Saturday, August 06, 2005

The Religion of Peace, Etc., Etc., Ad Nauseam

 
This, from The American Thinker
     What is the purpose or goal of jihad?
A complicated policy like jihad can have multiple goals or purposes, but this one comes late in Muhammad’s life in Medina and best summarizes the goal and purposes. He wants to make Islam prevail over every religion.
The following translation is approved and funded by the Saudi Royal family; the parenthetical explanations are inserted by the translators:

9:33 It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad) with guidance and the religion of truth, to make it superior over all religions, though the Mushrikûn (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) hate (it). (Hilali and Khan, The Noble Qur’an, Riyadh: Darussalam, 1996, 2002; parenthetical notes are theirs)
This verse is repeated two more times, word for word, in Suras 61:9 and 48:28. Muhammad means business.
Seekers and the curious about Islam must understand this brute fact as they read the Quran: in the ten years that Muhammad lived in Medina (AD 622-632), he either sent out or went out on seventy-four small assassination hit squads, raids, expeditions, small battles, or full-scale wars like the Tabuk Crusade in AD 630, in which Muhammad led 30,000 soldiers north to invade the Byzantine empire. Sometimes the conflicts did not end in violence, but too many times they did. All verses (and there are not many) in the Medinan suras that seem to speak of peace and tolerance must be read in light of this violent historical context. Not far from the few tolerant verses the reader will find intolerant and violent verses.
Sura 9:33, simply put, predicts the conquest of Islam over all religions. Islam must dominate the world through jihad.
And that, my fellow Americans — “Islam must dominate the world” — is what makes this World War IV.

14 comments:

Newvictorian said...

And that, my fellow Americans — “Islam must dominate the world” — is what makes this World War IV.

And if we have to say it a thousand times on ten thousand blogs blogs and in a million conversations with friends and neighbors and our children, we shall.

PD111 said...

Newvictorian posted: And if we have to say it a thousand times on ten thousand blogs blogs and in a million conversations with friends and neighbors and our children, we shall.

But say it not in anger but in a voice of gentleness. A voice that shows that you care for the good of all humanity, including the millions of muslims who have come to the West to escape the thrall of Islam, and now find themselves in a worse position because of the actions of Jihadis and the dogma of Islam.

Let compassion and gentleness be our path and passwords to the MSM and the public at large.

DP111

Fjordman said...

DP: I'm not always gentle, neither do I always want to be.

PD111 said...

Selling humans into slavery produced a lot of wealth, so the Allah-inspired prophet never got a revelation that this practice should stop permanently and forever.

Islam is an institution of slavery and has been since its inception. It has been going on for so long without challenge, that a culture of slavery has developed, it has become a way of life, and is now called a religion.

I dont believe that we should make a full-frontal assault. That would be folly. It is best to approach in two easily identifiable and understood cases of slavery.

1. The constitutional subjugation and enslavement of Muslim women.

2. The law of Apostasy that requires the killing of anyone who leaves Islam. This is akin to the killing of a runaway slave. The effect of this is that many Muslims are being forcibly held within Islam against their will.

Both are clear cases of institutionalised slavery.

DP111

PD111 said...

fjordman:

Neither am I. However, it is best to start the gentle and compassionate route so no one can accuse us of being bigots or worse.

I realise the predicament. We live in a PC and Ultra-liberal world, and at this moment in time, I see no way that the clock is going to turn back anytime soon. We have to operate in the circumstances that we find our selves in.

I'm also symultaneously posting on your blog.

Keith said...

" We have to operate in the circumstances that we find our selves in."

No we don't. We need to change the circumstances, because the present dialog is framed by the appeasers of and practitioners of this thuggish ideology. The time for gentle remonstrance is long past. We're in a war and don't have the time for a "hearts and minds" campaign. Any freedoms lost now will never be regained.

Baron Bodissey said...

Keith -- I'm with you. I think it's time to take back the culture. The PC/Multi-Culti establishment exists only because the MSM is there to prop it up and sustain it. The blogosphere can subvert it. We need to change the subject.

felix said...

If you heard Tony Blair yesterday, announcing that UK will ty to deport the worst of the worst, it almost sounded like the multicultural PC fog had been lifted from him for a day.

Let's hope he follow thru.

Always On Watch said...

Please correct me if I am in error.

1. The Medina verses of the Koran are much more militaristic than portions of earlier origin.

2. The Koran is organized by length of chapters as opposed to chronological organization.

Fjordman said...

Always: You are correct in both assumptions. If the Koran were organized according to chronology, people would clearly read how much more violent it becomes with time. This is also how Islam functions today: Muslims are only tolerant as long as they don't have the numerical of military capability to force the infidels to submission.

PD111 said...

Keith:

We need to change the circumstance that we operate in. Of course we do. The problem is that we are still in the social atmosphere of liberalism. This is not going to change in a hurry. All sea changes take time; lots of time. In the meantime we do what we have to, and we do so using the language of liberalism.

This way we not only attack the central tenets of islam without being labelled bigots or racists, but also change the nature of the social discourse.

Just think that how diificult it is to get a letter published in the MSM if the tone of the letter was aggressively anti-islam. However, if we just raised the issues of the ensavement of muslim women or the deadly fear that Apostates of islam are under, even in the liberal democratic West, then it is well nigh impossible to be labelled bigots or racists. Quite the opposite. We become the defenders of Human Right.

airforcewife said...

We definately need to change our circumstances. And we can begin to do so without yelling bad words and names (like the left wing of politics do).

We started this way at home - whenever there is a discussion of Islam and the words "Prophet Mohammed" come out of anyone's mouth other than a Muslim's we reply (and we tell our children), "Muhammed is not our prophet, so we aren't going to call him "Prophet Mohammed" until everyone using that title will refer to Christ as "The Lord Jesus Christ."

Fair is fair. Propaganda is not always a bad thing. I've convinced four people so far by using that logic.

PD111 said...

The RoP is back

Inside the sect that loves terror

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1724541,00.html

Redhand said...

The United States (and the West) should respect freedom of religion for all religions that respect freedom. The minute these fanatics start down the road of trying to impose their religion, and religious-based law, on the rest of us through violence they should be prosecuted, convicted and locked up. End of story.