable of getting Palestine back from the Israelis, the [UAE] islands back from the Iranians, Alexandretta back from the Turks, and Andalus back from the Spaniards? And what good would all that be if nuclear bombs fell on our heads and destroyed the little that is good in our countries?

What are those, if not pragmatic arguments? Concern is expressed about outcomes, expected failure and possible retaliation. Where is the condemnation based on the intrinsic immorality of the proposal?

"And are our feelings and emotions so dead that we are not bothered by [the prospect of] the death of 330,000 innocent Americans in a single hour - among whom may well be some of our own people, and true friends - just because the government of this country has helped one of our enemies? And as though we ourselves haven't been our own enemy for hundreds of years? Oh logic, oh reason: how beautiful you are, and how rare."

The writer implies enmity to Israel, does he object to attacks against her as well? Would he have responded in this manner if Al-Nafsi had suggested an attack on Tel Aviv? Notice the qualifier: "innocent Americans". Are there "guilty Americans" who should be killed? Is Ahmad aware that Allah considers all Non-Muslims to be sinners who must be humiliated, punished and subjugated?

Dr. Al-Nafisi is a citizen of Kuwait, a nation with good reason to have a favorable attitude towards the USA. The speech was delivered to a an approving audience in Bahrain, another supposedly "moderate" Muslim nation.