Ignorance in the Age of Jihad

More from the debate between the Inexcusably Blind and Those Who Wish Things Were Different But Realize They Are Not, at EO:

Joe Carter asked,

So should we doubt the trustworthiness of devout Muslims who serve in the U.S. Armed Forces?

Is this question offered in good faith? I am unsure, since if you are familiar with Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, you already know the answer. Your question would then be nothing more than a disingenuous attempt to silence criticism of Islam by hiding behind the honor of the (deservedly heroic) U.S. military.

If the question is an honest one, then you are obviously (dangerously) unfamiliar with Islam's "sacred" texts and history in carrying out Allah's will against the Infidel. In that case, what business do you have making anything resembling authoritative statements on Islam? How can your misrepresentations of those who are familiar with traditional, Qur'anic Islam carry any weight at all except with the ignorant and the coward?

In the event that your question is sincere, it would be helpful to have some background:

In Islam, the Qur'an is considered the perfect, immutable word of Allah. Mohammed is considered the Ideal Man, whose words and deeds are to be imitated by the faithful. Here is a small sampling of what Allah and his (false) prophet have spoken on topics that should be of concern to Infidels enamoured with little things like Liberty (or their necks):

"...fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)..." (Qur’an 9:5).

"Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of Believers..." (Qur'an 9:14).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book [Jews and Christians], until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).

"Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere..." (Qur'an 8:38-8:39).

"O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him" (Qur'an 9:123).

"Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not" (Qur'an 2:216).

“Muhammad said, ‘A single endeavor of fighting in Allah’s Cause is better than the world and whatever is in it’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 50).

"War is deceit" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 268).

Are the only members of our military beyond scrutiny those who are Muslim? Would you not have reservations about trusting anyone with close ties to the particular enemy against which we war?

You should be asking, "In light of Allah's expressed will and Mohammed's example, how can we be assured that a devout Muslim ("devout" meaning one who knows the true nature of Allah and his apostle and still believe) will not act in accord with Allah's clear commands and his apostle's example? How can we be assured that a nominal Muslim will not discover his god's will and decide to fulfill it?"

Perhaps you're right, Joe. It's not like we've seen an American Muslim's slaughtering of fellow soldiers in defense of the Ummah. And we've never heard of Muslim "chaplains" aiding their co-religionists against us.

Oh, wait....

*******

ucfengr,

You've brought up some interesting points that deserve response.

Should we round up all the young Muslim males here on student visas and ship them home? What about all the young, Muslim males serving in our military? Should we ship them off to Gitmo or would a mere dishonorable discharge serve? What about the young, Muslim males holding high positions in our own Defense Department....

Would you have been so accepting of communists in the military and DOD during the Cold War? Would you have been so tolerant of Nazis in those positions during WWII? I think not.

The point you (and others here) seem to be missing is that Allah requires Jihad against the Infidel to make the world Islam. Your sarcasm will do nothing to change that.

The difficulty of distinguishing between the decent, good-willed Muslim ignorant of his god's commands and the devout Muslim who knows Allah's will is exactly why every Muslim in any position to harm Infidels must be scrutinized.

What should be the reaction of good, honest, decent Muslims to the truth about Allah and his apostle recorded in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira? Any reasonable person upon reading such vile hatred would be revulsed, would they not? Wouldn't their renouncing Islam be a reasonable response?

If upon seeing with their own eyes the monstrous barbarism of their god and his apostle they refuse to reject Allah, such acceptance should be seen as an affirmation of their allegiance to a god that requires their fighting against, subduing and humiliating, and killing non-Muslims, shouldn't it?

What would UAE have to do to move from a "questionable alliance" to unquestionable one? Convert to Christianity? If our alliance with UAE is "questionable", then we don't have any unquestionable ones. Remember the "shoe bomber" was a Brit. Does that make our alliance with the Brits questionable too?

Blind faith in the goodness of any ally is irresponsible. Blind faith in the goodness of an ally devoted to a god that requires our submission and death is suicide.

The example you cite of a British citizen's terrorism is evidence of why Muslims in place to do harm to any unbeliever must be examined carefully. (You're making Chris's point.)

If a Muslim citizen of a Western nation is willing to "fight in the cause of Allah" against that nation, what guarantee do Infidels have that other Muslims will not do the same (especially since their god requires it)?

So, do the acts of their co-religionists make your neighbors, co-workers, or friends suspect?

No, their devotion to a god which requires those acts carried out by their co-religionists does.

Nothing wrong with judging people based on their beliefs, but you've gone beyond that. You have said that all Muslims are suspect because of the actions of a small group of their co-religionists.

The "actions of a small group of their co-religionists" are useful in that they highlight the ideology which inspires and sustains Jihad.

Jihad has different meanings to different Muslims, as does Sharia, most of them fairly acceptable. For example, Sharia does not require the wearing of the burkha, that is the interpretation of some more fundementalist sects, for many (most, probably), it is an injunction for women to dress modestly. For many Muslims, Jihad represents an internal struggle for the believer to try to better comport with the wishes of Allah, not an external one to convert the world by the sword. For someone who claims to have Muslim neighbors and friends, you don't seem to have much knowledge of their religion....

That's ironic, because I was just thinking that about you.

Most Muslims in the West are probably unfamiliar with Allah's requiring his people to fight against, subdue and humiliate, and kill non-Muslims. Of those who do know, do you think they'd brag about it? The U.S. is not France (although, come to think of it, I have seen video of the Islamic Thinkers Society in New York itself calling for Islam's victory over the U.S., and President Bush did equate the teachings of Qur'an with the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount in his second inaugural address....)

To whom should we look for the meaning of Jihad? Nominal, Muslims-in-Name-Only? No, we should look to Allah and his (false) prophet.

As noted earlier in my response to J. Carter, Allah clearly requires offensive warfare against non-Muslims until the world is made Islam.

And what of Mohammed? Did he view jihad as primarily an internal struggle? Anyone familiar with Hadith and Sira knows that Mohammed viewed Jihad as actual warfare. He personally led dozens of battles, slew thousands, raped many (including his nine-year-old wife Aisha), and taught his followers to do the same.

As Rob Ryan just pointed out, that sentiment cuts a lot of ways, many of which I doubt you would agree with.

The Christian religion provided the inspiration and foundation for our Republic. Islam is a totalitarian, tyrannous ideology that requires its complete domination over all mankind.

Nowhere in the Bible will you find a universal command to "...kill the unbelievers wherever you find them." No other prominent world religion orders its adherents to use any means necessary (including war) to make it the faith.

You could probably stretch this sentiment world-wide. The vast majority of Muslim do not want to impose, let alone live under a Taliban-like theocracy.

In every Muslim nation on earth under Shari'a, women, apostates, and non-Muslims are severely oppressed because Allah requires it.

In every Muslim nation not yet under Shari'a, there are significant portions of its population working to implement it, whether through political channels or through small, individual acts of obedience to Allah.

To assert that most Muslims do not want Shari'a is a stretch.