Overblog Suivre ce blog
Administration Créer mon blog

Thérèse Zrihen-Dvir

Regard d'un écrivain sur le Monde

8 novembre 2012 4 08 /11 /novembre /2012 17:22

American Muslims: Sharia v. Freedom v… “Sampling”?

November 3rd, 2012 by Andrew Bostom |

This Al-Banna (Gamal) Appears Accurate (and Honest):Most Muslims today are Salafis

UCLA Law Professor Eugene Volokh e-mailed me to raise legitimate concerns about the “representativeness” of the n=600 US Muslim sample assessed by Wenzel Strategies, during October 22 to 26, 2012. Due to sampling limitations, Professor Volokh cast doubt on the salient findings, which I summarized, as follows:

When asked, “Do you believe that criticism of Islam or Muhammad should be permitted under the Constitution’s First Amendment?, 58% replied “no,” while only 42% affirmed this most basic manifestation of freedom of speech, i.e., to criticize religious, or any other dogma. Indeed, oblivious to US constitutional law, as opposed to Islam’s Sharia, a largely concordant 45% of respondents agreed “…that those who criticize or parody Islam in the U.S. should face criminal charges,” while 38% did not, and 17% were “unsure”.  Moreover, fully 12% of this Muslim sample even admitted they believed in application of the draconian, Sharia-based punishment for the non-existent crime of “blasphemy” in the US code, answering affirmatively, “…that Americans who criticize or parody Islam should be put to death.”

Also, consistent with such findings 43% of these US Muslims rejected the right of members of other faiths to proselytize to adherents of Islam, disagreeing, “…that U.S. citizens have a right to evangelize Muslims to consider other faiths.” Additional confirmatory data revealed that nearly two-fifths (39%) agreed “…that Shariah law should be considered when adjudicating cases that involve Muslims, ” while nearly one-third (32%) of this American Muslim sample believed “…Shariah law should be the supreme law of the land in the US.”

Professor Volokh, at my urging, contacted Wenzel Strategies directly to clarify the basic methodology, but also followed up on my suggestion that he obtain basic demographic data for not only the Wenzel Strategies US Muslim sample, but a larger, nationally representative sample of US Muslims. He then graciously shared these findings with me.

Here is what Professor Volokh discovered—and kindly relayed to me—about the Wenzel Strategies sampling procedures:

They were working off a list of Muslims “compiled through a self-selection process,” apparently generated from “dozens of methods of self-selection,” such as “information gathered during commercial activity.”…They then randomly selected people to call from the list. Of those they called, they got a response rate of 5.6%.

The basic demographic data from the Wenzel Strategies convenience sample were as follows (compiled from these tables, here and here):

Sex: 58.33% male, 41.67% female.

Geography: 22% West, 20% Midwest, 20% South, 38% East.

Age: 13.5% under 30, 14% 30s, 13.5% 40s, 26% 50s, 18% 60s, 15% 70s.

Income: 44% under $50K, 15% $50K to $75K, 22% $75K to $125K, 15% >$125K, and 4% refused to answer.

Citizen: 98%

Registered to vote: 97%.

Party: 81% Obama/leaning Obama, 11% Romney/leaning Romney, 8% not sure.

For comparison, these summary demographic data were extracted from this 2011 “nationally representative” Pew survey of Muslim Americans.

Sex: 55% male, 45% female.

Geography: No data.

Age: 36% 18-to-29, 23% 30s, 28% 40-54, 12% 55+.

Income: 64% under $50K, 13% $50K to $75K, 8% $75K to $100K, 14% >$100K.

Citizen: 81%.

Registered to vote: 66% certain, 30% no or not certain, 3% don’t know

Party: 70% Democrat/leaning Democrat, 11% Republican/leaning Republican.

However, it is worth noting the following about the final Pew sample of n=1033 American Muslims, obtained with state of the art methodology designed to limit bias and enhance external validity/“representativeness”:

  • It was winnowed, ultimately, from a total of  513,147 land line and 179,608 cell phone numbers
  • It also made use “within the land line random digit dialing frame of US telephone numbers” of 608,397 numbers “that had a high probability of belonging to a household with a Muslim adult” (compiled by the market research firm Experian)

As I explained to Professor Volokh, given the practical constraints of all sampling methodologies—driven, primarily, by the > 90% overall rate of refusal to participate in phone surveys recently lamented by Pew itself—one is always confronted with the dilemma of biased samples, whether overt convenience samples (such as the Wenzel Associates American Muslim study group), or inconveniently obtained, de facto convenience samples such as the 2011 Pew survey of US Muslim participants! Thus the only relevant question remaining once internal validity is established—and it was for the Wenzel Associates sample, which, comparing the consistent responses to independent queries about free speech, “blaspheming Islam” as a criminal offense, and application of the Sharia in the US, makes plain—is whether the bias augmented or reduced the observed outcome/effect.

Apropos, I concur with Professor Volokh’s comparative assessment that the Wenzel Associates American Muslim sample, relative to the Pew sample, was “markedly skewed in favor of older and wealthier respondents.” However, if we accept the current academic (and policymaking) consensus that youth,  and, in particular, lack of socioeconomic advantages, are the drivers of “Muslim radicalization,” the Wenzel Associates sample is biased towards moderation.

Sadly, perhaps these Wenzel Associates survey results from American Muslims, in turn, validate Gamal al-Banna’s recent observation. The eccentric, secular-leaning nonagenarian Egyptian gadfly, whose older sibling and jihadist “martyr” Hasan al-Banna founded the Muslim Brotherhood, remarked during a 2011 interview, “most Muslims today are Salafis”. Gamal al-Banna attributed this mass Muslim phenomenon to the 10th century onset “closure of the gates of  ijtihad ” (ijtihad  being the process whereby the most select, learned Muslim legists were allowed narrow interpretive “flexibility” regarding Sharia mandates), leaving the preponderance of Muslims, ever since, to blindly follow mainstream, traditionalist, i.e.,   “Salafi,” interpretations of Islam.

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article
8 octobre 2012 1 08 /10 /octobre /2012 15:57

Pre-9/11/12 Benghazi Attack Pentagon Report: Al Qaeda Jihadists Significant Threat to Libya

October 8th, 2012 by Andrew Bostom |

The nonpareil national security investigative reporter Bill Gertz brings to our attention an internal 54 pp. Pentagon report obtained by the Washington Free Beacon., “AL-QAEDA IN LIBYA: A PROFILE—A Report Prepared by the Federal Research Division, Library of Congress under an Interagency Agreement with the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office’s Irregular Warfare Support Program, August, 2012.”

Prepared and issued  before the murderous 9/11/12 attacks, which left 4 dead—the US ambassador Chris Stevens, two former US Navy Seals (Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods), and a US Air Force veteran (Sean Smith)—the report emphasized how Al Qaeda Senior Leadership (AQSL), working via a large, powerful, and well-established jihadist infrastructure in Libya, sought to capitalize on the US and NATO-supported insurrection which toppled the Libyan despot Qaddafi, and fulfill its goal of making Libya part of an eventual transnational caliphate.

The report highlighted an ominous July, 2012 public jihadist rally, while emphasizing, with resigned sobriety, how such jiadist/Al-Qaeda discourse resonates with a significant swath of the Libyan population

In June 2012, Ansar al-Sharia staged a large-scale rally and military show of force involving dozens of military vehicles, with Islamists wearing the Afghan mujahidin’s traditional outfit. Some leaders described themselves as Islamists and called for implementation of sharia similar to that which the Taliban had implemented in Afghanistan or al-Qaeda in Somalia and Yemen. The military show of force consisted of a parade in which some 30 battalions from Benghazi, Darnah, Misrata, Al-Nufilyah, Ajdabiyah, and other Libyan towns took part in the first meeting in support of sharia in Benghazi. Islamist leaders pointed out that the aim of the military parade was to terrorize (Arabic: irhab) those who do not want to be judged by God’s law. Islamist leaders urged the Transitional National Council to clarify the identity of the state as Islamic or secular. Such a system of local affiliates might use neighborhood mosques as a support infrastructure for a religious and popular movement that could frighten politicians attempting to run on a moderate Islamic platform. …A weak Islamist-dominated central government is unlikelyto confront such a radical movement, at least in the short term. The minister of religious affairs expressed his government’s weakness when he lamented the “hijacking” of mosques by extremist imams imposed by militiamen. Two of these local Islamist-oriented militias—Ansar al-Sharia and al-A’hrar Libya—are the tip of the iceberg. They broadcast typical al-Qaeda–type propaganda on the Internet, and they have adopted the black flag, which symbolizes commitment to violent jihad promoted by AQSL.

AQSL’s discourse may attract a sizable audience, especially among disenchanted former rebels, insecure tribal leaders, and Salafist clerics that could be turned into a support network and recruiting tool for jihadists. As demonstrated by ongoing rallies of supporters of the implementation of sharia, the Salafist movement is gaining ground in Libya and is most likely to adopt an uncompromising stance with regard to sharia and secularism close to the one typically promoted by al-Qaeda.

The  report’s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY features these 10 points of emphasis, which raise serious questions about both the callous inattention to security for US diplomatic and ancillary personnel in Benghazi, as well as the abysmal failure of imagination regarding overall US policy in Libya, which has abetted the most fanatical jihadist movement extant—Al Qaeda itself.

1. Al-Qaeda has tried to exploit the “Arab Awakening” in North Africa for its own purposes during the past year. Al-Qaeda Senior Leadership (AQSL), based in Pakistan, is likely seeking to build a clandestine network in Libya as it pursues its strategy of reinforcing its presence in North Africa and the Middle East, taking advantage of the “Arab Awakening” that has disrupted existing counterterrorism capabilities. Although AQSL’s previous attempt to co-opt the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) was inconclusive, the Libyan Revolution may have created an environment conducive to jihad and empowered the large and active community of Libyan jihadists, which is known to be well connected to international jihad.

2. AQSL’s strategic goals remain restoration of the caliphate, instituting sharia, and ending the Western presence in Muslim lands. Al-Qaeda’s primary goal in Libya is to establish an Islamic emirate as part of its overall objective to reestablish the caliphate.

3. AQSL in Pakistan issued strategic guidance to followers in Libya and elsewhere to take advantage of the Libyan rebellion. AQSL’s strategic guidance was to:

- gather weapons,

- establish training camps,

- build a network in secret,

- establish an Islamic state, and

- institute sharia.

4. AQSL in Pakistan dispatched trusted senior operatives as emissaries and leaders who could supervise building a network. Al-Qaeda has established a core network in Libya, but it remains clandestine and refrains from using the al-Qaeda name.

5. Ansar al-Sharia, led by Sufian Ben Qhumu, a former Guantanamo detainee, has increasingly embodied al-Qaeda’s presence in Libya, as indicated by its active social-media propaganda, extremist discourse, and hatred of the West, especially the United States.

6.  Al-Qaeda adherents in Libya used the 2011 Revolution to establish well-armed, well-trained, and combat-experienced militias. Militia groups, led by Wisam Ben Hamid and Hayaka Alla, have adopted similar behavior, with, however, fewer advertised grudges against the West. The only open-source material that has linked these groups, aside from their jihadist credentials and their defense of sharia, is their attachment to the flag that has come to symbolize al-Qaeda.

7. The al-Qaeda clandestine network is currently in an expansion phase, running training camps and media campaigns on social-media platforms, such as Facebook and YouTube. However, it will likely continue to mask its presence under the umbrella of the Libyan Salafist movement, with which it shares a radical ideology and a general intent to implement sharia in Libya and elsewhere.

8. Al-Qaeda affiliates such as AQIM are also benefiting from the situation in Libya. AQIM will likely join hands with the al-Qaeda clandestine network in Libya to secure a supply of arms for its areas of operations in northern Mali and Algeria.

9. The July 2012 elections failed to generate a strong and unified national leadership that could address the chronic insecurity posed by the multiplicity of local militias, which al-Qaeda’s clandestine network has probably infiltrated.

10. Al-Qaeda’s clandestine network is highly likely to recruit and train local and foreign jihadists to be sent to Syria

Libyan Jihadists Per Capita and by Hometowns as of 2005 During the Iraq War

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article
7 octobre 2012 7 07 /10 /octobre /2012 02:13

Free Speech, Muhammad’s Character—And Ours

October 6th, 2012 by Andrew Bostom |

Mohammed (on horseback) before members of the submitting Banu Nadir, one of the Medinan Jewish tribes he aggressively  vanquished and expropriated, in a series of proto-jihad campaigns which helped establish the nascent Islamic state. From the Jami’al-Tawarikh, dated 1314-5. In the Nour Foundation’s Nasser D. Khalili Collection of Islamic Art, London.

**

Cross-posted at Pajamas Media

Following violent Muslim reactions to the amateurish “Innocence of Muslims” video, which depicted some of the less salutary aspects of Muhammad’s biography, international and domestic Islamic agendas are openly converging with vehement calls for universal application of Islamic blasphemy law. This demand to abrogate Western freedom of expression was reiterated  in a parade of speeches by Muslim leaders at the UN General Assembly. The US Muslim community echoed such admonitions, for example during a large demonstration in Dearborn, Michigan, and in a press release by the Islamic Circle of North America.

Previously, the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference (subsequently renamed the Organization of Islamic Cooperation [OIC])—the largest voting bloc in the UN, which represents all the major Muslim countries, and the Palestinian Authority—had sponsored and actually navigated to passage a compromise U.N. resolution insisting countries criminalize what it calls “defamation of religion.” Now the OIC—via its Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu—is calling for a specific ban on speech allegedly impugning the character of Islam’s prophet, which he termed “hate speech.” Ihsanoglu accompanied  his demand with a thinly veiled threat of violence should such “provocations” recur:

You have to see that there is a provocation. You should understand the psychology of people who revere their prophet and don’t want people to insult him,…If the Western world fails to understand the sensitivity of the Muslim world, then we are in trouble…[such provocations pose] a threat to international peace and security and the sanctity of life.

Earlier, in a long Pajamas Media review of the Huma Abedin family-dominated Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA), and its ideological drivers, I highlighted the IMMA’s May 15, 2012 journal contents (vol. 32, issue 1), which championed the relevant Weltanschauung of Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi (d. 1999).

Nadwi was a founding member of the Muslim World League, a member of the Organization of Islamic Conference (now Cooperation), a member of the World Supreme Council of Mosques, and a member of the Fiqh Council of Rabita. Nadwi participated in a host of other activities via Islamic organizations and institutions, including, notably, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY). In India, Nadwi was a rector of Nadwatul Ulama, and president of the Academy of Islamic Research and Publications.)

Recently, I came across Nadwi’s remarkable juxtaposition of  his apologetic views on Muhammad, and the Sharia, which epitomize the mindset behind the current efforts to impose Sharia-based universal blasphemy laws, now clearly manifest.

Nadwi wrote these words just over 50 years ago (in 1961; the English translation was published in 1976; Speaking Plainly to the West, Lucknow, 1976, pp. 105-106):

…[T]he record of the sayings and doings of the sacred Prophet, his life-account, is a fragrant legacy which is extremely beautiful as well as incandescent. It makes the most shining page of the story of human advancement which can be recreated by reminding mankind of its true station. The reading of it restores the confidence of man in himself and revives in him the awareness of nobility. The picture it presents is so exquisitely charming that anyone whose aesthetic sense has not deserted him and in whom the feeling of perfection is present cannot fail to be aroused and inspired by it. He will be seized with ambition to attain the heights by emulating the Prophet’s example that may endue his life with sublimity, peace, and magnanimity. It unties knots of intellect and unravels the hidden mysteries. This wonderful portrait of lofty virtues and splendid accomplishments is present to this day in its pristine glory and the alteration of circumstances and the passage of time have done nothing to rob it of its purity or radiance.

The preserved treasure of the Islamic Sharia is present, without any distortion or amendment, as it was left behind by the bringer of the Sharia, the Prophet himself. The Sharia is the most complete and the most perfect jurisprudential system in the world. It denotes an admirable blending of the ancient with the modern and can serve the needs of all ages and climes. It is also well established for the future. It possesses such wise and sound foundations that the edifice of a healthy society or civilization can always be built on them.

I maintain that unless we are willing to offer a reasoned, but firm rebuttal to the entire genre (represented by Nadwi’s writings) of bowdlerized, triumphant views of Islam’s prophet, and the Sharia itself, than we are abetting, or passively accepting the Sharia supremacist agenda. Fortunately, pellucid, objective Western and freethinking Muslim scholarly analyses debunking these views are at our disposal.

Notwithstanding Nadwi’s hagiography, the renowned Islamologist, Arthur Jeffery, in his review of A. Guillaume’s seminal 1955 English translation of the defining pious Muslim biography of Islam’s prophet by Ibn Ishaq, remarked:

Years ago the late Canon Gairdner in Cairo said that the best answer to the numerous apologetic Lives of Muhammad published in the interests of Muslim propaganda in the West would be an unvarnished translation of the earliest Arabic biography of the prophet. In this present volume such a translation is put into our hands in a beautifully printed and produced book. … Byzantine, Syriac, and Armenian writers who mention him say only that he was a merchant who appeared as a prophet and sent the Arabs out on their wars of conquest.

Nearly a century ago (in 1915), W.H.T. Gairdner, the great Arabic linguist and scholar of Islam, had indeed noted dispassionately what is readily apparent from Muhammad’s actual biography (as opposed to the treacly Muslim hagiography), based exclusively on the reverent Muslim sources:

As incidents in the life of an Arab conqueror, the tales of raiding, private assassinations and public executions, perpetual enlargements of the harem, and so forth, might be  historically explicable and therefore pardonable but it is another matter that they should be taken as a setting forth of the moral ideal for all time.

Four years later, in 1919, Gairdner wrote an essay titled “Muhammad Without Camouflage,” responding to a mendacious birthday tribute panegyric of Islam’s prophet written collaboratively by Muslims and non-Muslims. A particularly trenchant segment of Gairdner’s rebuttal discussed the slaughter of the vanquished Medinan Jewish tribe, Banu Qurayza, whose massacre became an important motif in jihad war jurisprudence. Relying exclusively upon Muslim sources, Gairdner highlighted without equivocation the pivotal role that Muhammad himself played in orchestrating the overall events:

The umpire who gave the fatal decision (Saad) was extravagantly praised by Muhammad. Yet his action was wholly and admittedly due to his lust for personal vengeance on a tribe which had occasioned him a painful wound. In the agony of its treatment he cried out: “O God, let not my soul go forth ere thou has cooled my eye from the Bani Quraiza” [Banu Qurayza]. This was the arbiter to whose word the fate of that tribe was given over. His sentiments were well-known to Muhammad, who appointed him. It is perfectly clear from that that their slaughter had been decreed. What makes it clearer still is the assertion of another biographer that Muhammad had refused to treat with the Bani Quraiza at all until they had “come down to receive the judgment of the Apostle of God.” Accordingly “they came down”; in other words put themselves in his power. And only then was the arbitration of Saad proposed and accepted — but not accepted until it had been forced on him by Muhammad; for Saad first declined and tried to make Muhammad take the responsibility, but was told “qad amarak Allahu takhuma fihim,” — “Allah has commanded you to give sentence in their case.” From every point of view therefore the evidence is simply crushing that Muhammad was the ultimate author of this massacre.

The modern Muslim scholar Ali Dashti’s biography of Muhammad, 23 Years:  A Study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad has also chronicled Muhammad’s “changed course” at Medina, where the Muslim prophet begins to “issue orders for war” in multiple and repeated Koranic revelations (Sura [chapter] 9 being composed almost entirely of such war proclamations—permanent injunctions against pagans, Jews, and Christians). Prior to describing some of the numerous assassinations Muhammad ordered, Ali Dashti observes:

…Islam was gradually transformed from a purely spiritual mission into a militant and punitive organization whose progress depended on booty from raids and [tax] revenue….The Prophet’s steps in the decade after the hejra [emigration from Mecca to Medina] were directed to the end of establishing and consolidating a religion-based state. Some of the deeds done on his command [were] killings of prisoners and political assassinations…

Pace Nadwi’s hagiographic views—the narrative all are being forced to accept lest they be accused of “blasphemy” under the OIC-hatched “defamation of religions” UN resolution—the persistent consequences of Muhammad’s status as “a good [even ‘beautiful’] example of conduct” (Koran 33:21), across a continuum of nearly 14 centuries, remain glaringly evident. Invoked by contemporary Muslim clerics, governments, journalists and jihadists alike, Muhammad’s sacralized behaviors continue to result in: exploited child brides and general misogyny, sanctioned by law; Draconian, mutilating punishments such as stoning for adultery and amputation for theft; jihad violence against non-Muslims and Sharia (Islamic Law)-sanctioned oppression of non-Muslims under Muslim rule.

The great Orientalist David S. Margoliouth’s very balanced 1905 biography of Islam’s prophet recognized Muhammad as “ . . . a great man, who solved a political problem of appalling difficulty—the construction of a state and empire out of the Arab tribes.” Margoliouth recounted this accomplishment without “apology” or “indictment,” summarizing faithfully the images of Muhammad that emerge in the earliest and most authoritative pious Muslim biography of the Muslim prophet by Ibn Ishaq (d. 761/767), as follows:

In order to gain his ends he recoils from no expedient, and he approves of similar unscrupulousness on the part of his adherents, when exercised in his interest. He profits to the utmost from the chivalry of the Meccans, but rarely requites it with the like. He organizes assassinations and wholesale massacres. 

His career as tyrant of Medina is that of a robber chief, whose political economy consists in securing and dividing plunder . . . He is himself an unbridled libertine and encourages the same passion in his followers. For whatever he does he is prepared to plead the express authorization of the deity. It is, however, impossible to find any doctrine which he is not prepared to abandon in order to secure a political end…This is a disagreeable picture for the founder of a religion, and it cannot be pleaded that it is a picture drawn by an enemy…

If we are silent and ignore the reality of Muhammad’s “beautiful example of conduct”, in lieu of defiantly upholding the irrefragable evidence briefly adduced herein, we are tacitly condemning Professor Margoliouth, posthumously, and all who presently understand and expound the proven wisdom of his judgments,  and submissively acquiescing to the establishment of universal Islamic blasphemy law.

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article
6 octobre 2012 6 06 /10 /octobre /2012 01:10

Obama Quote Displayed in Cairo Airport: “We must educate our children to become like young Egyptian people.”

October 5th, 2012 by Andrew Bostom |

A colleague sent me the image below from Egypt’s Cairo Airport, which had been discussed in an e-mail posted September 22, 2012, at Godfather Politics:

“My husband and I just came back from the Middle East. As we arrived in Cairo, going down the mechanical stairs to go to the baggage claim area, there’s this big poster which reads: “We must educate our children to become like young Egyptian people.” President of the USA, Barack Obama

Notwithstanding President Obama’s quoted admonition (from 2011), a detailed 2004 study of Egyptian children’s textbooks (“Jews, Christians, War and Peace in Egyptian School Textbooks”), revealed their unabashed inculcation of anti-infidel hatred. For example, explicit sanctioning for jihad-related beheadings is provided in a seemingly pedestrian manner,

Studies in Theology: Tradition and Morals, Grade 11, (2001) pp. 291-92 …This noble [Qur’anic] Surah [Surat Muhammad]… deals with questions of which the most important are as follows: ‘Encouraging the faithful to perform jihad in God’s cause, to behead the infidels, take them prisoner, break their power, and make their souls humble – all that in a style which contains the highest examples of urging to fight. You see that in His words: ‘When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take a ransom from them, until war shall lay down its burdens.’

Commentary on the Surahs of Muhammad, Al-Fath, Al-Hujurat and Qaf, Grade 11, (2002) p. 9 …When you meet them in order to fight [them], do not be seized by compassion [towards them] but strike the[ir] necks powerfully…. Striking the neck means fighting, because killing a person is often done by striking off his head. Thus, it has become an expression for killing even if the fighter strikes him elsewhere. This expression contains a harshness and emphasis that are not found in the word ‘kill,’ because it describes killing in the ugliest manner, i.e., cutting the neck and making the organ – the head of the body – fly off [the body].’ 

Although chilling to our modern sensibilities, particularly when being taught to children, these are merely classical interpretations of the rules for jihad war, based on over a millennium of Muslim theology and jurisprudence.  And the context of these teachings is unambiguous, as the translator makes clear:

[the] concept of jihad is interpreted in the Egyptian school curriculum almost exclusively as a military endeavor… it is war against God’s enemies, i.e., the infidels… it is war against the homeland’s enemies and a means to strengthening the Muslim states in the world. In both cases, jihad is encouraged, and those who refrain from participating in it are denounced.

Teaching Egyptian school children anti-infidel jihad hatred is clearly a long, ongoing , and ignoble tradition even within the modern era. As the scholar E. W. Lane reported after several years of residence in both Cairo and Luxor (initially in 1825-1828, then in 1833-1835),

I am credibly informed that children in Egypt are often taught at school, a regular set of curses to denounce upon the persons and property of Christians, Jews, and all other unbelievers in the religion of Mohammad.

Lane’s nephew Edward Stanley Poole (who edited the 1860 re-issue of his uncle’s classic work), was provided such a prayer, which he translated, below, from a contemporary 19th century Arabic text, containing a typical curse on non-Muslims, recited daily by Muslim schoolchildren:

I seek refuge with God from Satan the accursed. In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. O God, aid El-Islam, and exalt the word of truth, and the faith, by the preservation of thy servant and the son of thy servant, the Sultan of the two continents (Europe and Asia), and the Khakan (Emperor or monarch) of the two seas [the Mediterranean and Black Seas], the Sultan, son of the Sultan (Mahmood) Khan (the reigning Sultan when this prayer was composed). O God, assist him, and assist his armies, and all the forces of the Muslims: O Lord of the beings of the whole world. O God, destroy the infidels and polytheists, thine enemies, the enemies of the religion. O God, make their children orphans, and defile their abodes, and cause their feet to slip, and give them and their families, and their households and their women and their children and their relations by marriage and their brothers and their friends and their possessions and their race and their wealth and their lands as booty to the Muslims: O Lord of the beings of the whole world.

The modern scholar of Islamic civilization, S.D. Goitein, warned more than a century later, in 1949, speaking of the Arab world generally, in particular Egypt:

Islamic fanaticism…is now openly encouraged…writers whose altogether Western style (was mentioned earlier) have been vying with each other for some time in compiling books on the heroes and virtues of Islam…What has now become possible in educated circles may be gathered from the following quotation from an issue of the New East, an Arab monthly periodical describing itself as the “organ of the academic youth of the East”:

“Let us fight fanatically for our religion; let us love a man-because he is a Moslem; let us honor a man- because he is a Moslem; let us prefer him to anyone else-because he is a Moslem; and never let us make friends with unbelievers, because they have nothing but evil for us.” 

And a decade later, in 1958, Lebanese Law Professor Antoine Fattal, a noted scholar of the legal condition of non-Muslims living under the Sharia, lamented,

No social relationship, no fellowship is possible between Muslims and dhimmis…

Even today, the study of the jihad is part of the curriculum of all the Islamic institutes. In the universities of Al-Azhar, Najaf, and Zaitoune, students are still taught that the holy war is a binding prescriptive decree, pronounced against the Infidels, which will only be revoked with the end of the world… The (Muslim) Prophet did in fact say… and his words have not expired: “I came with the sword…Jihad is engaged now and to the day when the last handful of men of my nation will be called to fight the ‘Antichrist!”  Islam will not emerge from this impasse until the day when its scholars take the initiative to open wide the doors of ijtihad.

Sadly, a half century after Fattal made his observations, the sacralized hatred of jihad is still being inculcated as part of the formal education of Muslim youth in Egypt, the most populous Arab country, and throughout the Arab Muslim, and larger non-Arab Muslim world.

Mr. Obama should have demanded that such bellicose, hate-mongering instructional practices be abolished in Egypt (and throughout Islamdom) rather than perversely extolling such indoctrination as an educational model for American youth

 

 

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article
30 septembre 2012 7 30 /09 /septembre /2012 21:51

Geller Agonistes—Truth in Advertising About the Jihad Against Israel

September 30th, 2012 by Andrew Bostom |

Even the NY Times seemed revolted by the glorification of the August 9, 2001 Jerusalem Sbarro Restaurant homicide bombing carnage—an act of jihad terrorism committed by Hamas—“re-created” the next month with ghoulish joy, in a Palestinian Muslim exhibit whose entrance (complete with replicated Sbarro sign) is depicted in the photo above.

The September 26, 2001 Times report included these grisly details:

Created by a student faction of Hamas…The most contentious section is a mock-up of the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem where 15 people were killed in a suicide attack in August including not only gnawed pizza crusts but bloody plastic body parts suspended from the ceiling as if they were blasting through the air

 

**

Cross-posted at Pajamas Media

Geller Agonistes—Truth in Advertising About the Jihad Against Israel

All of us who cherish Western free speech, particularly when it elucidates irrefragable truths, owe an enormous debt to journalist and author, Pamela Geller.

With courageous tenacity, and unflappable poise (listen to former New York Governor David Paterson’s own eyewitness account of her appearance at the New York Metropolitan Transportation [MTA] Authority board meeting, 9/27/12 ), Ms. Geller obtained permission to post advertisements in the New York City subway system that appositely characterize the Palestinian Muslim—and larger global Muslim umma’s—annihilationist jihad against Israel.

An earlier advertising campaign allowed by the MTA, promulgated the ahistorical Islamic supremacist narrative: that all of historical Palestine remains the “fay territory,” or booty, of its 7th century Muslim jihad conquerors, who massacred, pillaged, deported, and enslaved the indigenous non-Arab Christian, Jewish, and Samaritan communities; ignored the fact that in 1922, 78% of the League of Nations Mandate for a Jewish Palestinian homeland, was arbitrarily used to create a Judenrein by law Muslim state, i.e. “Trans-Jordan” (see contemporary Jordan’s law no. 6, sect. 3, April 3, 1954, reactivated in law no. 7, sect. 2, on April 1, 1963; p. 119, n 82); claimed that since 1948, Israel’s defensive wars of survival deprived the would be murderous Palestinian Muslim community (abetted by Muslim nation armies, and jihadist volunteers, in the Middle East, and beyond) of some of the remaining disputed territory, while being responsible for “4.5 million Palestinian refugees”—at least six-fold the actual number of perhaps 750,000, and oblivious to the fact 900,000 Jews in Muslim lands, well removed from the battlegrounds in historical Palestine, were simultaneously made refugees via murderous pogroms, expropriations, and expulsions, between 1948 and 1967.

Geller crafted a response to these mendacious anti-Israel ads, and overcame the MTA’s initial refusal to post her ad, with a successful legal challenge. The anti-jihad ad (just below) paraphrases Ayn Rand’s astute, if blunt comments about Palestinian irredentism during a 1979 appearance on the Phil Donahue show, while, affirming, correctly, the jihad war being waged against Israel.

The jihad pathology identified and held up for opprobrium in Geller’s ad was captured in this graphic discussion of jihadist carnage “celebrations” by the Palestinian Muslim masses, excerpted from Dr. Raphael Israeli’s 2003, Islamikaze—Manifestations of Islamic Matryrology:

…few outsiders have paid attention to the makeshift stage, erected at the terminal of those processions, which bring to their climax the celebrations. Often the latest target they destroyed, for example an Israeli bus loaded with dozens of passengers on board, is meticulously reconstructed in paper, cardboard and cloth, painted so as to imitate the original, and then set ablaze to the lunatic cries of delight of the watching crowds. All the while, the perpetrators of the actual horror against the real Israeli bus, or more often their successors, who wished to cultivate the “heritage” of the deceased Islamikaze, run around the stage in frenzy, shoot long bursts in the air as if possessed by some other worldly power, shout blood-chilling war cries, repeatedly invoke the Power of Allah, smash the burned carcass of the bus and stab with bayonets the “remnants” of the slain “passenger,” whom they, or their fellow kamikaze had earlier slain in reality.

Even these horrendous scenes, taken from a different reality than the one known to civilized people, can be “improved upon” by the Hamas. In Nablus, during the Palestinian Intifadah that broke out in October 2000, a most disturbing “exhibition” was presented to the general public in the city public square, which showed in inhuman detail the replicas of blown-up limbs and body pieces of Israelis who had perished in a restaurant by Hamas Islamikaze. It was only the reports of the deeply disgusted foreign correspondents, and the protests of the Israelis who did not want to relive that horro by seeing it replicated on the screens, which convinced the Palestinian Authority to move the exhibition indoors, not to close it down, and arrest its promoters.

Moreover hard data confirm the ongoing implacable, murderous irredentism of Israel’s Palestinian Muslim “peace partners.”

During July, 2011, American pollster Stanley Greenberg reported the findings from what was described as an “intensive, face-to-face survey in Arabic of 1,010 Palestinian adults in Judea-Samaria, and the Gaza Strip.”

Here are the two most salient, pathognomonic survey results which further validate the underlying veracity of Geller’s anti-jihad ad:

First, 73% of the Palestinians surveyed agree with the annihilationist dictates of this canonical hadith (the words and deeds of Islam’s prophet Muhammad which have a weight often equal to the Koran), quoted in the Hamas Covenant.

As characterized in the hadith, Muslim eschatology—end of times theology—highlights the Jews’ supreme hostility to Islam. Jews are described as adherents of the Dajjâl – the Muslim equivalent of the Anti-Christ – or according to another tradition, the Dajjâl is himself Jewish. At his appearance, other traditions maintain that the Dajjâl will be accompanied by 70,000 Jews from Isfahan, or Jerusalem, wrapped in their robes, and armed with polished sabers, their heads covered with a sort of veil. When the Dajjâl is defeated, his Jewish companions will be slaughtered- everything will deliver them up except for the so-called gharkad tree, as per the canonical hadith (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985) included in the 1988 Hamas Covenant (in article 7). The hadith—which three-fourths of those surveyed agree should be acted upon—is cited in the Covenant as a sacralized, obligatory call for a Muslim genocide of the Jews:

…the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to realize the promise of Allah, no matter how long it takes. The Prophet, Allah’s prayer and peace be upon him, says: “The hour of judgment shall not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them, so that the Jews hide behind trees and stones, and each tree and stone will say: ‘Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him,’ except for the Gharqad tree, for it is the tree of the Jews.” (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985)

Second, 80% agreed with the quoted sentiments expressed in article 15 of the Hamas Covenant (subtitled, “Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is a Personal Duty”), which describes classical jihadist theory—including jihad martyrdom (i.e., homicide bombing) operations—as well as its practical modern application to the destruction of Israel by jihad,  and the need to recruit the entire global Muslim community, or “umma” in this quintessential Islamic cause:

The day the enemies conquer some part of the Muslim land, jihad becomes a personal duty of every Muslim. In the face of the Jewish occupation of Palestine, it is necessary to raise the banner of jihad. This requires the propagation of Islamic consciousness among the masses, locally [in Palestine], in the Arab world and in the Islamic world. It is necessary to instill the spirit of jihad in the nation, engage the enemies and join the ranks of the jihad fighters. The indoctrination campaign must involve ulama, educators, teachers and information and media experts, as well as all intellectuals, especially the young people and the sheikhs of Islamic movements…

It is necessary to establish in the minds of all the Muslim generations that the Palestinian issue is a religious issue, and that it must be dealt with as such, for [Palestine] contains Islamic holy places, [namely] the Al-Aqsa mosque, which is inseparably connected, for as long as heaven and earth shall endure, to the holy mosque of Mecca through the Prophet’s nocturnal journey [from the mosque of Mecca to the Al-Aqsa mosque] and through his ascension to heaven thence. “Being stationed on the frontier for the sake of Allah for one day is better than this [entire] world and everything in it; and the place taken up in paradise by the [horseman’s] whip of any one of you [jihad fighters] is better than this [entire] world and everything in it. Every evening [operation] and morning [operation] performed by Muslims for the sake of Allah is better than this [entire] world and everything in it.” (Recorded in the Hadith collections of Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi and Ibn Maja). “By the name of Him who holds Muhammad’s soul in His hand, I wish to launch an attack for the sake of Allah and be killed and attack again and be killed and attack again and be killed.” (Recorded in the Hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim)

 The actual Palestinian Muslim jihad savagery, and its equally heinous continued widespread promulgation with an Islamic religious imprimatur,  is far worse than conveyed in the ad’s comparatively staid language.

Free speech champion Pamela Geller, in the words of the late historian and human rights activist David Littman (quoting his beloved Shakespeare’s Henry V, Act 3 Scene 1), has “shown us the mettle of her pasture.” All who wish to protect freedom of speech must  share the burden of its defense, or this bedrock Western freedom will disappear, trampled by Sharia supremacists, and their morally cretinous non-Muslim abettors.

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article
29 septembre 2012 6 29 /09 /septembre /2012 11:21

Muhammad’s Nuptial Example To Be Law In Egypt?—Constitution Writers Discuss Sanctioning Marriage of Nine-Year-Old Girls

September 28th, 2012 by Andrew Bostom |

Muhammad depicted in a prominent frieze which adorns the U.S. Supreme Court Building, despite the efforts of the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood offshoot Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) to have the sculpture removed in accord with Sharia mandates that proscribe, as CAIR stated, “portraying any prophet in paintings, sculptures or other artistic representations.”

***

One of Ayatollah Khomeini’s early actions after toppling Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, and seizing power, was lowering the marriage age in Iran as per these canonical hadith:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88:

Narrated ‘Ursa: The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with ‘Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Sahih Muslim Book 008 Number 3311

‘Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah’s Apostle (May peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and she was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.

Time Magazine reported in November, 2001:

In Iran the legal age for marriage is nine for girls, 14 for boys. The law has occasionally been exploited by pedophiles, who marry poor young girls from the provinces, use and then abandon them.

These practices are sanctioned as per article 1041 of “The Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran”:

Marriage before puberty [i.e., before “nine lunar years” for girls, p. 118] by the permission of the Guardian and on condition of taking into consideration the ward’s interest is proper. (p. 103)

Indeed, as the late David Littman observed in 2010, when a bill was introduced to the Iranian Parliament attempting to raise the marriage age for young girls from 9 to 15 years it was overruled by the ruling mullahcracy. They stipulated it would be against Islamic teachings to alter the law as “Islamic scholars had put a lot of efforts into these laws,” notably, invoking Muhammad’s example. “Thus,” as Littman aptly concluded, “making it sacrosanct for the mullahs.”

Now we learn the traditionalist Muslim ascension to power in Egypt, epitomized by the popularly elected Constituent Assembly is considering the same course of action. Specifically, statements have been made by the body in the Constituent Assembly designated to write Egypt’s new constitution regarding,

…the possibility of sanctioning marriage of sexually mature girls even if they were at the age of nine.

Egypt’s The National Council for Women (NCW) reportedly lamented this discussion, but conceded it was a popular expression

… of outdated traditions still prevailing in the Egyptian society.

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article
27 septembre 2012 4 27 /09 /septembre /2012 23:10

Feature Length, Honest Muhammad Movies in the Offing?

September 27th, 2012  by Andrew Bostom |

Islam’s prophet Muhammad, as depicted by Edward Gibbon (1734-1794), considered the Enlightenment’s greatest historian, in his 1776 magnum opus, “The History of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,” Vol. 9 (p. 30)

 

***

The LA Times reported (Tuesday, 9/25/12) that two remarkably courageous Muslim “apostates”—the Palestinian Muslim convert to Christianity Mosab Hassan Yousef, and the Iranian Muslim freethinker Ali Sina—have unbowdlerized, narrative films on the life Islam’s prophet Muhammad in production, or pre- production.

Yousef, now an LA resident, maintains that he

…has already cast a “prominent Hollywood actor” in the title role of his film “Muhammad,” which has a proposed budget of $30 million. The film will tell the story of the prophet from age 12 to his death, and will have the look and feel of Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ,” … “My goal is to create this big mirror to show the Muslim world the true image of its leader.”

Ali Sina, whose film is in preproduction claims that

.. he has raised $2 million from Southern California investors for the film, which does not yet have a title but will portray the prophet as a cult leader in the vein of David Koresh or Jim Jones. He hopes to raise a total of $10 million, he said, and begin filming next year.

Sina, now a Canadian,  initially contemplated

… a biopic about Muhammad a decade ago, but stepped up his effort in the last two years as technological advances made it feasible to circumvent government censors and wary exhibitors. “We can bypass theaters completely and sell the movie online with a profit to a large number of people, especially Muslims. They can download it and watch it even if they are living in Karachi or Mecca or Medina.”

With notable understatement, the LA Times report observes,

Reactions to the films, if they are ever finished, are likely to be severe.

The prevalence  of such likely overwrought reactions can be gauged by the comments elicited for the LA Times story from much ballyhooed moderate Muslim academic Akbar Ahmed, the Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies at American University, and a former Pakistani ambassador to the United Kingdom. Ahmed warned:

This is crossing a line. If there is an actor physically portraying Muhammad, there will be a violent reaction.

Ahmed acknowledged that such “violent reaction”  would ensue even if a devout Muslim made a movie about Muhammad, claiming most Muslims (apparently, himself included) were unprepared to view their prophet on screen, especially if not cast in a purely hagiographic light.

Both Mosab Hassan Yousef, and Ali Sina should be lauded for undertaking this profoundly dangerous task: producing accurate film biographies of Muhammad, the Jihad Model (as so designated by Muslim Brotherhood “Spiritual Leader” Yusuf Al-Qaradawi), based, larrgely on the earliest, most complete pious Muslim biography of Islam’s prophet: The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah.

Indeed a century ago (in 1915), W.H.T. Gairdner, the great Arabic linguist and scholar of Islam, noted dispassionately what is readily apparent from Muhammad’s actual biography (as opposed to the treacly Muslim hagiography) based exclusively on the reverent Muslim sources:

As incidents in the life of an Arab conqueror, the tales of raiding, private assassinations and public executions, perpetual enlargements of the harem, and so forth, might be  historically explicable and therefore pardonable but it is another matter that they should be taken as a setting forth of the moral ideal for all time.

Four years later, in 1919, Gairdner wrote an essay titled “Muhammad Without Camouflage,” responding to a mendacious birthday tribute panegyric of Islam’s prophet written collaboratively by Muslims and non-Muslims. A particularly trenchant segment of Gairdner’s rebuttal discussed the slaughter of the vanquished Medinan Jewish tribe, Banu Qurayza, whose massacre became an important motif in jihad war jurisprudence. Relying exclusively upon Muslim sources, Gairdner highlighted without equivocation the pivotal role that Muhammad himself played in orchestrating the overall events:

The umpire who gave the fatal decision (Saad) was extravagantly praised by Muhammad. Yet his action was wholly and admittedly due to his lust for personal vengeance on a tribe which had occasioned him a painful wound. In the agony of its treatment he cried out: “O God, let not my soul go forth ere thou has cooled my eye from the Bani Quraiza” [Banu Qurayza]. This was the arbiter to whose word the fate of that tribe was given over. His sentiments were well-known to Muhammad, who appointed him. It is perfectly clear from that that their slaughter had been decreed. What makes it clearer still is the assertion of another biographer that Muhammad had refused to treat with the Bani Quraiza at all until they had “come down to receive the judgment of the Apostle of God.” Accordingly “they came down”; in other words put themselves in his power. And only then was the arbitration of Saad proposed and accepted — but not accepted until it had been forced on him by Muhammad; for Saad first declined and tried to make Muhammad take the responsibility, but was told “qad amarak Allahu takhuma fihim,” — “Allah has commanded you to give sentence in their case.” From every point of view therefore the evidence is simply crushing that Muhammad was the ultimate author of this massacre.

Reinforcing Gairdner’s earlier observations, another major scholar of Islam, Arthur Jeffery, in his review of A. Guillaume’s seminal 1955 English translation of the defining pious Muslim biography of Islam’s prophet by Ibn Ishaq, remarked:

Years ago the late Canon Gairdner in Cairo said that the best answer to the numerous apologetic Lives of Muhammad published in the interests of Muslim propaganda in the West would be an unvarnished translation of the earliest Arabic biography of the prophet. In this present volume such a translation is put into our hands in a beautifully printed and produced book. … Byzantine, Syriac, and Armenian writers who mention him say only that he was a merchant who appeared as a prophet and sent the Arabs out on their wars of conquest.

Given the ongoing, millennial history of violent Muslim rage aroused by (even reverent) depictions of Muhammad in words or images — and the lethal punishment for such portrayals still sanctioned at present by Islam’s Sharia-based blasphemy law — it is fitting that only persons of Mosab Hassan Yousef’s and Ali Sina’s remarkably intrepid conviction would attempt such a forbidding, if critically important task. These men embody the moral clarity and remarkable courage of  the ex-Communist apostate Cassandras from an earlier era, who unflinchingly educated Westerners about the doctrines of that atheistic, totalitarian scourge. All in the West who claim to uphold our unique bedrock freedoms, secured by the bloody sacrifices of previous generations—particularly those faint-hearted elites in government, media, and the academy, who cower at the threat of Islamic totalitarianism—should support the heroic efforts of Hassan Yousef and Ali Sina to protect that Western birthright.

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article
27 septembre 2012 4 27 /09 /septembre /2012 00:28

“Liberal Muslim” Mona Eltahawy Violently Rejects Free Speech Truth

September 26th, 2012 by Andrew Bostom |

Stalwart Pamela Hall was caught on a remarkable video defending the New York City subway ads of the American Freedom Defense Initiative from the unhinged anti-free speech jihad of “liberal Muslim” Mona Eltahawy.

Ms. Eltahawy objected to the ad depicted below.

But the jihad pathology identified and held up for opprobrium in the ad was captured in this graphic discussion of jihadist carnage “celebrations” by the Palestinian Muslim masses, excerpted from Dr. Raphael Israeli’s 2003, Islamikaze—Manifestations of Islamic Matryrology:

…few outsiders have paid attention to the makeshift stage, erected at the terminal of those processions, which bring to their climax the celebrations. Often the latest target they destroyed, for example an Israeli bus loaded with dozens of passengers on board, is meticulously reconstructed in paper, cardboard and cloth, painted so as to imitate the original, and then set ablaze to the lunatic cries of delight of the watching crowds. All the while, the perpetrators of the actual horror against the real Israeli bus, or more often their successors, who wished to cultivate the “heritage” of the deceased Islamikaze, run around the stage in frenzy, shoot long bursts in the air as if possessed by some other worldly power, shout blood-chilling war cries, repeatedly invoke the Power of Allah, smash the burned carcass of the bus and stab with bayonets the “remnants” of the slain “passenger,” whom they, or their fellow kamikaze had earlier slain in reality.

Even these horrendous scenes, taken from a different reality than the one known to civilized people, can be “improved upon” by the Hamas. In Nablus, during the Palestinian Intifadah that broke out in October 2000, a most disturbing “exhibition” was presented to the general public in the city public square, which showed in inhuman detail the replicas of blown-up limbs and body pieces of Israelis who had perished in a restaurant by Hamas Islamikaze. It was only the reports of the deeply disgusted foreign correspondents, and the protests of the Israelis who did not want to relive that horro by seeing it replicated on the screens, which convinced the Palestinian Authority to move the exhibition indoors, not to close it down, and arrest its promoters.

The actual jihad savagery is far worse than conveyed in the ad’s comparatively staid language, Mona Eltahawy’s raging denial notwithstanding.

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article
25 septembre 2012 2 25 /09 /septembre /2012 02:02

Muhammad and Islam’s Cosmic Brothel—Motoon Entry 2

September 25th, 2012 

The cartoon depicted below was one of the Danish Jyllands-Posten caricatures which precipitated the 2005-2006 cartoon rage.

Islam’s—and Muhammad’s—vision of Heaven has been aptly characterized by Ibn Warraq as a cosmic brothel.

The Islamic Paradise for men is inhabited by “Houris” (beautiful, angelic female creatures who’s virginity is renewed each day), to whom they will be married. Koran 56:36, 56:37, 56:38 state:  “and We made them spotless virgins, chastely amorous, like of age for the Companions of the Right.” Thus the contemporary gloss on Koran 56:36  from Maariful Quran, the most important modern Urdu Koranic commentary maintains,

The word ‘abkaran,’ being the plural of bikr, means ‘virgins’. The sense is the creation of the maidens of Paradise will be of such a nature that, even after every sexual intercourse, they will remain like virgins. (Source, Page 290).

Maariful Quran’s gloss on 44:54, another verse relevant to the Islamic virgins of Paradise (“Even so; and We shall espouse them to wide-eyed houris,”), adds

… Although the inmates of Paradise will not be legally obligated to observe the precepts of Shariah the purpose of marriage will be to honour them. Therefore, this should not raise any objection IF the word is taken in the first sense, houris having big dark eyes will be given as life partners to the men of Paradise. The houris in this case will be granted to them as a gift. There will be no need for a contract of marriage as is done in this world. (Source, Page 762).

The authoritative  Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam, provides these additional details (from the entry “Hur”) on the virgins, i.e., their grooming and function as sexual objects

Two names are written on their breasts, one of the names of Allah and the name of their husband. They wear many jewels and ornaments etc. on their hands and feet. They dwell in splendid palaces surrounded by female attendants and all possible luxury. When the believer enters Paradise he is welcomed by one of these beings; a large number of them are at his disposal; he cohabits with each of them as often as he has fasted days in Ramadan and as often as he has performed good works besides. Yet they remain always virgins…

Muhammad (reflecting his apparent strong interest in the subject) opined on the number of times a man can have sexual intercourse during one day in Paradise, as recorded in this canonical hadith.

A man will have intercourse in Paradise with his wives from among al-hoor al-‘iyn and his wives from among the people of this world, if they enter Paradise with him. A man will be given the strength of a hundred men to eat, drink, feel desire and have sexual intercourse. It was narrated from Anas that the Prophet said: “The believer in Paradise will be given such and such strength for sexual intercourse.” He was asked, “O Messenger of Allaah, will he really be able to do that?” He said, “He will be given the strength of one hundred (men).” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, no. 2459. He said, (it is) saheeh ghareeb). Sunan al-Tirmidhi #2459 (Source)

This highly sexualized “Paradise” is thus an inducement to the jihad martyr—he is assured entry to it as affirmed in Koran 9:111, and even more explicitly, Muhammad’s own characterizations from the canonical hadith.

[Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 53] Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet said, “Nobody who dies and finds good from Allah (in the Hereafter) would wish to come back to this world even if he were given the whole world and whatever is in it, except the martyr who, on seeing the superiority of martyrdom, would like to come back to the world and get killed again (in Allah’s Cause).”

[Sahih Bukhari: Volume 4, Book 52, Number 54] Narrated Abu Huraira:  “The Prophet said, ‘By Him in Whose Hands my life is! Were it not for some men amongst the believers who dislike to be left behind me and whom I cannot provide with means of conveyance, I would certainly never remain behind any Sariya’ (army-unit) setting out in Allah’s Cause. By Him in Whose Hands my life is! I would love to be martyred in Allah’s Cause and then get resurrected and then get martyred, and then get resurrected again and then get martyred and then get resurrected again and then get martyred.”


All Articles Copyright © 2007-2012 Dr. Andrew Bostom | All Rights Reserved
Printing is allowed for personal use only | Commercial usage(For Profit) is a copyright violation and written permission must be granted first.

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article
4 septembre 2012 2 04 /09 /septembre /2012 15:07

Mohammed Zuhdi Jasser, Hamas, and “Human Rights”

September 3rd, 2012 by Andrew Bostom |

Mo’ than enough of his immoral equivalences

Last night (9/2/12) I was sent (unsolicited) the video link to a conference held 3-months ago at the University of California San Diego (UCSD), entitled, “Rescuing Human Rights.” During his talk, one of the featured speakers, Mohammed Zuhdi Jasser, much ballyhooed as a “brave Muslim reformer,” opined (at 11:00 to 11:25) that Hamas’s openly declared annihilationist jihad against Israel was merely

…a tool for Hamas [and Hamas alone] to create a faith-based conflict…Us versus. them…Collectivist thinking which exploits human rights to oppress its own [ i.e., Palestinian Arab Muslim] people

Despite having been subjected to Jasser’s personalized immoral equivalences (he claimed in 2007 my extensive analyses of Islamic Antisemitism effectively made me the moral equivalent of “exploiters” of his noble faith—such as Osama bin Laden!), even I found his UCSD statement shocking. Jasser blithely ignores that Hamas was elected by a landslide vote in Gaza during 2006, and due to its prevailing popularity, would likely dominate any proposed Hamas-Fatah “reconciliation government” for all the Palestinian Muslim enclaves in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria.

Regardless, last July, 2011, data were released from an analysis by American pollster Stanley Greenberg who performed what was described as an “intensive, face-to-face survey in Arabic of 1,010 Palestinian adults in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.”

The salient, pathognomonic findings, were as follows:

First, 73% of the Palestinians surveyed agree with the annihilationist dictates of this canonical hadith (the words and deeds of Islam’s prophet Muhammad which have a weight often equal to the Koran), quoted in the Hamas Covenant.

As characterized in the hadith, Muslim eschatology—end of times theology—highlights the Jews’ supreme hostility to Islam. Jews are described as adherents of the Dajjâl – the Muslim equivalent of the Anti-Christ – or according to another tradition, the Dajjâl is himself Jewish. At his appearance, other traditions maintain that the Dajjâl will be accompanied by 70,000 Jews from Isfahan, or Jerusalem, wrapped in their robes, and armed with polished sabers, their heads covered with a sort of veil. When the Dajjâl is defeated, his Jewish companions will be slaughtered- everything will deliver them up except for the so-called gharkad tree, as per the canonical hadith (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985) included in the 1988 Hamas Covenant (in article 7). The hadith– which ¾ of those surveyed agree should be acted upon—is cited in the Covenant as a sacralized, obligatory call for a Muslim genocide of the Jews—:

…the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to realize the promise of Allah, no matter how long it takes. The Prophet, Allah’s prayer and peace be upon him, says: “The hour of judgment shall not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them, so that the Jews hide behind trees and stones, and each tree and stone will say: ‘Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him,’ except for the Gharqad tree, for it is the tree of the Jews.” (Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985)

Second, 80% agreed with the quoted sentiments expressed in article 15 of the Hamas Covenant (subtitled, “Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is a Personal Duty”) elucidates classical jihadist theory—including jihad martyrdom (i.e., homicide bombing) operations—as well as its practical modern application to the destruction of Israel by jihad,  and the need to recruit the entire global Muslim community, or “umma” in this quintessential Islamic cause:

The day the enemies conquer some part of the Muslim land, jihad becomes a personal duty of every Muslim. In the face of the Jewish occupation of Palestine, it is necessary to raise the banner of jihad. This requires the propagation of Islamic consciousness among the masses, locally [in Palestine], in the Arab world and in the Islamic world. It is necessary to instill the spirit of jihad in the nation, engage the enemies and join the ranks of the jihad fighters. The indoctrination campaign must involve ulama, educators, teachers and information and media experts, as well as all intellectuals, especially the young people and the sheikhs of Islamic movements…

It is necessary to establish in the minds of all the Muslim generations that the Palestinian issue is a religious issue, and that it must be dealt with as such, for [Palestine] contains Islamic holy places, [namely] the Al-Aqsa mosque, which is inseparably connected, for as long as heaven and earth shall endure, to the holy mosque of Mecca through the Prophet’s nocturnal journey [from the mosque of Mecca to the Al-Aqsa mosque] and through his ascension to heaven thence. “Being stationed on the frontier for the sake of Allah for one day is better than this [entire] world and everything in it; and the place taken up in paradise by the [horseman’s] whip of any one of you [jihad fighters] is better than this [entire] world and everything in it. Every evening [operation] and morning [operation] performed by Muslims for the sake of Allah is better than this [entire] world and everything in it.” (Recorded in the Hadith collections of Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi and Ibn Maja). “By the name of Him who holds Muhammad’s soul in His hand, I wish to launch an attack for the sake of Allah and be killed and attack again and be killed and attack again and be killed.” (Recorded in the Hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim)

Third, 72% backed denying the thousands of years of Jewish history in Jerusalem.

Fourth, 62% supported kidnapping IDF soldiers and holding them hostage

Fifth, 53% were in favor or teaching songs about hating Jews in Palestinian schools.

Moreover, Jasser’s immoral equivalence at UCSD exculpates the “non-Hamas” Palestinian Muslims, and the rest of the Arab and non-Arab global Muslim umma incited for almost a century by mainstream, institutional Islam to a hydrophobic, annihilationist Islamic Jew-hating fury.  Particularly edifying examples of this incitement were two fatwas produced by Sunni Islam’s Vatican, Al-Azhar University, 9-months before the 1956 Sinai war when Israel was a rump state of 1949 armistice borders, and fully 32-years before Hamas was founded in 1988. Issued at the height of so-called secular Arab nationalism, these two complementary fatwas, one written on January 5, 1956, by then grand mufti of Egypt Sheikh Hasan Ma’moun, and another dated January 9, 1956, signed by the leading members of the Fatwa Committee of Al Azhar University and the major representatives of all four Sunni Islamic schools of jurisprudence, elaborated the following key points, indistinguishable from Hamas’s current Weltanschauung (from my forthcoming Sharia Versus Freedom):

Muslims cannot conclude peace with those Jews who have usurped the ter­ritory of Palestine and attacked its people and their property in any manner which allows the Jews to continue as a state in that sacred Muslim ter­ritory.[As] Jews have taken a part of Palestine and there established their non-Islamic government and have also evacuated from that part most of its Muslim inhabitants. . . . Jihad . . . to restore the country to its people . . . is the duty of all Muslims, not just those who can undertake it. And since all Islamic countries constitute the abode of every Muslim, the Jihad is impera­tive for both the Muslims inhabiting the territory attacked, and Muslims everywhere else because even though some sections have not been attacked directly, the attack nevertheless took place on a part of the Muslim territory which is a legitimate residence for any Muslim. Everyone knows that from the early days of Islam to the present day the Jews have been plotting against Islam and Muslims and the Islamic homeland. They do not propose to be content with the attack they made on Palestine and Al Aqsa Mosque, but they plan for the possession of all Islamic territories from the Nile to the Euphrates.

At UCSD, Mohammed Zuhdi Jasser deliberately ignored—as is his wont—Islam’s annihilationist jihad against the Jews, animated by its mainstream conspiratorial Jew hatred. Jasser compounded that offense by pretending Hamas—still resoundingly popular amongst the masses of Palestinian Muslims who share Hamas’s Weltanschauung—is somehow “denying” the Palestinians, not the Jews they seek to annihilate via jihad in accord with Islam’s canonical hadith,  etc.—their “rights”

Mohammed Zuhdi Jasser’s UCSD comments were emblematic of the reprehensible moral inversions he must create to remain in his disingenuous state of denial.


All Articles Copyright © 2007-2012 Dr. Andrew Bostom | All Rights Reserved
Printing is allowed for personal use only | Commercial usage(For Profit) is a copyright violation and written permission must be granted first.

Repost 0
Published by La Libellule - dans Andrew Bostom
commenter cet article

Pimprenelle Pourprée

  • : Regard d'un Ecrivain sur le Monde
  • Regard d'un Ecrivain sur le Monde
  • : Cherchant les points communs entre les peuples, les nations et les religions pour creer un monde meilleur...et une paix durable.
  • Contact

Profil

  • PIMPRENELLE POURPRÉE
  • écrivain, née à Marrakech, Maroc, qui cherche une voie pour rapprocher les coeurs et les ames.
  • écrivain, née à Marrakech, Maroc, qui cherche une voie pour rapprocher les coeurs et les ames.

PIMPRENELLE POURPRÉE

Recherche

Pimprenelle Pourprée