The Meltdown of the Solkhar Troll: suddenly, the mask came off!

By sheik yer’mami:

Regular readers of WoJ are familiar now with our (non- resident) Islamo-troll Solkhar, who tries to play many roles, but keeps tying himself up in knots. Ocassionally he makes some good points, while  trying to present himself as  ‘moderate’, was it not for the smears and constant attacks on people like Spencer, Fitzgerald, Ali Hirsi, Wafa Sultan, myself  and all those who oppose the global jihad along with the spread of Mohammedanism in the world. Then of course, there are the lies: Solkhar lies so much that you  can’t help but wonder whether he can lie straight in bed at night.

Those of you who are familiar with how trolls operate won’t be surprised, since yesterday Solkhar exclaimed jubilant “the blog owner is of course a Jew..” after reassuring us multiple times that he is not an anti-Semite, but... just like he assured us that it is wrong to punch women in the face, but... and so many other things that included that famous Islamic “but…” Many readers have complained about Solkhars detractions and why I put up with it, but  as we can see below, Solkhar  finally cracked.

So yes, today, after being taken to task by some newcomers to the blog, the mask came off and below you can see the Solkher meltdown, just  like you can see it here again in this classic interview between Sean Hannity and  imam Husham Al-Husainy


Submitted on 2009/09/24 at 12:42am

The battle with the Jews will surely come… the decisive Moslem victory is coming without a doubt, and the prophet spoke about in more than one Hadith. And the day of resurrection will not come without the victory of the believers [us] over the descendants of the monkeys and pigs [you Jew] and with their annihilation.

Praise be to Allah.


The above posting turned out to be a prank by one of our regular posters.

Those who suspected Mullah are wrong; it wasn’t him. The poster has since apologized to me and I have accepted his apologies. As for blogtroll Solkhar, I don’t think any apologies are necessary since his actions and words are  mutually repulsive. Solkhar is a self professed snitch who thinks its perfectly okay for Mohammedans to punch an elected Italian politician in the face and to let a journalist in Morocco, who publicly opposes the Islamically enforced ramadan fast, disappear in the Moroccan desert.

Solkhar is not above issuing threats against this blog and the “blog-owner” and would shut us down in a flash (if only he could!) His constant attacks on me, Spencer, Fitzgerald, Wafa Sultan or anyone who opposes the global jihad, his vile smears on Jews, Hindus and everyone he loves to hate are tiresome and spooky. In other words, Solkhar is a good muslim, he is just doing jihad by the pen.



Another point, Fitzgerald is a failed would-be academic that cashes in on selling books to an already far-right client base and has no understanding at all on what he is talking about.

Notwithstanding the above, the State of Lebanon really has no reason to exist and its fractured status will remain until it is absorbed into Turkey and Syria. Its legitimacy exists because of French and British cartography.

So Solker wants to absorb  Lebanon into the future caliphate? Well, who would be surprised? So much for our ‘modern, liberal’ Muslim.

Anyhow, Mohammedan’s suck the Jew-hatred in with the mothers milk, as we can see here in this latest clip from Pali-TV, financed by your and my taxes which go to UNESCO and UNRAWA:

Video: Incredibly Creepy Hamas Children’s Show, Nassur the Genocidal Teddy Bear Instructs Kids to “Slaughter da Joooos”….

Via PMW: thanks to Weasel Zippers:

Nassur: “There won’t be any Jews or Zionists, if Allah wills. They’ll be erased.”

Saraa: “They’ll be slaughtered.” (Manhurin naher)

Nassur: “And just like we will visit the Qaaba [in Mecca]… everyone will visit Jerusalem.”

[Seven-year old Palestinian child on phone tells how his father, a member of the Hamas Al-Qassam Brigades, “died as a Shahid (Martyr).”]

Nassur to child on phone: “What do you want to do to the Jews who shot your father?”

Child on phone: “I want to kill them.”

Saraa: “We don’t want to do anything to them, just expel them from our land.”

Nassur: “We want to slaughter (Nidbah-hom) them, so they will be expelled from our land, right?”

Saraa: “Yes. That’s right. We will expel them from our land using all means.”

Nassur: “And if they don’t want [to go] peacefully, by words or talking, we’ll have to [do it] by slaughter.”

37 thoughts on “The Meltdown of the Solkhar Troll: suddenly, the mask came off!”

  1. Solkhar, now that you have Chernobyled completely, stop the blasphemous pretense that the God of Abraham, Israel, the Prophets,
    the Torah, the Bible, the Son and Holy Spirit is the same “god” revealed
    in the koran through the false prophet.

    Flee from islam, Solkhar – run for your life!

  2. LOL, this is Realist who is talking, spends a week using insults and no actual subject matter is his posting. As for the blog-owner, he just twists.

    Note that if anyone uses the word Jew or Israel they are automatically labelled anti-Semitic instead of looking at the subject matter. I pointed out that the blog-owner’s rediculous article that bashes Islam and Palestinians is from a Jew who confesses to being a supporter of Kahane a well documented radical Rabbi with religio-Zionist goals to push the Palestinians out of the West Bank, Gaza and Hebron etc, and thus his postings should be taken with that agenda in view – ie, it is propoganda.

    No melt-down here at all, I am sticking to my own agenda and making my points of view clear.

    I personally think that The Lebanon is a mistake, it was of course the blog-owner who used the word “Caliphate. I think it is rather pathetic and in typical Spencer style to drop extra words in to try and give another impression – anyone reading my posts knows that I neither believe in, do not accept and am certain that a Caliphate will ever happen.

    But back to The Lebanon. I think it should never have been created, it is an example of Anglo-Franco political medling that is to some degree responsible to the religo-ethic tensions on the reason – siding and supporting one group above another. My own opinion, not that it will happen, is that much of that country should have been absorbed into Syria but also believe that the north along with a long stretch of Syrian coastline should have been ceeded to Turkey – based on history and ethnicity. The coastal Syrians are a supressed minority and are Syrian by force.

    The last note to make is that on the previous Al Qods thread someone, probably the raving scripture quoting fundamentalist/evangalist – but that is jumping to quick conclussions, posted an item in my name which anyone following my posts, style and beliefs will know to be false. For a start I almost never quote the Qur’an and especially in this case half-haddiths and radical clerics. Since it was very religous in overtone and immediately then used by the resident fundamentalist – I point in that direction.

    Is the blog-owner able to ISP check postings?

  3. hi Solkhar

    I , too, thought it was odd that you would make such a post.
    I smell a rat and something tells me the good Mullah is up to something…

    I never did trust him….

  4. Did you notice that Realist calls his wife a lying hypocrit. He does because he generalises about Muslims.

    Realist – go to the Maldives Muslim …… thread and you will have your 11 answers, it is in the same response to tjworks. I did not split it up, as I am pressed for time.

  5. * I smell a rat and something tells me the good Mullah is up to something…

    There was a rat at work, and did apparently imitate Solkhar, but
    not my doing. I’ve sent an email to the Sheik comparing the two
    IP addresses used by the imposter & Solkhar – Sheik can take it
    from there.

  6. I should have suspected an imposter at work – Solkhar doesn’t know
    as much about islam and the “prophet” as the imposter.

    This is the real deal:

    [Nassur: “There won’t be any Jews or Zionists, if Allah wills.
    They’ll be erased.”]

    And so on.

  7. Hahahaha! knock yourself out, solker!
    Does it bother the moon when a dog barks?

    Here’s how the Moroccan Islamo mafia deals with dissenters:

    Following the affair, several Moroccan newspapers wrote frenzied articles denouncing the group’s “virulent” acts. On the front page of the September 16 edition of the Al-Alam, a local newspaper that belongs to the Istiqlal Party (also the Moroccan Prime Minister Abbas El Fassi’s party), an editorial read: “They don’t belong with us”. Besides the libellous headlines, members of MALI received death threats via the Internet, indicated a communiqué from Human Rights Watch. September 15, an official newspaper published a statement from the Provincial Council of Mohammedia Ulemas (doctors of Islamic law), in which they denounced the picnic organised by “the agitators” as an “abhorrent” act that “defies the teachings of God and the prophet with all the severe sanctions it would bring about.”

    Well, if that doesn’t call for blood it wouldn’t be called the Religion of Peace, right solker? Kill the infidels, kill the Jews… kill journalists, attack politicians, slime and smear and discredit everyone who tells the truth about Mohammedanism….

  8. Solkhar, leave Lebanon alone. It probably breaks you to see Christians not paying jizya and acting like “tolerated” minorities who have to be so very grateful that Islam sees them as “people of the book”.

    As for countries being mistakes well tough luck! With the collapse of the empires last century many countries and areas were partitioned and new states created that aggrieved many an imperialist or population. In my darkest mood I believe Pakistan was a mistake but then I realize that to reverse the partition would mean absorbing Pakistan back into India, and I wouldn’t wish that on the peaceful and democratic Hindus!!

    Personally I believe there should be more states in the ME and the Islamic world not less. There should be a free and sovereign Kurdistan, recognition of the Berbers in N. Africa, and most importantly a free Southern Sudan where the Christians and Animists are no longer subjected to Islamic supremacy and slavery.

  9. Thanks for that, Mary.

    Strange that solker has no problem with the existence of Kuwait, Sowdi Arabia, the emirates, Pakistan or Bangladesh, but insists on wiping Lebanon from the map.

    All the while disputing that he wants to integrate it into the future caliphate.

  10. Mary, ask a Muslim what is jisya and they will not know unless they are history students.

    I said I have my opinion, The Lebanon is a creation of Anglo-Franco politicians, that is all. That is history.

    I agree with you about an independant Khurdistan would be just.

    Your comments about recognition about berbers is very incorrect. I hopey our not silly enough to think the word independance. They are a part of the region, the countries they are in and except for an element in Algeria are basically integrated if not an important cultural player. The King of Morocco is half berber, if not more since his father was also partly there of. Berbers here not only dominate the retail industry, but have a higher percentage rate in the public service as well as dominance in their traditional ethnic areas. Amazigh music is popular amongst most Moroccans be they Arab, Andalous, Saharan or Berber.

    As for Sundanes integrity, what is happening in Darfur is bad but you will find that they will be prayed upon by any of their neighbours, of which the attacks are not religous but tribal.

    Oh, you must also remind the peaceful and democratic Hindus

    Mary, get real.

    SNIP for BS and trying to smear Hindus…

    1. “Mary, ask a Muslim what is jisya and they will not know unless they are history students.”

      Strange, Solker.

      Even the illiterate Taliban extorted the jiziya from the Sikhs and the Christians recently when they overran the Swat Valley. Hamas levied the jiziya on the few remaining Christians when they got the upper hand in Gaza and solker tells us you have to be a history student to know where the extortion money can be extracted from

      Something’s not quite right here, solker. You wouldn’t try to deceive us infidels, would you?

  11. I think the (remaining) Jews in Morocco might have memories of jizya
    (allah’s extortion racket) …

    From an obviously “agenda-based” site:

    ( )
    Reut R. Cohen

    Islamic brutality againsts Jews under the so-called “Golden Age”

    1790 — Pogrom in Tetouan (Morocco): All Jews stripped naked, many women raped, most homes ransacked.

    1834 — “Suleika affair”: Jewish woman from Tangier refuses to convert and marry a high-ranking official. She is executed in Fez.

    1815 — Jews of Mogador (Morocco) ordered to pay sudden jizya poll-tax. Those who pay punched on the forehead after turning over coins, those who refuse thrown in dungeon.

    1884-1888 — 307 Jews murdered over four years by Muslims, yet no Muslims put on trial.

    1903 — 40 Jews killed by Muslims during riots in Taza. More killed in Settat.

    1907 — In Casablanca, 30 Jews killed; 200 women, girls and boys abducted, raped.

    1910 — 12-year-old grandson of Fez’s Rabbi Abensur abducted and forcibly converted to Islam.

    Individual muslims may or may not know about jizya and other horrors of the “religion of peace”, but allah’s standover tactics
    and penchant for terror don’t change.

  12. * Mary, ask a Muslim what is jisya and they will not know unless they are history students.

    Little more than a decade ago I did not know about jizya, al Qaeda,
    jihad, halal food, wudu washers, “martyrdom operations”, and many
    of the trappings of allah’s counterfeit religion. I was of course aware
    that the false prophet denied that Jesus Christ is the Son of God,
    and denied the crucifixion of Jesus …

    Over the last decade, islam has been on the march, infiltrating every
    aspect of Western society, aided and abetted by fawners and appeasers, “diversity officers”, “cultural sensitivity training”, and
    snitches dobbing in those who stand in its way.

    Nevertheless, prophecy must be fulfilled, Mystery Babylon and the
    Beast must come to power, imposing their respective blood-fests on
    those who resist and reject, until they in turn are destroyed.

  13. “SNIP for BS and trying to smear Hindus…”

    Mary made a rediculous assumption that Muslims do evil and Hindus do not, thus I pointed out “real examples”.

    Blog owner does not, of course, like the concept that anyone else does evil……LMAO, what a loser.

  14. eloivsdiablo, interesting never did bother to look which sites do stats.

    I have no need to find readers, my posts are automatically linked and sent to the four groups that I am a member of.

  15. Solker, look what I found: just for you!

    “Jihad is carried offensively to cleanse the earth from the kufr [unbelief], with the implementation of Islam as a system”

    I turned to “Clarifying the meaning of Jihad” in the Pakistan Daily, May 21, expecting more of the same old denial and obfuscation we see so often from Muslim spokesmen — as we saw from Pakistan’s National Assembly Speaker Fehmida Mirza. The Pakistan Daily has, surprise surprise, deleted this wonderful article outlining the true meaning of jihad. Too much truth doesn’t help the advances of jihad…

    But instead, to my great surprise, I found a detailed Qur’anic exposition of the ideas that jihad means offensive warfare against unbelievers in order to establish the hegemony of Sharia, and that the idea of jihad as spiritual struggle has scant foundation within the core Islamic texts.

    Of course, this is what I have said that the Islamic texts say all along. Will Islamic apologists in the West — Ibrahim Hooper, Salam Al-Marayati, Ali Eteraz, Stephen Schwartz, and the like — direct any effort at all toward showing the author of this Pakistan Daily piece that his understanding of jihad is all wrong? Will the Administration realize that it has been sold a bill of goods by Islamic apologists, and acknowledge that jihad as warfare against and the subjugation of unbelievers is deeply rooted within Islam, and the implications of that fact are manifold and must be faced?

    No on both counts, I’m sure. But the next time someone calls me an “Islamophobe” for pointing out that mainstream Islam teaches violent jihad and Islamic supremacism, I’m going to tell him to take it up with the editors of the Pakistan Daily, not with me.

    Jihad’ is extracted from the source, ‘Jaahada’ and it measured upon the fourth verb structure, which means interaction between two sides, al-Mufa’ala. Another example is ‘Al-Khisaam’ which means to quarrel and is extracted from its roots source – Khaasama. Also, there is the example of ‘Jidaal’, which means to discuss or to argue and is taken from the root source ‘Jaadala’.
    In the tongue of the Arabs, al-Jihad means, ‘exerting ability and effort to do an action or express opinions’.

    In Al-Munjid, the words Jaahada, Mujaahada and Jihadan means, ‘exerting effort and ability to push the other away’. In the Tafseer of al-Naysaboori it is clearly stated that ‘al-Jihad’ means to exert effort to achieve the objective or what is intended.

    After all of these related definitions of the word ‘al-Jihad’ in the language, it is possible to give a clear linguistic definition, which is: ‘al-Jihad is the exerting of all effort and ability between two sides by the least.’

    Based on the linguistic definition, the exerted effort could be via material weapons or without a weapon, with money or without money. Also it could be the struggle between two opposing desires exerting effort (Jihad) to overcome the other. It could also be by words and could be by refusing to do an action or to speak. An example of this is like the one who disobeys his parents when they order him to disobey Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) and the person becomes patient and perseveres when his parents insist in ordering him. And it is like the one who abstains from committing a haram desire when his nafs calls him to it. This is what is mentioned in Hashiyat Al-Jamal in al-Jalalayn: “Jihad is to have patience on difficulties. It could be during war and it could be inside the nafs.”

    Based on this linguistic definition, the opponent that the Muslim engages Jihad against could be his own nafs, or the shaiytan, or the transgressor or the kuffar. Additionally, by this definition, Jihad could also be that which is in the way of Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) ‘Fi Sabeel Lillah’’. So the Jihad could be undertaken to please Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) or to please the shaiytan, like the Jihad of the Kuffar against others. Al-Naysaboori, wrote, “It is exerting effort to achieve the objective or what is intended regardless of the nature of the objective intended by the one who is exerting the effort.” The Quran used the word ‘Jihad’ in describing the activity of the kaafir fathers to make their believing children reject true belief. Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) says:

    وَإِن جَاهَدَاكَ عَلى أَن تُشْرِكَ بِي مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ فَلَا تُطِعْهُمَا

    “If they do Jihad to make commit association with me…do not obey them” (tmq Surah Luqman 31:15)

    In the Shariyah, the word ‘al-Jihad’ was transferred from the general linguistic meaning to a special confined (restricted) meaning in the Quran and the Sunnah. It is, “the exerting of the effort to fight in the Way of Allah directly or by financial aid, or opinion and the like” This special meaning of Jihad was given in Medina. In Mecca, the legislation concerning Jihad was not revealed and that is why the subject of Jihad in the Mecci surahs carries the general linguistic meaning. They are the three verses (ayaat) in Surah al-Ainkaboot:

    وَمَن جَاهَدَ فَإِنَّمَا يُجَاهِدُ لِنَفْسِهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَغَنِيٌّ عَنِ الْعَالَمِين

    “And if any struggle ‘Jaahid’ (with might and main), they do so for their own souls: for Allah is free of all needs from all creation.” (tmq 29:6)

    وَإِن جَاهَدَاكَ لِتُشْرِكَ بِي مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ فَلَا تُطِعْهُمَا إِلَيَّ مَرْجِعُكُمْ فَأُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا كُنتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ

    “But if they (either of them) struggle ‘Jaahada’ (to force) you to join with Me (in worship) anything of which you have no knowledge, obey them not. You have (all) to return to me, and I will tell you (the truth) of all that ye did.” (tmq 29:8)

    وَالَّذِينَ جَاهَدُوا فِينَا لَنَهْدِيَنَّهُمْ سُبُلَنَا وَإِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمَعَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ

    “And those who strive in Our cause ‘Jaahadu’- We will certainly guide them to our Paths: For verily Allah is with those who do right.” (tmq 29:69)

    Also in surah Luqman verse 15, the word Jihad is used in the linguistic context. Regarding the verse in surah Al-Nahl talking about Jihad, it mentioned ‘al-Hijra’, which means that this is a Madani verse in a Mecci surah (chapter) – and this was mentioned by the al-Mufasiroon. The verse is:

    ثُمَّ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ لِلَّذِينَ هَاجَرُواْ مِن بَعْدِ مَا فُتِنُواْ ثُمَّ جَاهَدُواْ وَصَبَرُواْ إِنَّ رَبَّكَ مِن بَعْدِهَا لَغَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ

    “But verily Your Lord- those who leave their homes after trials and persecutions,- and who thereafter struggle ‘Jaahadu’ and fight for the faith and patiently persevere,- Your Lord, after all this is oft-forgiving, Most Merciful”. (tmq 16:110)

    The subject of Jihad in Medina occurs 26 (twenty-six) times and the majority of them carry the clear meaning of Fighting, ‘Qitaal’. From these verses are:

    لاَّ يَسْتَوِي الْقَاعِدُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ غَيْرُ أُوْلِي الضَّرَرِ وَالْمُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ فَضَّلَ اللّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ دَرَجَةً وَكُـلاًّ وَعَدَ اللّهُ الْحُسْنَى وَفَضَّلَ اللّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ أَجْرًا عَظِيمًا

    “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah has granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). To all (in Faith) has Allah promised good. But those who strive and fight has He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward.” (tmq 4:95)

    It is clear in this verse that al-Jihad is in the meaning of going out to fight and that it is better than staying at home. Also from the verses about Jihad in surah Al-Tawba:

    انْفِرُواْ خِفَافًا وَثِقَالاً وَجَاهِدُواْ بِأَمْوَالِكُمْ وَأَنفُسِكُمْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ ذَلِكُمْ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ إِن كُنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ

    “Go forth, (whether equipped) lightly or heavily, and strive and struggle, with your goods and your persons, in the cause of Allah. That is best for you, if you (but) knew.” (tmq 9:41)

    The order of ‘Nafr’ (going out) means that Jihad is fighting.

    لَـكِنِ الرَّسُولُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ مَعَهُ جَاهَدُواْ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ لَهُمُ الْخَيْرَاتُ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ

    “But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper.” (tmq 9:88)

    Also in surah Al-Saf, after mentioning fighting (Jihad) at the beginning, Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) says:

    إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الَّذِينَ يُقَاتِلُونَ فِي سَبِيلِهِ صَفًّا كَأَنَّهُم بُنيَانٌ مَّرْصُوصٌ

    “Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.” (tmq 61:4)

    It is clear in the Madani verses that the subject of Jihad is specifically related to fighting and what fighting entails naturally from finance, weapons and the like. Also these verses demonstrate aspects of the conditions that precede the action of fighting and are conditional for its legality i.e. propagating the invitation for non-Muslims to embrace Islam (as this is the original condition for fighting as has been mentioned in ‘Mughni al-Muhtaj) and/or accept the Islamic authority over them. From the Sunnah of Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam), Jihad has been mentioned also with this shariyah meaning i.e. fighting and what it entails.

    On the authority of Abi Hurayrah, who said: “People asked, “Oh Rasoolallah, tell us about an action that is equal to the Jihad fi Sabeel Lillah?” Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) replied, “You will not find it bearable.” They replied, “Tell us oh Rasoolallah, maybe we can be able to withstand it.” Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “The example of a mujahid Fi Sabeel Lillah is like the fasting man, the one who stays up at its night and prays and the one who is obedient to the verses of Allah, does not get tired of fasting, nor stops sadaqah until the mujahid returns back to his family.”

    It is clear from the wording of the hadith that the question was about the mujahid with the meaning of the fighter in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) specifically. The answer also indicated the same meaning when Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “Until the mujahid returns back to his family” i.e. returns back from the fighting. Also by the authority of Jaabir, that the people asked Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam), “Which Jihad is better?” He (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “The one in which one’s horse is wounded and one’s blood is split in it.” On the authority of ibn Abbas, he said that Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “When your brothers were killed in the battle of Uhud, Allah put their souls inside green birds that wonder inside Jannah landing on the rivers of Jannah and eats from its fruits. When they see how they spend their time and they look at their food and drink and how great it was, they say, ‘How we wish that our people know about how Allah rewarded us, so that they may love Jihad and not refrain from it.’ So then Allah says to them that, ‘I will tell you people and your brothers on your behalf.’ So they became happy with that news.” Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) sent this in surah Al-Imran on the occasion of the Battle of Uhud:

    وَلاَ تَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِينَ قُتِلُواْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ أَمْوَاتًا بَلْ أَحْيَاء عِندَ رَبِّهِمْ يُرْزَقُونَ

    “Think not of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead. Nay, they live, finding their sustenance in the presence of their Lord.” (tmq 3:169)

    From all of these shariyah texts, it is clear that the Legislator transferred the word Jihad from its general linguistic meaning to a special meaning, which is ‘al-Qitaal’ (fighting) and whatever is linked to it directly and indirectly, as has been mentioned earlier. Moreover, it relates to the words, which carry the same meaning of al-Jihad like war. From this we can see that the shariyah texts defined Jihad as fighting (qitaal) in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) and this can be found in the books of fiqh, which dealt with the shariyah meaning of Jihad and laws related to it.

    In Badi’ul Sanai’ of the Hanafi Mazhab, it states the following: “Jihad in the language is exerting effort. In the understanding of the Shara, it is exerting effort and energy in fighting fi sabeel lillah by nafs, finance, tongue or another.”

    In Manhul Jaleel of the Maliki Mazhab, al-Jihad is defined as the, “fighting by a Muslim against a kaafir (who does not have a treaty with the Muslims) to make the word of Allah the highest…. or for a Muslim to arrive to do Jihad or to enter the Kaafir’s land for fighting.” Ibn Arafa defined this.

    According to the Shafi Mazhab in Al-Iqna, Jihad is fighting ‘Fi Sabeel Lillah’. Al-Shirazi in Al-Muhazab said that Jihad is ‘qitaal’.

    In Al-Mughni according to the Hanbali Mazhab, Ibn Qudama did not give any other definition. In the section ‘kitab ul-Jihad’ whatever is related to war, whether it was fard ul-kifaya (collective obligation) or fard ul-ayn (individual obligation) or whether it was in the form of guarding the believers from the enemy and the guards ‘ribat’ at the borders, all of this is connected to Jihad. He also said, “If the enemy arrives, Jihad becomes fard ul-ayn on the murabitoon (border guards). If it becomes evident that the enemy arrived, then they do not leave to meet them except by an order of the Ameer, since the Ameer is the one who has the authority for issuing orders in the matters of war.”

    So it is clear that the meaning of Jihad was transferred from the linguistic to the shariyah meaning, such that it was understood to mean fighting and nothing else. Such purity and clarity over its meaning today is clearly vague, from what is heard from the lips of rulers over the Islamic lands and even amongst the Muslim ummah itself, as a result of the dominance and pollution of western political thought and reeling from a defeatist mentality that seeks to be apologetic.

    So what emerged and dominated the opinion were those who sincerely but incorrectly took Jihad as the rule for all matters whilst others reduced Jihad as a matter connected to defending the ‘nafs’ and identity i.e. defensive fighting as opposed to offensive fighting. Others went further to say that Jihad is of the ‘nafs’ and overcoming desires only, calling it the ‘Great Jihad’, further saying that it is better than the small Jihad which is ‘qitaal’ (fighting). Such are those that have become lazy and feeble, with their hearts filled with the fear of the enemy.

    So the protection of the Deen, hatred of the Kuffar and the love of Jihad has become replaced with the protection of the nation-state (nationalism), pleasing the colonialists and the love of excessive material gain. Since these incorrect concepts have become common between Muslims and the clear definition of Jihad is absent from the minds, the incentive and love to do Jihad, for many, has died (though the increased hostility and aggression of the western nations in the Islamic lands has served to re-kindle the correct desire).

    It is, therefore, naturally important to clarify this matter such that the Muslims are able to refute the erroneous misunderstandings that exist, refute false claims and rekindle the love of Jihad.

    Greater/Smaller Jihad

    Firstly, the common understanding of Muslims is that Jihad is divided into two sections: Jihad ul-Akbar (the ‘Greater Jihad’), which is connected to Jihad ul-Nafs i.e. fighting the inner desires and shaiytan etc… Jihad ul-Asghar (the ‘Smaller Jihad’), which is fighting the kaafir enemy in battles and what is related to it.

    Of the evidences that are quoted from the Islamic texts, the main one is the hadith, where Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: “We have arrived from the small Jihad to the great Jihad”. So they asked, “What is the great Jihad?” He (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) replied, “It is Jihad ul-Nafs (against the inner self).”

    In another narration, Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) referred to the“…Jihad of the slave against his desires.”

    Though it is correct that there is a Jihad against the nafs, like against shaiytan, however, it is not greater in the sight of Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) from the physical Jihad against the Kuffar and it (Jihad ul-Nafs) does not cancel nor invalidate it.

    This Jihad against the Kaafir enemies is continuous until the Day of Judgment as is the Jihad against the nafs also continuous until the Day of Judgement. But one should know that the evidences of doing Jihad against the nafs are different to the evidences of Jihad against the Kuffar.

    Each has a situation different from the other (context) and it is not permitted to mix the two or to use the evidence of one for the other or to change one in place of the other. Rather there is a need for each, but in its correct context and each of them is a responsibility when put in their correct contexts.

    This is why saying that ‘Jihad ul-nafs’ is better and greater in the sight of Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) is both very dangerous and an outright mistake, which contradicts the understanding of Jihad in the Way of Allah.

    It is invalid from many angles:

    1. Jihad has two meanings as mentioned previously, a linguistic and a shariyah meaning. Jihad of the nafs comes under the linguistic meaning and not the shariyah meaning. 2. The evidences used to say that Jihad ul-nafs is greater than Jihad against the Kuffar cannot be used to prove this and this is clear from the reality of the evidences that are used. This is because,

    a. The hadith is ‘mardood riwayatan’

    b. The hadith is ‘mardood dirayatan’

    With regards to its invalidation from narration that is because the hadith is weak ‘Da’eef’ as is clarified in Al-Ajmi Al-Saghir by Imam Suyuti. As for its invalidation by meaning that is because it is contradicting definite text, which makes Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah obligatory and makes it the greatest of action.

    This can be seen from three aspects:

    a. The verses that mention the value of the Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah and that it is from the best actions like the verse:

    لاَّ يَسْتَوِي الْقَاعِدُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ غَيْرُ أُوْلِي الضَّرَرِ وَالْمُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ فَضَّلَ اللّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ دَرَجَةً وَكُـلاًّ وَعَدَ اللّهُ الْحُسْنَى وَفَضَّلَ اللّهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ أَجْرًا عَظِيمًا

    “Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah has granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). To all (in Faith) has Allah promised good. But those who strive and fight has He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward.” (tmq 4:95)

    b. The verses that praise Jihad and the Mujahideen Fi Sabeel Lillah like the verse,

    لَـكِنِ الرَّسُولُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ مَعَهُ جَاهَدُواْ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ لَهُمُ الْخَيْرَاتُ وَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ

    “But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper.” (tmq 9:88)

    إِنَّ اللّهَ اشْتَرَى مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَنفُسَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُم بِأَنَّ لَهُمُ الجَنَّةَ يُقَاتِلُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ فَيَقْتُلُونَ وَيُقْتَلُونَ وَعْدًا عَلَيْهِ حَقًّا فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَالإِنجِيلِ وَالْقُرْآنِ وَمَنْ أَوْفَى بِعَهْدِهِ مِنَ اللّهِ فَاسْتَبْشِرُواْ بِبَيْعِكُمُ الَّذِي بَايَعْتُم بِهِ وَذَلِكَ هُوَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيمُ

    “Allah has purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.” (tmq 9:111)

    c. The verses that condemn and promises punishment to those who do not participate in Jihad, the ones left behind and the lazy neglectful ones,

    يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ مَا لَكُمْ إِذَا قِيلَ لَكُمُ انفِرُواْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ اثَّاقَلْتُمْ إِلَى الأَرْضِ أَرَضِيتُم بِالْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا مِنَ الآخِرَةِ فَمَا مَتَاعُ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا فِي الآخِرَةِ إِلاَّ قَلِيلٌ

    “O you who believe! What is the matter with you, that, when you are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, you cling heavily to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter.” (tmq 9:38)

    In addition to this are the sayings of Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) that the best action to Allah is Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah and the fighting (qitaal) against the Kuffar: From the many narrations, Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, ”Taking a journey in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) is better than the duniya and what is in it.”

    “Those who guard (the borders) for one day in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) is better than the duniya and what is in it.” ”If anyone takes a position in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah) it is better than his prayer ‘salah’ in his house for 70 years. Don’t you want Allah to forgive you your sins and enter you in the Jannah? Invade, in the Way of Allah (Fi Sabeel Lillah).”

    Therefore what has been mentioned in the text shows clearly that Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah is one of the best actions and of the highest degree, which is clearly shown by the shariyah indicators, ‘Qarain’, that connect praise, condemnation, reward and punishment to expose the fact that Jihad Fi Sabeel Lillah is greater and better than Jihad against the nafs. This is why the hadith is invalid in meaning ‘dirayatan’ because it contradicts the definite texts and therefore it is invalid ‘baatil’ to use as an evidence (i.e. to show that Jihad ul-nafs is a greater action).

    Is Jihad is defensive only?

    As for the opinion that Jihad in Islam is defensive and not offensive by using the evidence (and similar evidences):

    وَإِنْ جَنَحُوا لِلسَّلْمِ فَاجْنَحْ لَهَا وَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ
    “But if the enemy incline towards peace, do you (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that Hears and Knows (all things)” (tmq 8:61)

    وَقَاتِلُوا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ الَّذِينَ يُقَاتِلُونَكُمْ وَلَا تَعْتَدُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ الْمُعْتَدِينَ
    “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors.” (tmq 2:190)

    This is also incorrect and invalid for its application upon this matter is incorrect for the following reasons:

    1. The evidences of Jihad are general ‘mutlaq’ evidences and include all offensive and defensive actions e.g. waging warm to pre-empt an attack, to protect the borders, killing on the battlefield. To restrict or specify the evidences only to defensive and not offensive Jihad, requires a textual evidence to show that the Jihad is restricted to defensive Jihad only. And there is no such text in the Quran or the Sunnah that restricts or specifies this. Therefore, the evidences regarding Jihad remain general and to be used for all types of war and all types of fighting with the enemy. So it is invalid (baatil) to use the verse,

    وَإِن جَنَحُواْ لِلسَّلْمِ فَاجْنَحْ لَهَا

    “But if the enemy incline towards peace, do you…” (tmq 8:61), to show that Jihad is only defensive.

    That is also the case with the rest of the evidences that are used by proponents of this erroneous understanding. This and similar verses cannot be used to specify or restrict the generality of the verses in surah al-Tawba because they were the last verses revealed regarding Jihad and what came prior to these verses regarding Jihad does not specify the verses which were revealed after them or came afterwards. And the verse does not restrict the latter revealed verses either. There has to be a text present to restrict or specify the general verse and they also must be revealed after the initial, which are general or mutlaq or even they (i.e. those verses which are restricted or specific) should be mentioned together with the general verses so that the two situations can be shown (i.e. to show the different situations upon which they apply). So Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) says: وَإِن جَنَحُواْ لِلسَّلْمِ , which is regarding the time of the peace. And He (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) says,

    قَاتِلُواْ الَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّهِ وَلاَ بِالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَلاَ يُحَرِّمُونَ مَا حَرَّمَ اللّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَلاَ يَدِينُونَ دِينَ الْحَقِّ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ حَتَّى يُعْطُواْ الْجِزْيَةَ عَن يَدٍ وَهُمْ صَاغِرُونَ
    “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued”, (tmq 9:29) which is at the time of war and fighting.

    So peace and fighting are two situations, which remain un-abrogated, i.e. neither abrogates the other.

    2. In addition to this, the saying and actions of Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) show that Jihad definitely is to start (offensive) fighting the kuffar to make the Words of Allah the highest and to propagate (da’wa) the call of Islam. Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said,

    “I have been ordered to fight the people until they bear witness that, ‘there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is His Messenger’ and they establish the prayer and the zakat. And if they do this, then from me is protected their blood and their wealth except by the right granted by Allah.”

    As for his (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) actions, they are full of actions that show Jihad is to start the fighting. So when he went out to Badr to take the caravan belonging to the Quraysh, this was going out to fight, this is offensive – as Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) initiated the action before the Quraysh.

    Likewise, when Muhammad (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) invaded Hawazin in the battle of Hunayn, when he (Salalahu Alaihi Wasallam) seiged Ta’if and the battle of Mutah to fight the Romans and the Battle of Tabuk – all of these are evidences to show that Jihad is to start fighting kuffar (offensive). This should clarify the erroneous view that in origin Jihad is defensive.

    3. From Ijma as-Sahabah, it is clear that Jihad is fighting Fi Sabeel Lillah to carry Islam and that it is offensive. The evidence, which is sufficient to explain this, is the opening of Iraq, Persia, Sham, Egypt and North Africa. They were all opened at the time of the Sahabah with their Ijma’ (consensus). Therefore, all what we mentioned are sufficient evidences to refute the claim that Jihad is defensive.


    In conclusion, Muslims should gain the confidence to present the reality of Jihad to our ummah and raise the level of thinking on this issue such that the Muslims become clearer about its meaning, obligation, gain an increased love for it and importantly, understand the contexts in which it exists and is applied.

    The Islamic Ummah, served with the responsibility to present and guard Islam should not allow the rulers over the Islamic lands to pollute the meaning of Jihad and remove its love from the hearts of the believers. Indeed, the Islamic Ummah should not allow these rulers to commit the greater crime to rule over her by other than Islam and dilute the purity of the whole of Islam with their shamelessness, implementation of kufr and humiliating subservience to a part of the creation i.e. their colonial masters, instead of their subservience to the Creator and Master of all that is seen and unseen, Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala).

    As for the interaction with the non-Muslims, it is important that the Muslims have the clarity and strength to tackle the malicious, incorrect and hateful propaganda that is focussed on Jihad that is presented as barbaric against peaceful people with the objective to force them to embrace Islam by compulsion and the sword.

    The Islamic ummah should tackle this from two perspectives.

    Firstly, the Muslims should expose the violent, barbaric and inhumane foreign policy of the ‘civilised’ colonial powers that have destroyed nations, states and people; left millions to starve for the sake of securing capitalist interests, appointed and protected oppressive regimes that suppress the will of their people; plundered resources of the lesser developed and invade lands with brute force, terrorising the local civilian people with indiscriminate policies of killing, imprisonment, rape, ‘carpet bombing’; razing whole villages and towns into the ground; and forcing the people to adopt their life-styles, values and political structures. What right do such people have after witnessing the implementation of such a wicked and brutal foreign policy with their own eyes – in South America, Africa, Palestine, Afghanistan and more recently in Iraq, from the various credible news sources – to even begin laying a criticism against Jihad.

    Non-Muslims need to see the reality of their own governments and not be blinded the hysterical and deceitful propaganda that increasingly is aimed at Islam and its values.

    Secondly, Muslims should demonstrate some of the rules that surround Jihad and state that offensively carrying the struggle against non-Islam does not permit Muslims to compel the local people to embrace Islam. This is because Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala) does not allow compulsion:

    لاَ إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ

    “There is no compulsion in deen” (tmq)

    Likewise Islam does not allow the exploitation, plundering, razing and desecration of places of worship, people’s homes and honour – when Jihad is carried offensively. Rather Jihad is carried offensively to cleanse the earth from the kufr, with the implementation of Islam as a system thus liberating man from the rule of man. The history of the Islamic conquests, the presence of Christians and Jews, who lived in security and prosperity under the Islamic State and the safe-haven that the Islamic authority provided for people savaged by the forefathers of the modern colonialists is sufficient proof for this.

    On the horizon, as the struggle between Iman and kufr increases day by day – it is imperative for the Muslims to hold to the truth of Islam, its rules and not permit the dilution of its intellectual wealth – a wealth which soon will transform the darkness of colonial rule to the mercy and shade of the Islamic authority, Al-Khilafah, by Allah (Subhanna Wa Ta’ala’s) permission.

  16. “Under its guidance, the spread of Islam and its dominance over previously Christian or pagan lands were breathtaking. Over centuries, Islam founded an empire and led the world in discovery, art, and culture. The standard-bearers of tolerance in the early Middle Ages were far more likely to be found in Muslim lands than in Christian ones”. – Tony Blair.

    Islam is an all inclusive religion and is filling the void of a fragmented and decadent West. The West is committing suicide, its flawed philosophies have created the selfish individualistic society that will not procreate to replace itself, it’s the nature of selfless commitment to its community is why Mr Blair considered it ahead of its time. Suggest you all get with the demographic reality of the human ‘race’.

  17. CairnsKing
    Thank you for demonstrating the lack of your knowledge. The standard bearers of tolerance were never found in muslim lands – ever – despite the plaintive bleating of Mr. Blair. There were pockets of tolerance- in both Christain and Muslim lands – as well as pockets of extreme intolerance in both – but to call islam as having being demonstrably more tolerant is incorrect. Islam never let the world in science, the arts, and culture. I suggest you do some homework before quoting a low IQ moron like Mr. Blair. Islam is not filling a void – except perhaps for you. We respect that it is your solution however it seems as if you are unable to realize that other people’s solutions are not your own. The demographic reality of the human race is NOT islam. And no, the west is NOT committing suicide. All that you have written merely demonstrates that both your education and intellect are lacking. I suspect that you are that idiot Gavin King who writes third grade rubbish for the Cairns fish-wrap. Our country has 20+ million people – most do very well in their fields of endeavor in comparison to much larger countries – however an idiot like you tends to negatively bias the statistics because the sample size can, by definition, only be small. Do us a favor and go away you silly little boy. You should let both of your brain cells take a holiday sometime soon .. perhaps Saudi Arabia.

  18. Kaw, without venting infantile insults I’ll remind you that people were burned alive at the stake by Christians for alleged crimes of witchcraft. Now there’s tolerance, ha! The first university of Europe was established in Spain by Muslims. Crusaders who trekked from Europe to the Holy Land to liberate it from “heathen” Muslims returned home with many new lessons in civilization, as well as practical inventions and scientific insight. From the 8th to the 10th centuries, Baghdad flourished as the world’s most civilized city. Its university was attended by 6,000 students from all over the world, and it boasted an endowment equivalent to millions of dollars. Baghdad streets were also paved, drained by covered sewers, and illuminated.
    Aristotle and Plato were rediscovered by Muslim scholars who translated many Greek manuscripts into Arabic. They were the originators of modern chemistry, meteorology, mathematics, sociology and geography. Muslim surgeons were also the first to dissect the human body. Without the Arabic numbering system, which included decimals and the cipher (zero), modern science and business flourished.
    One of the greatest contributions of Islam to the Western world was the art of paper making, adapted and developed from techniques pioneered by the Chinese. Without good quality, affordable paper, the spread of printing and the availability of books for universal education would have been difficult.

    Today, it would seem that the civilizations of East and West, or the Muslim and non-Muslim world, have become reversed. But, perhaps, it is more a case of having forgotten those former glories in the pursuit of present-day material and political agendas. A re-discovery and renewed appreciation of Muslim accomplishments would benefit all of humanity, allowing us to see – and hopefully resolve – present conflicts within the wider spectrum of human history.

  19. The elimination of the Solkhar troll

    Practicing to Deceive
    by Baron Bodissey
    Today Dymphna and I have departed from our usual liberal policy concerning comments and commenters. This draconian action is a response to the destructive activities of a single commenter, so it’s only fair to offer an explanation for what we’ve decided to do.

    Regular readers are familiar with Solkhar, who is a recently-arrived commenter on this blog. Solkhar is a Dutch convert to Islam and lives in Morocco.

    When he first started commenting here, I engaged him, arguing with him about certain of his assertions. Eventually I learned that he would not concede even the most basic of facts — e.g. the statistical incidence of violence within Islam as compared with other religions — as legitimate data for a logical argument. That made it obvious that we could establish no common premises for discussion, and that he was commenting in bad faith. I gave up responding to him, since to do so would be a waste of my time.

    Solkhar continued in his disingenuous ways, however. He lured other readers into lengthy verbal battles, always defending Islam while stepping deftly aside from addressing the important arguments and damning examples posed by his interlocutors.

    Dymphna intuited that he was here to stir up trouble, to tie up the energy and time of our contributors and commenters in pointless bad-faith arguments. She considered him to be dishonest, ill-intentioned, and an agent provocateur.

    This morning comes confirmation of her assessment, in Solkhar’s own words. One of our regular European readers just sent the following email concerning Solkhar:

    Today I was looking to see if Solkhar had anything on GoV on his blog, and found out he is not out to discuss or comment at all. A few quotes from his own website (emphasis added):

    In trying to gauge how bad it is, I played a game. Joining many forums and blog-sites under differing names and personas I role-played the conservative, someone from outside the west, as a westerner-liberal, European, Australian, American and so on, all with a little bit of truth or half-truths of my own real persona; to test the reactions…

    Certainly I was mostly debating (or arguing) with a minority and my goal is to the more articulate blog-owners and websites…


    …I participate in forums and blogs and battle their views which quickly turn bigoted and dangerous. So… I will pick more often on them.
    – – – – – – – – –

    Today I took a look at the bigoted, racist and down-right neo-Fascists out there that continue there garbage, it did not take long… [pointing at Lambeth Walk and others]

    Two more weeks of holiday but I have some items that I will post on my exchanges with the Gates of Vienna blog — they will be interesting.


    His goal is obviously to heat up the comments, to push and pull, until he has the quotes he wants and then be able to later on write at length on his own blog of what a bunch of neo-fascists we all actually are. And there is no way to respond to that, because in his website he does not allow comments: here is no “comment” section on my blog, I am not a hypocrit[sic] like some that allow it but will only chose [sic] those that suit them.

    Solkhar, in a way, is playing a very dirty game.

    Laine summarized Solkhar’s modus operandi in a comment on a recent post:

    Solkhar’s pattern is emerging.

    He “agrees” on the danger of Muslim radicals and the need for moderate Muslims to take them on but surprise! is very short of credible evidence that moderates as the West understands the word have any sway whatsoever over the direction of Islam.

    As the price of this empty admission that is of no advantage to anyone interested in countering Islamic jihad, Solkhar inflicts reams and reams of apologia for Islam consisting of useless anecdotes and customized interpretations of the Koran that are either takiya or of some marginal small group who are not representative of mainstream Islam. For example, he constantly tries to sideline the damning hadiths as having no importance in Islamic theology.

    Whether he wants people to enter his seriously deluded fairy tale world where the Koran is full of sweetness and light and Islam is a force for good despite the crimes it commits on a daily basis against peace and humanity, or whether he is a committed takiya artist (denying most Muslims even know what it means) the end result for this site is the same.

    He wastes people’s time and that’s his probable goal. See the pattern. He draws someone in with what sounds like a reasonable admission on Muslim radicals. But he always spends more time denying or justifying Islam’s manifest sins. Eventually, people conclude as Erdebe did above that discussion with him is unprofitable. Then he casts out another loss leader so that he can sell some more BS about Islam.

    Push him and the patronizing, entitlement, bigotry and anger start showing. His clear hatred of Geert Wilders is a dead giveaway of his real thoughts.

    It has become obvious that Solkhar is weaving a tangled web in his activities here. Dymphna and I have decided that we will no longer allow any of its strands to be anchored at Gates of Vienna.

    As of today we will be deleting all comments by Solkhar as soon as they appear, regardless of whether they are civil, temperate, on-topic, or show decorum. Solkhar is now persona non grata at Gates of Vienna.

    We will also delete the comments of those unfortunates who choose to respond to him.

    If he takes on a new identity and uses a different pseudonym, that incarnation will also be deleted as soon as the new deception becomes apparent.

    Goodbye to all that!

  20. A psychiatric,but that guy can do a lot of damage with peoples not aware of islam….I knew it was not normal, I felt it,at least I threw him some good Spitting in his Face.

  21. CairnsKing

    You are not very bright. Lets go through your points again – shall we!!! Try not to swear.

    >>”I’ll remind you that people were burned alive at the stake by Christians
    >> for alleged crimes of witchcraft”

    Actually this had little to do with religion and a lot to do with politics. Read
    the reports published by the inquisitors – very interesting. Did you know that there were two inqusitions – the Spanish and the Papal. The Spanish one was the really nasty one, with wonderful people like Tomais de Torquemada – it was driven by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella – politics!!!!

    >>The first university of Europe was established in Spain by Muslims.

    You will find that the first degree granting universities were in Bologna 1088 Italy – devoted to law and medicine. Non-degree granting institutions which were centers of learning existed much earlier in Europe thanks to the influence of the Greek schools – but these were not, in the formal sense, universities.

    >> From the 8th to the 10th centuries, Baghdad flourished as the world’s most >>civilized city. Its university was attended by 6,000 students from all over >>the world, and it boasted an endowment equivalent to millions of dollars. >>Baghdad streets were also paved, drained by covered sewers, and >>illuminated.

    So what??? I suspect that the Chinese can claim with equal candour that Peking was the most civilised city in the world – and it lasted much longer than 200 years. Rome was at one time the “most civilised “city – it lasted
    nearly 500 years and still is a cultural icon.

    >Aristotle and Plato were rediscovered by Muslim scholars who translated >many Greek manuscripts into Arabic.

    Yes and you will find that Arab advancements on the earlier Greek works was not substantial.

    >They were the originators of modern chemistry, meteorology, mathematics, >sociology and geography.
    They were NOT the originators or modern Chemistry, Meteorology, Mathemeratics, Geology or Sociology. I know exactly where the roots for all these came from, or are suspected to have come from and muslim contributions are MINOR. The only significant contributions from muslims came in the field of optics and that stopped circa 1300 AD.

    > Muslim surgeons were also the first to dissect the human body.
    Wrong again!!!!

    >Without the Arabic numbering system, which included decimals and the cipher (zero),

    Wrong again – and this time almost criminally incorrect. The decimal system is a base 10 numerical system developed by Hindu and Indian mathematicians
    somewhere about the 9th Century A.D.. Al Khwarizmi – incidentally a Persian and NOT an Arab, introduced the Indian work to the the Arab world. Around 500 CE the astronomer Aryabhata uses the word kha (“emptiness”) to mark “zero” in tabular arrangements of digits. The 7th century Brahmasphuta Siddhanta contains a comparatively advanced understanding of the mathematical role of zero. The Sanskrit translation of the lost 5th century Prakrit Jaina cosmological text Lokavibhaga may preserve an early instance of positional use of zero (last four sentences taken from
    There is some evidence that the Mayans also understood this concept, developed without contact to the Indians. The muslims just used it but they DID NOT develop the concepts!!!! I am a scientist and I find these absurd claims that you make rather amusing.

    >modern science and business flourished.
    modern science certainly did not – you seem to understand little of what defines modern science – business probably did – as it always has – independent of whether the people involved were martians, venusians, christians, buddhists, or muslims!!!

    >One of the greatest contributions of Islam to the Western world was the art >of paper making, adapted and developed from techniques pioneered by the >Chinese.
    For this we thank the Chinese but muslims also made a contribution – developing industrial scale paper production and directly introducing the technology to Europe.

    >Today, it would seem that the civilizations of East and West, or the Muslim >and non-Muslim world, have become reversed. But, perhaps, it is more a >case of having forgotten those former glories in the pursuit of present-day >material and political agendas. A re-discovery and renewed appreciation of >Muslim accomplishments would benefit all of humanity, allowing us to see – >and hopef

    rubbish – you claim accomplishments that never existed – your single partially correct claim is that of paper, but it can also be cogently argued that it was because of muslim violence that the church officially banned paper as a printing medium for several hundered years – if this ban had not been in place then it is probably that others might have inductrialised paper production etc etc. On all your points with the exception of one you are incorrect.

  22. I did not post for awhile so did not know what happened to Solkhar..anyhow it is good he has gone..he wore people out..on and on and on he went..always having to have the last say whilst pretending to be a scholar.

  23. Theresaj,solkhar has thrown himself out of the site but he always tries to come back under different Nickname.

  24. Funny Kaw how Muslims have to go way back in time to find bad things done by a few Christians; all we have to do to find horrendous things done by muslims is read our papers every day.
    I was just reading through some old articles recently and read about the Afghans in Auckland who were planning to blow up a nuclear reactor in Sydney a few years ago. I do not even know if they were sent home. Perhaps they are sitting in a cafe on Queen St as I write this.

  25. kaw,

    ‘cairns king’ is of course our solker troll who keeps trying to come back with multiple aliases and more IP addresses than all the internet cafe’s in Morocco.

    We wasted enough time with this creep and we’ll block any attempt of him causing further distractions.

Comments are closed.