In the style of the "Donald Rumsfeld soundbite of the week" the BBC's Broadcasting House programme used to have on a Sunday, in which the public was left to laugh at Dumbsfeld tripping over his tongue, I present Melanie Phillips' latest bizarre genocidal-conspiratorial outburst:
And yet, if you pare away the partisan politics, the message that the combination of big oil and politics has had a lethal impact on global order is surely correct. It’s just that the film miscasts the principal villains and victims. After all, why else has Israel been left to swing in the genocidal wind for more than fifty years if not for the fact that oil runs global politics?
An Oscar for national self-loathing (a comment on Syriana, in which she also wheels out Amir Taheri with the "America-hating helps recruit terrorists" nonsense)
Also, check out this piece in today's Media Guardian, regarding columnists who also have blogs - including David Aaronovitch and, of course, Mel. Here's her explanation for why she keeps a blog:
Phillips makes no bones about her main reason for blogging: unlike her commentary articles for the Mail, which usually take up a single page, her blog has no such restrictions. "[Blogging] is so seductive because it offers you literally an unlimited amount of space to say what you want," she explains, "and there's so much to say for someone like me."
She forgets to mention that her blog contains such nonsense that it's too extreme even for the Daily Mail ...
To me the "Holocaust II" card (the Palestinians want to exterminate us) is a much more effective Zionist argument than either the "God gave us the land" argument or the "Holocaust I" card (we deserve a state of our own because of what the Nazis did to us). Is there any way of countering the "Holocaust II" card?
The Palestinians do want to exterminate the Israelis. They voted for Hamas and its in the Hamas charter.
Old Pickler,
I don't think they want to exterminate Isrealis. Rather, I think they want to exterminate their statehood in the land of Palestine al-Quds (rightly so). You don't set up a brand new country in someone else's backyard. It is even worse than one country invading another country.
So, they should both get together under one state and let democratic intentions prevail. The majority are the Palestinians, so they should ideally govern that country.
*Is there any way of countering the "Holocaust II" card?*
You could say that Israel no longer faces any threats from any of the neighbouring states.
Egypt has a peace treaty with it. Jordan has a peace treaty with it. There's no military force in Lebanon capable of doing any significant damage to Israel. Syria's army can't attack Israel because the Israelis hold the Golan Heights plus Syria needs its army to put down potential insurrection at home.
More importantly Israel is the only nuclear power in the ME. Even if any of the neighbouring countries did aquire nuclear weapons they would be unlikely to use them against Israel because of the potential damage to Jerusalem. Israel isn't constrained in this way.
Old Pickler,
"They voted for Hamas and its in the Hamas charter."
Was that the only or most important consideration when they voted?
"Even if any of the neighbouring countries did aquire nuclear weapons they would be unlikely to use them against Israel because of the potential damage to Jerusalem"
Er no, I think they might refrain from nuking Israel because they are fully aware that Israels force de frappe would flatten every Arab city over 50.000. Sorry, but those are the facts of life. Moreover, I don't think Muslims are overly concerned about their holy sites, I mean look what they just did to their shrine in Samarra.
anonymous
"I don't think they want to exterminate Isrealis. Rather, I think they want to exterminate their statehood in the land of Palestine al-Quds (rightly so)."
Astonishing logic.
"So, they should both get together under one state and let democratic intentions prevail. The majority are the Palestinians, so they should ideally govern that country."
Its not going to happen due to the fact that suicide is forbidden in Judaism.
The Jews have lived in "Palestine" far longer than the Arabs, who first came as invaders, then later, as the Jews made what was previously a desert, bloom, to cash in on a prosperity they were too incompetent to create.
The one-state solution is a joke. Do you think for a minute that the "Palestinian" majority would treat the jews decently in such a state? Arabs never have throughout their history. The laws of the Dhimma forbid it.
Pickler, as usual you're on crack. European Jews are not semites, but the descendents of khazarian converts to Judaism from 1000 years past.
Sepharidic Jewry has always been in the Middle East and lived in peace with the Christians and Muslims. If you love them Askenazim colonists so much, give them your land and shut the hell up. Cretin.
Nuclear weapon is for losers, it is not Islamic to develop such weaponry. It is for the barbarians.
The one-state solution is a joke. Do you think for a minute that the "Palestinian" majority would treat the jews decently in such a state? Arabs never have throughout their history.
Muslim hatred of Jews only really started in the 20th century due to the influence of Arab Nazis like Haj Amin al-Husseini
The laws of the Dhimma forbid it.
Acoording to who? Bat Ye'or?
http://www.minaret.org/dhimmitude.pdf
The Jews have lived in "Palestine" far longer than the Arabs, who first came as invaders,
The people of the Levant were Monophysite Christians (ie they believed Jesus was purely divine, not human) and were brutally persecuted by the Byzantine state. The main reason why the Muslim were able to take over the area was because the Ghassanids (the puppet Arab army set up to defend Byzantine Syria against Arab raiders), who were also Monophysites, defected en masse to the Muslims at Yarmuk. (Note that the Sassanid Empire also had a similar Arab puppet army, the Lakhmids.)
then later, as the Jews made what was previously a desert, bloom, to cash in on a prosperity they were too incompetent to create.
Not the old "made the desert bloom" myth again! The only real desert was in the Negev region - which is still desert to this day. Yes, the Zionists may have improved agricultural efficiency in the area, but that was a function of all the money they imported into the region from the West...
*Moreover, I don't think Muslims are overly concerned about their holy sites, I mean look what they just did to their shrine in Samarra.*
Samarra's only a shrine for shi'ites. Jerusalem is important to all muslims. Plus no one knows who blew up the shrine other than that they were dressed as policemen.
*Its not going to happen due to the fact that suicide is forbidden in Judaism.*
Actually it's not. There are quite a few times in history when jews have engaged in communal suicides. I also believe there are biblical precedents for suicide. I think Samson's one. I seriously hope you don't plan to go into academia.
*the Jews made what was previously a desert, bloom, to cash in on a prosperity they were too incompetent to create.*
So do you think Europeans should have been allowed to keep South Africa and Rhodesia because they developed those countries?
...Muslim hatred of Jews only really started in the 20th century due to the influence of Arab Nazis like Haj Amin al-Husseini...
I'd say Muslim hatred of zionist terrorism and theft is it. I dont know why Al-Husseini is being singled out when many Zionists Jews openly coloborated with the Nazis. Guess who said "A cow in Palestine is worth more then all the Jews in Poland"?
Some chap named Ben Gurion.
*I'd say Muslim hatred of zionist terrorism and theft is it. I dont know why Al-Husseini is being singled out when many Zionists Jews openly coloborated with the Nazis. Guess who said "A cow in Palestine is worth more then all the Jews in Poland"? Some chap named Ben Gurion.*
There was also Vladimir Jabotinsky.
> I'd say Muslim hatred of zionist terrorism and theft is it. I dont know why Al-Husseini is being singled out when many Zionists Jews openly coloborated with the Nazis.
I'm speicifically talking about hatred of Jews, rather than Zionists.
Also do you have proof on Zionist-Nazi collaboration. To me it seems unlikely for Zionists, even fascist ones like Jabotinsky, to collaborate with those who wanted to exterminate all Jews across the world (then against we do have Rapturist Christian Zionists today, hmmmmmmm).
> Plus no one knows who blew up the shrine other than that they were dressed as policemen.
One theory I've heard is that it was blown up by corrupt members of the new Iraqi government, who wanted to steal the gold within the dome...
*Also do you have proof on Zionist-Nazi collaboration. To me it seems unlikely for Zionists, even fascist ones like Jabotinsky, to collaborate with those who wanted to exterminate all Jews across the world (then against we do have Rapturist Christian Zionists today, hmmmmmmm).*
Is there any evidence that the Nazis wanted to wipe out all the jews in the world? From what I know Hitler was only interested in Eastern Europe and turned his attention to the west only when war was declared against him.
Also Jabotinsky was primarily linked with Italien Fascism which wasn't anti-semitic.
DrM,
The theory that the Ashkenazi are descendents of a Turkic Khazar tribe that converted to Judaism is a shaky theory at best. Arthur Koestler, a man who we should all admire for his stance on communism at a time when it was politically incorrect to do so, popularized this idea about the origins of Europe’s Jews. Moreover, its ignorant and dishonest to say that the Sephardim have had it great under the Muslims, ask yourself what happened to the Banu Qurayza, or why did my namesake meet her end sticky end. I think we can all agree that things have gone pretty well down hill since the Muslim conquest of the ancient world.
George,
Have you read anything from Bat Ye’or? She is not the only one who has catalogued the long history of the Dhimmi’s. Most of her study’s depend on primary research. If your interested there is the excellent Speros Vryonis who writes better than Ms. Ye’or (English is her third language) I understand that reading about the Dhimmi must be uncomfortable for a convert to Islam, if that’s what you are, but there are aspects of Islamic history you just cant sweep under the carpet just because they clash with your preconceived notions of the ROP. Throwing mud shows that you’re being lazy and tells me you know nothing about the history of the Dhimmi.
As for your potted history of the battle of Yarmuk, its about forty years out of date. The “puppet” Ghassanids did not throw their lot in with the Muslims. Read David Nicolle’s “The battle of Yarmuk, Fred Donner’s The Early Islamic Conquest, or Alfred Butlers The Arab Conquest of Egypt. Both excellent reads and a little more up to date than your version of events.
> If your interested there is the excellent Speros Vryonis who writes better than Ms. Ye’or (English is her third language).
It seems like Speros (being Greek) would also have an axe to grind though. The Turkish treatment of Greeks in medieval Asia Minor was very brutal - although the Spanish were doing many of the same things the Turks were doing (destroying agricultural systems etc) at the opposite end of the Mediterranean.
> I understand that reading about the Dhimmi must be uncomfortable for a convert to Islam, if that’s what you are, but there are aspects of Islamic history you just can't sweep under the carpet just because they clash with your preconceived notions of the ROP.
Actually I'm not Muslim. The real reason why anti-Muslim polemics make me uncomfortable is because I am unaware of any example of Muslim populations abandoning Islam as a group. French colonial rule in Algeria didn't touch Islam there. Russian colonial rule (even under the atheist totalitarian Soviet regime) did not have much effect, at least in the long term, on Islam in Central Asia, and Iberia and the Balkans (minus Bosnia and greater Albania) are only non-Muslim now due to ethnic cleansing. In short I view any anti-Islamic polemic as a veiled call to genocide.
> As for your potted history of the battle of Yarmuk, its about forty years out of date. The “puppet” Ghassanids did not throw their lot in with the Muslims. Read David Nicolle’s “The battle of Yarmuk, Fred Donner’s The Early Islamic Conquest, or Alfred Butlers The Arab Conquest of Egypt. Both excellent reads and a little more up to date than your version of events.
Maybe my history is off here, but my original source was "Geoffrey Regan's Book of Military Blunders" - not really an example of Muslim propaganda.
Asma,
The dhimmi status in an Islamic state is well known, it is not uncomfortable to learn at all. It is well documented in Muslim books of jurisprudence. A dhimmi is a non-muslim whose is protected under Islamic law. His life is as sacred as the life of a Muslim (unlike in the West).
To help you understand the dhimmi status better, compare it to a muslim living under a secular law or christian law. They don't have rights to their "holy" holidays, they can't turn up in a business board room in hijab/jilbab, they can't do adhan, they can't stay home in Ramadan, they have to pay income tax (which is considered as highway robbery in Islamic law),etc basically we have to live according to rules and norms of the host/majority community (and righly so).
Similarly, if you are a non-muslim living under Islamic law, you will have to wear good clothes that cover your body when you go on the street, no walking around half-naked like a whore, you won't be allowed to ring church bells to summon people to church (except is special circumstances), you won't be allowed freedom to abuse or ridicule other communities, and so on.
You mentioned something about the Jews of banu Qurayza. Yes there were executed according to the law of their Torah, the judgement was pronounced against them by their leader/prince Sa'ad bin Muadh.
Actually, a question just occured to me....anyone?
Are Jews/Christians allowed to live in Medina? Does anyone know? Please ignore what the Saudi's say. Certainly not in Mecca, they are not allowed there, never! How about Medina, anyone knows, can you point me to any evidence in hadith, fiqh books, etc.
Asma bin Marwan,
BTW, where did you get that name from?
"I understand that reading about the Dhimmi must be uncomfortable for a convert to Islam, if that’s what you are, but there are aspects of Islamic history you just cant sweep under the carpet just because they clash with your preconceived notions of the ROP."
Muslims need not be concerned with Islamic history in place of or in referce to, the history of the first three generations of Muslims where we get the Sharia from. Does your scholars deal with those sources in any meaningful way?
If I want to know about dhimma there are a thousand on one books of fiqh on the issue. Actions of Muslims dont constitute Islamic law.
Old Pickler,
"Arabs never have throughout their history. The laws of the Dhimma forbid it."
How can you go from talking about history of the Arabs then the dhimma (pact) between those conquered through Jihad and the Emir of that jihad? Dhimma is from Islam and not from Pagan Arab Jahiliyah.
Anonymous,
I believe Jews and Christians can live there but they cant it cant be permanently. They cant build churches or synagogues there.
"Yes there were executed according to the law of their Torah, the judgement was pronounced against them by their leader/prince Sa'ad bin Muadh."
I thought that that judgement was pronounced by one of thier Pagan Arab allies from Banu Aws? In any event, I dont think there are any authentic hadiths that deal with that specific issue as to who made the judgement on them. I believe it was writting about by Ibn Ishaq but that last I remember Ibn Ishaq isnt a source for sirah in and of itself. He too must take from the authentic sources and I dont know how authentic he sources were, wa Allahu Alim. These days, anything passes off as ilm. There is a hadith about the signs of the hour being that people will go to the ignorant for knowledge and knowledge will be leave the people, i.e. death of the ulema.
Goerge, Lenni Brenner's 51 Documents: Zionist Collaboration With the Nazis is worth a read. BTW Asma, dont waste time with "Bat Yeor" and her mythical orientalist revisionism.
George its really nice to know that you have not abandoned your faith like so many other un-churched people on this blog.
“It seems like Speros (being Greek) would also have an axe to grind though. The Turkish treatment of Greeks in medieval Asia Minor was very brutal - although the Spanish were doing many of the same things the Turks were doing (destroying agricultural systems etc) at the opposite end of the Mediterranean.”
Yes, the Spaniards had the temerity to take back what was theirs. As for Mr. Speros why don’t you read him, the long period of the Turkish conquest is depressing. A dark chapter in our history and unfortunately virtually unknown in the West.
“In short I view any anti-Islamic polemic as a veiled call to genocide.”
Come on George that’s just barmy. Are you saying that apostates like Ibn Warraq or Patrick Sookhdeo are advocating genocide against their former co-religionists? Am I? Most people, I believe have a problem with Islam because its one of the least huggable faiths. In short, they are sick and tired of tolerating intolerance. I’ve lived in Marseilles, and the native French have absolutely no problem with the many dusky Armenians, Christian Arabs, and Asians who live there. However, they are sick and tired of having to live in a city with so many no-go areas because of feral Muslim youth. In short, this is not about racism but culture.
Asma, you are ranting.
*Most people, I believe have a problem with Islam because its one of the least huggable faiths.*
What other faiths do you consider "unhuggable".
*I’ve lived in Marseilles, and the native French have absolutely no problem with the many dusky Armenians, Christian Arabs, and Asians who live there. However, they are sick and tired of having to live in a city with so many no-go areas because of feral Muslim youth. In short, this is not about racism but culture.*
Maybe it's because those other groups don't make up as a high a percentage of the population as Algerians do.
I'm kind of confused about what you're implying.
Are you saying that non-muslim immigrants don't form ghettos or engage in crime?
I think you'd find that pretty hard to justify.
'asma' - you obviously have a hate-on for muslims, a ridiculous cause to attach yourself to, and a liberal-arts education you assimilate (in fly-paper fashion) what weak arguments for hatred you can assemble.
'asma bint marwan' is an assumed name, the first name belongs to a poetess in the Prophet's (peace be upon him) time who was killed, after she joined with those pagans who mocked and tried to have him and the early muslim community killed.
'Asma', after the Prophet & the muslims were kicked out of Medina, they had the temerity to take back what was theirs. You like the idea that the oil or the resources of the middle east 'belongs to the West'? Heard that from some Randians, but you obviously have some new grievance...
Oh, 'feral muslim youth' messed-up your vacation spot? Why are those North African youth there, and not in Algeria or Morocco? What does colonialism mean to you? Who exactly is 'taking back what's theirs'?
Grievances are a dime a dozen, petty racism is even cheaper. Having an intelligent argument about the future of Europe and a 'clash of the uncivilized' between 'Western [secular liberal] democrats' and 'Islamic fundamentalists' with racists is useless.
As to pseudo-intellectuals, anyone who would be unable to use a single name, chosen at least from their own cultural background or honestly attributed - it's no more interesting than Neo-Nazis who post on Betar and other right-wing Israeli forums, trying to incite Arab-Jewish tensions - *WHO ARE YOU*?
*However, they are sick and tired of having to live in a city with so many no-go areas because of feral Muslim youth.*
In this country there are plenty of feral youth and most of them are not Muslim or of Muslim ancestry. I've had to deal with them on more than one occasion when travelling on public transport.
Dawud,
*[snip]*
"Oh, 'feral muslim youth' messed-up your vacation spot?"
Actually I was living and working in the sunny south, very few people vacation in Marseilles (due to the feral Muslim youth)
"Why are those North African youth there, and not in Algeria or Morocco? What does colonialism mean to you? Who exactly is 'taking back what's theirs'?"
An excellent display of pretzel logic, what pray are the Beurs(North Africans) taking back? Did Provence ever belong to them. (actually it did for about two centuries before they were finally kicked out in the 9th cent, what they were doing there is another question.)
*In this country there are plenty of feral youth and most of them are not Muslim or of Muslim ancestry. I've had to deal with them on more than one occasion when travelling on public transport.*
True. I find this arguement about feral muslim youth really hard to understand.
I think it's probably just an oppurtunity for certain people to voice their anti-foreigner views under the excuse of criticising a religious group. The BNP make this arguement and very few people doubt their racism because they have a history of it. There are those however who may not want to be seen as openly racist.
Asma Bin Marwan,
Where did you get that name from?
Also, the way you speak about French Muslim Youths you would think they were feral because of their Muslimness. If so please explain. Try not to make references to other Muslims except for the relevant ones i.e. Prophet Muhammed, His Companions, and their Companions. Because if this is about their Muslimness, this is about ISlam, and if this is about ISlam, this is about our text, and if this is about out text, we gotta deal with the text.
The real reason why anti-Muslim polemics make me uncomfortable is because I am unaware of any example of Muslim populations abandoning Islam as a group
Just because people stick with their beliefs doesn't make them right.
Asma Bin Marwan,
Where did you get that name from?
This was the pregnant poetess and mother who wrote some satirical verses about Mohammed. Mohammed had her brutally assassinated. It's in the hadith.
Dawud,
"Asma', after the Prophet & the muslims were kicked out of Medina, they had the temerity to take back what was theirs. You like the idea that the oil or the resources of the middle east 'belongs to the West'? Heard that from some Randians, but you obviously have some new grievance"
I don't know what you are going on about, you should read my post again.
Dawud.
"As to pseudo-intellectuals, anyone who would be unable to use a single name, chosen at least from their own cultural background or honestly attributed - it's no more interesting than Neo-Nazis who post on Betar and other right-wing Israeli forums, trying to incite Arab-Jewish tensions - WHO ARE YOU?"
You should really practice what you preach buddy. You left the below passage on another blog(Manrilla)
"My own background of being the children of immigrants to Canada [from the Netherlands, after WWII, mostly for economic reasons], growing up in a second country (the Phillipines) and having a third culture (American) almost foisted on me - international Christian schools... my parents were/ are missionaries, which makes my muslim identity all that much more difficult."
Yusuf, how about checking the IP address of "asma" the orientalist and comparing it to pRickler's?
Dawud,
You know I have been asking this woman about why should would take that name and it is nice to finally know the reasons behind it. However, I caution Muslims about defending and justifying the actions of our Noble Messenger based upon reports from spurious hadith which account for the Sufi religion, and many false impressions of Allah's Messenger.
Why anyone would want to take the name of some Pagan Arab woman who probably buried ten of her dishonorable baby girls is beyound me. Ha Ha Ha. I kid.
As you can see, people aren't that deep as they like to appear to be.
First she was arguing against the idea of a dhimmi (a protected non-muslim citizen living under Islamic law), we gave her pointers to show that the system she advocates is worse in treating minority, then she moves on to "feral youths" in France, and then goes on to accuse someone of pretzel logic....
What exactly are you trying to articulate, Asma?
As Bikhair suggested, why not bring us some text from Islam that you perhaps have problem with and we can look at to see whether its teachings are good/bad... all these incoherent sophistry and obscurantist arguments you are chunking out does not do anyone any good. It will cause you more stress than ease.
Dawud: It's no more interesting than Neo-Nazis who post on Betar and other right-wing Israeli forums, trying to incite Arab-Jewish tensions - WHO ARE YOU?
I've never heard of this, but I have heard of a French "Zionist" terrorist group, the Mouvement d'Action et Défense Masada, which bombed a PLO bookshop in Paris in 1972 and hostels in Nice and Cannes in 1988. They left Islamophobic leaflets bearing Stars of David at the scene of one of the hostel bombings, but when the terrorists were arrested, they turned out not to be Zionists at all, but neo-Nazis...
Asma: Yes, the Spaniards had the temerity to take back what was theirs.
If that was the case, why did they ethnically cleanse not just the Arabs and Berbers, but also the Muslims of indigenous Spanish descent?
Asma: Come on George that’s just barmy. Are you saying that apostates like Ibn Warraq or Patrick Sookhdeo are advocating genocide against their former co-religionists?
Of course they (being apostates and all) don't see themselves as advocating genocide, but since most Muslims would rather die than convert, any plan to destroy Islam would have to involve killing hundreds of millions of Muslims...
I just checked out what is out there on Asma bint Marwan (the poet), and it turns out that the story being cited is a flawed report, because one of its narrators is a known hadeeth fabricator. So it is not a reliable report.
With regard to killing pregnant women, it's a known fact that Islamic law insists that pregnant women are delivered of their babies before being executed, as in the well-known case of the woman who confessed of adultery.
*Yusuf, how about checking the IP address of "asma" the orientalist and comparing it to pRickler's?*
I just did. ABM is posting from Rogers in Canada, and Pickler from Blueyonder in England.
dawud - is david, which is my real name. I left nothing out of my identity, and for clarity, yes - I described myself elsewhere. I also chose to use the arabic version of my name, as people who read the muslim scriptures are more familiar with the same name in Arabic; secondarily, there are implications to the biblical story (murder, adultery, grave sins that muslims wouldn't accuse Prophets of) - Dawud is fair.
I do wonder why you would bother looking up my posts elsewhere, are you obsessed? Why don't you find some actual terror-supporting fanatics to blather on to, and not harass Yusuf or others?
I don't think 'Asma' is identical with OP, but I wouldn't be surprised if they have a friendship sparked on some other anti-muslim page; since she's already made her loathing and dedication (wasting time looking me up on the internet, I post so infrequently that this would be some work) - why shouldn't we find out who she is? Perhaps there would be some work consequences if her internet identity is exposed, and copies of her more racist posts mailed to her boss?
George,
"If that was the case, why did they ethnically cleanse not just the Arabs and Berbers, but also the Muslims of indigenous Spanish descent?"
At the time of the when the Moors were given the proverbial boot, most if not all Muslims in Spain were Arab or Arabized. The late Richard Fletcher wrote about the process of conversion in Moorish Spain, it’s a fascinating read. And George we have to remember that there are worse things than ethnic cleansing, and if the Christians had not taken action in the 16th cent then a large part of Spain today would be an appendage of Morocco. Africa would literally begin at the Pyrenees.
Yusuf,
"With regard to killing pregnant women, it's a known fact that Islamic law insists that pregnant women are delivered of their babies before being executed, as in the well-known case of the woman who confessed of adultery."
Thank you for that clarification, I feel so much better about Islam now.
In regards to my namesake, It’s considered a "flawed report" because the story is deeply uncomfortable for Muslims, especially for converts. It wasn't out of character of Muhammad to murder look how he dealt with Kinana or prisoners of war. Moreover, the Ulema have not excised this story, so it’s good enough for me. Ibn Ishaq is attacked by some scholars but mainly for his mention of the Satanic Verses
What's more noteworthy about this event is that after Asma was murdered, Muhammad said, "Two goats won't butt their head about her", meaning no one will care about her death. (Well except her children and her family).
What kind of a man was Muhammad? Did he really need to ask his men to murder a mother of five, a woman who was no legitimate threat to him?
Your thoughts
Old Pickler,
"It's in the hadith."
And the fact that the donkeys built the pyraminds can be in a hadith as well.
Yusuf,
Where is my IP address? I wanna know, I wanna know? In reference to weak narations and fabricated hadith, it is true that many of them are out there. Many of them are in books like the Sunan of Abu Dawud or At Tirdmidhis books of hadith. Muslims ought to refer back to our great muhadiths like Shaik Albani, (rahimuhullah) who has, and May Allah continue to reward him for his works, authenticated many hadiths for us.
Its a shame that the Westners cannot approach the Orientals and their religion with the same kind of consideration as they would with their own religious traditions, i.e. Judaism or Christianity. Could you imagine me waxing so authoritatively about the Torah after having "read" it like these people do with regard to the Quran?
I guess when you dont have a white mans religion you dont get the same respect.
George Carty,
It doesnt matter if there are no Muslims on planet earth. The truth is still the truth. Revalation has already been revealed. People will still be held to account.
Asalamualaikum wa rahmatullah...
Brothers and sisters, do you guys remember the hadith about the day of judgement, and how the bedouins will compete to build the tallest buildings.
You will not believe this but I heard that Dubai is planning on building the tallest building in the world.
SubhanAllah... scray stuff. Those Arabs are so estranged.
*In regards to my namesake, It’s considered a "flawed report" because the story is deeply uncomfortable for Muslims, especially for converts. It wasn't out of character of Muhammad to murder look how he dealt with Kinana or prisoners of war. Moreover, the Ulema have not excised this story, so it’s good enough for me.*
You obviously have no idea of the methodology of hadeeth scholars. They did not excise (and thus forget) fabricated hadeeth; they narrated them and made it clear that the hadeeth is false, so that were it to appear again, it could be rebutted. There are whole books of fabricated hadeeth, the best known being that of Ibn al-Jawzi.
*What kind of a man was Muhammad? Did he really need to ask his men to murder a mother of five, a woman who was no legitimate threat to him?*
If the story is a fabrication, the question does not have any relevance. However, if there was a situation of instability and people were attempting to stir up (violent) revolt with verses, then it is not satire, it is incitement to murder. Historically, people were executed for incitement to mutiny in western armies, including that of the UK. Julius Streicher was executed for his propaganda.
Bikhair: your IP address is stored in my MT database; the address from which every comment came is stored as well. Your last comment came from 69.234.16.162, which is part of the pacbell.net network. By the way, most ISP users get a different IP address whenever they log on, which is freed when they log off; this conserves addresses, because they are in somewhat short supply nowadays.
Asma Bint Marwan,
"It wasn't out of character of Muhammad to murder look how he dealt with Kinana or prisoners of war."
Who the hell is Kinana and whar prisoners of war are you talking about?
"Moreover, the Ulema have not excised this story, so it’s good enough for me."
What Ulema? Who are the members of this ulema? The Ulema of Saudi Arabia? The Ulema of Iran, although that is a contradition in terms because thier can be no ulema among the shia. The Ulema of Jordan?
Bikhair wrote: "Who the hell is Kinana and whar prisoners of war are you talking about?"
Asma is referring to Kinanah b. Abi l-Huqayq of the Bani Nadir, who was put to death (along with a cousin) after the battle of Khaybar. Kinanah broke one of the terms of surrender (the terms having been witnessed by four Muslims and ten Jews). The families were made captive. If you have Lings' biography, the story is on p. 267.
"What Ulema? Who are the members of this ulema? The Ulema of Saudi Arabia? The Ulema of Iran, although that is a contradition in terms because thier can be no ulema among the shia. The Ulema of Jordan?"
Ignore this. Yusuf answered her in his comment (10:22 pm). She is speaking out of ignorance.
Asma,
Before you waste your time any further, one thing you should know is that whatever authentic accounts we have of the actions of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), all his actions are accepted by muslims to be just and wise action: No matter what it may be. And this goes for all other Prophets of God (Moses, Jesus, etc). How can you follow a Prophet who is unjust and unwise, it doesn't make sense.
You ask:
What kind of a man was Muhammad?
He is a Lord of Men, a Mercy to all existing being. He is like Moses (peace be upon him).
Did he really need to ask his men to murder a mother of five, a woman who was no legitimate threat to him?
This is nonsensical, emotive and quite obsurantist. I don't know about the story you are referring to; but the number of children you have does not mean anything to the implementation of justice by someone who is entrusted with that function (except where there are some special considerations). Being a mother of 10 doesn't make you any less capable of committing a capital offense.
What kind of a man was Muhammad? Did he really need to ask his men to murder a mother of five, a woman who was no legitimate threat to him?
Anonymous,
Brother/Sister please give us a name. There are too many anons that post here. InshaAllah. Thanks for the much needed stance.
"Before you waste your time any further, one thing you should know is that whatever authentic accounts we have of the actions of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), all his actions are accepted by muslims to be just and wise action: No matter what it may be."
Barakallahu feek.
JD
Here are some of the details you left out. It kind of reminds me of the murder of Nick Berg.
Tabari VIII:122/Ishaq:515 "The Prophet gave orders concerning Kinanah to Zubayr, saying, 'Torture him until you root out and extract what he has. So Zubayr kindled a fire on Kinanah's chest, twirling it with his firestick until Kinanah was near death. Then the Messenger gave him to Maslamah, who beheaded him."
*Yusuf: I looked this up on Google and found no references to it other than on anti-Islamic websites, or otherwise attributed to anti-Muslim polemicists. I searched for it on the USC hadeeth database and found no record of it. So the story you present seems, once again, to be inauthentic. In any case, you left out the last bit: "... in retaliation for the murder of his brother Mahmud bin Maslama".*
Hi Asma,
Thanks for posting that!
It is a good approach to refer to text as opposed to regurgitating standard lines.
As far as I know, Tabari is a trusted Imam, not infallible tho, I am no expert to autheticate or dismiss these narrations.
However, if these were true, it is not sufficient as a refutation for the source and divinity of the message and of the Prophet (sallallahu aleihi wa salam).
There are two ways to help you look at this.
First, as we already mentioned that Prophets are wise and just, and it is impossible for them to commit any act of injustice. This is an implicit article of faith. There are Prophets who are described as "ululu azmi" (of Great Magnitude), such as Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad (peace be upon them all).
These are Lord of men, capable of dispensing unquestionable and almost absolute justice. Such as Moses in your Bible when he ordered the extermination of the Gentiles (for good reasons):
Numbers
Chapter 31
7-12
7 And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males. 8 And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam also the son of Beor they slew with the sword. 9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods. 10 And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire. 11 And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts. 12 And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and unto the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the camp at the plains of Moab, which are by Jordan near Jericho.
It always amazes me that these references in the Bible never troubles any Christian, it is the hadith ones that worry you most. Obviously because you hate Islam, but that would be you own problem to deal with in your private moments.
The second way to help you look at it is from the an epistemological perspective. How do you know what is right and what it wrong? What is the moral basis by which you are judging the actions of the Prophets - particularly those Prophets who are entrusted to preside over the affairs of man in is ENTIRITY, when indeed the source of all morality are from Prophetic Guidance. Think about this, if you are capable.
So, since man is not capable of an unbiased moral perspective, how are you going to judge the morals of divinely guided Prophets? The issue at stake here is Iman (faith), which if one is without will never attain to clarity of thought. This Iman however is not erratic/irrational, it is an autonomous sensation guided by knowledge and practise, which in turn feeds the soul - a soul rooted in the mystey of God.
You seem to be on a mission to pull people out of Iman into the wilderness in which you are currently wandering. So you bring these kind of stories, but you are wasting your time, because the people of Iman are smarter than you (always), they see through these cheap shots.
Let me give you a hint. If you want to challenge belief/faith in the Message of Muhammad (Allah bless and give him peace), or any of the Prophets, you need to talk about Epistemology and Ontology, and then move on to Usuludeen (the science of the foundation of religion). Anything less is just childs play.
Perhaps there would be some work consequences if her internet identity is exposed, and copies of her more racist posts mailed to her boss?
Since Islam is not a race, there is nothing racist about my posts. But I notice, Dawud, that, rather than counter my arguments, as Yusuf has done in saying that the hadith about Asma bint Marwan was weak, you resort to making threats.
Hardly a sign of someone confident in his arguments or his faith.
Yeah ... I don't much agree with the idea of complaining to people's bosses as this sort of behaviour has forced blogs off the web in the recent past. ABM could be a perfectly good paper shuffler or checkout girl. It's one reason why a lot of bloggers are anonymous. In any case, I have the address Asma bt Marwan uses to post here, and assuming it's genuine, it does not contain any name other than Asma bint Marwan.
Since Islam is not a race, there is nothing racist about my posts.
Well jews aren't a race either but prejudice towards them is still considered racist in western society. Racism is generally used to mean prejudice towards a minority community. Lots of comedians make fun of the French but they probably wouldn't (or at least they'd be less likely to) make fun of Jamaicans even though they're both just nationalities not races. Political correctness plays a very big role in public discourse today.
Just an addition to my earlier long post, sorry for the length folks.
The People of Azam (ahlul azmi) is better translated as "Men of Great Resolve/Determination"...traditionally including Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad (May Allah's peace and blessings be upon them all). Their resolve was to make the Truth prevail by all means necessary. No time for pretentious diplomacy except for where a positive result can be achieved (based on their insight).
Ali Ibn Abi Talib (Allah be please with him) was of a similar stature, but was not a Prophet nor an Infallible man (as some are led to believe). He was of great resolve and his knowledge, insight, and spirituality was certainly extraordinary...as indicated by the Prophet (saw). Hardly anyone of us is like that these days... The problem tho is that some muslims make pretention to possessing this type of states/authority....thereby committing grave blunders (atrocities proper speaking).
Anonymous,
Yes too many Muslims have usurped the Sharia to acheive their own desires. Muslims need a reformation. Note that I said Muslims and not Islam. I dont want to confuse the disbelievers. They are far too confused about Islam already.
Anonymous
“It always amazes me that these references in the Bible never troubles any Christian, it is the hadith ones that worry you most. Obviously because you hate Islam, but that would be you own problem to deal with in your private moments.”
Your absolutely right I don’t like Islam, because Islam doesn’t like me. There are obvious reasons why I don’t fear Orthodox Jews I don’t know any who would advocate the destruction of the Palestinians or other Goyem as described in Numbers Chapter 31 7-12 7.
“You seem to be on a mission to pull people out of Iman into the wilderness in which you are currently wandering. So you bring these kind of stories, but you are wasting your time, because the people of Iman are smarter than you (always), they see through these cheap shots.”
You sound desperate.
Yusuf,
“ABM could be a perfectly good paper shuffler or checkout girl.”
Or a lorry driver, or delivery boy like yourself.
Asma,
"You sound desperate."
Well he isnt the only one.
"Your absolutely right I don’t like Islam, because Islam doesn’t like me."
It is true Islam doesnt like disbelievers.
"There are obvious reasons why I don’t fear Orthodox Jews I don’t know any who would advocate the destruction of the Palestinians or other Goyem as described in Numbers Chapter 31 7-12 7."
I am sure that the religion of the Orthodox Jew doesnt like you either. Most Muslims arent a threat to you so by your same reasoning you should either not like the religion of the orthodox jew because it doesnt like you, or you shouldnt have such beef with Muslims because like the Ortho Jew they will not be going on any rampage.
If you arte going to talk about Muhammed and your Prophet test, please do the same for the others. Its about being fair right Asma, or did you Pagan Arab religion not teaching about being fair. They certainly taught you how to kill a baby or two. Ha Ha Ha. I kid.
There are obvious reasons why I don’t fear Orthodox Jews I don’t know any who would advocate the destruction of the Palestinians or other Goyem as described in Numbers Chapter 31 7-12 7.
I doubt very much you know any PERIOD.
Does anybody know the strength of this hadith quoted by Asma. It contradicts the hadith of Sahih Muslim on torture (ta'azib).
The arabic word used in the hadith she has presented, I am guessing is "yuazib" which is used in the Koran for the dwellers of hell, i.e. punishment. This word does not literally mean torture. If indeed this hadith is sahih with the meaning of torture (i.e. perhaps a contextual stretch in the meaning of the word yuazib), it is going to be a muskhilah (problematic) hadith...because it contradicts the general attitude of the Prophet (peace be upon him), ...even though, like Moses (peace be upon him), he has the full reign of power to preside over all affairs, and his judgement would be correct in any case, not deviating from divine justice....
And I don't even know what/which book of Imam At-tabari she is referring to?
One of the things, Asma, doesnt understand as Yusuf has pointed out is that it is possible to have a weak or even a fabricated hadith in a hadith book, the compilers include such hadiths so that people may know them as such. But the average Asma ofcourse without knowing this or not even knowing anything of the sciences of hadith will can easily pick up a hadith book and read it as it if were a newspaper. Islam is too sophistated for that.
"...He guides many by it. and by it He causes many to stray"
Asma: "One of them, who had Kinanah's welfare at heart, went to him and begged him to hide nothing, for if he did the Prophet would certainly be informed of it. Kinanah angrily rebuked him; but within less than a day the treasure was discovered, and Kinanah was put to death together with a cousin of his who was found to be privy to the concealment."
-- Martin Lings, "Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources," p. 267
Kinanah swore an oath witnessed by both sides, Muslims and Jews, and when he got caught red-handed he paid the price. Stupid people do stupid things, and they receive their just deserts in the end, insha'allah.
Your absolutely right I don’t like Islam, because Islam doesn’t like me.
Hi Asma,
What do you mean by saying Islam doesn't like you? Please elaborate. I've heard this before and not sure what you guys mean by it.
Islam has nothing to do with liking or disliking anyone, it has no bias towards any race, religion (yes!), nationality, and so on.
Islam is a 'deen', a teaching to guide people in all areas of life - religion, economics, politics, morality, etc, in all aspects of their existence. In short, it's purpose is to guide people. Period; no need listing all the every splits of life in which it offers guidance - life is one.
Islam presents its message without any bias (Koran & Sunnah), it's a different issue if people do'nt like it. Islam doesn't set out to confront anything/anyone (that would be too low of God).
When for instance Jesus (peace be upon him) said to his folks, I have not come to make peace with you, I have come to make war (in the Gospels). He is speaking to them in the way they perceived it. And he is still coming back to make that war that he promised.
The Prophet (saw) also said to the Quraysh, "I bring you slaughter/war", he is speaking to them in what they would perceive his message to be, in reality he brought them nothing but Guidance, but they considered it war.
So, it's not Islam that doesn't like you, Rather you are the one who don't like Islam, and that's okay.