Ahmed Akbar cops it

No, Professor Ahmed, the Founders Were Not So Fond of Islam

While doing the MSM circuit this week, American University professor Akbar Ahmed told some whoppers about Adams, Jefferson, and Franklin. (Pajamas Media/Lauren Rubenfeld)

I would suggest that Akbar Ahmed’s university status be investigated. A ‘professor in Islamic studies’ is a totally worthless degree in our world, especially when its used by Islamo-propagandists like AA  to influence unsuspecting university students.No, we must not allow him and his ilk to pull the Islamic wool over the eyes and ears of naive politicians and the clueless media stooges who are only too eager to misinform…….

Akbar Ahmed, the chair of Islamic studies at American University, has advised many government officials, including General Petraeus, Richard Holbrooke, and George W. Bush. He speaks regularly on BBC and CNN, and has appeared on many U.S. shows, including Oprah and Nightline.

To oppose the “burn the Quran” event planned by Pastor Terry Jones, Ahmed wrote an editorial for CNN in which he stated:

Not only are the actions of Jones contrary to the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, but they are also against the ideals of the American Founding Fathers.

The Founding Fathers read and honored the same Quran that Jones is now seeking to burn.

[John Adams, America’s second president] showed the utmost respect for Islam, naming the Prophet Mohammed as one of the greatest truth seekers in history.

These statements are utterly opposed by the facts.

John Adams said absolutely nothing of the kind. Correspondence from John Adams to Thomas Jefferson on July 16, 1814, reveals John Adams’ true feelings about Islam: Adams states that Mohammed is “a military fanatic” who “denies that laws were made for him; he arrogates everything to himself by force of arms.”

John Adams did indeed own a Quran — the copy he owned contained the following in the preface:

This book is a long conference of God, the angels, and Mahomet, which that false prophet very grossly invented; sometimes he introduceth God, who speaketh to him, and teacheth him his law, then an angel, among the prophets, and frequently maketh God to speak in the plural. … Thou wilt wonder that such absurdities have infected the best part of the world, and wilt avouch, that the knowledge of what is contained in this book, will render that law contemptible …

Perhaps Akbar Ahmed misspoke, and was referring to John Adams’ son, John Quincy Adams? The sixth president, not the second?

No. Here is what John Quincy Adams wrote about the Islamic prophet Mohammed:

In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust, by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE. [emphasis in the original]

John Quincy Adams also described the Quran in one of his essays as follows:

The precept of the koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.

Ahmed also claims in his editorial that “Benjamin Franklin called the Prophet Mohammed a model of compassion.” Ahmed made similar claims on The Daily Show:

I quote the Founding Fathers. … John Adams on the Prophet of Islam: He called him one of the greatest truth seekers in history. (Ben) Franklin called him a model of compassion. And Jefferson had the first Iftaar … and owned a copy of the Quran. … Those Americans who are attacking Islam simply as a terrorist religion or a religion of evil, really need to go back to their own Founding Fathers.

In a March 23, 1790, letter to the editor of the Federal Gazette, Ben Franklin wrote:

Nor can the Plundering of Infidels be in that sacred Book [the Quran] forbidden, since it is well known from it, that God has given the World, and all that it contains, to his faithful Mussulmen, who are to enjoy it of Right as fast as they conquer it.

Thomas Jefferson? Like John Adams, he did own a Quran, one translated by George Sale. Here are some of Sale’s comments on the Quran, included by Sale in his introduction:

It is certainly one of the most convincing proofs that Mohammedism was no other than human invention, that it owed its progress and establishment almost entirely to the sword.

In his editorial, Akbar Ahmed claims:

Thomas Jefferson kept the … Quran in his personal collection and it informed his decision to host the first presidential iftaar during Ramadan.

President Obama repeated this claim — that Jefferson hosted the first presidential iftaar — at the most recent White House Ramadan dinner.

Let’s review the facts.

During the Barbary Wars, in 1805, the bey (i.e., monarch) of Tunis threatened war with the United States after the U.S. had been successful in capturing some Tunisian pirate ships. The bey sent an envoy to the United States to negotiate for the return of the ships. This envoy stayed in Washington for six months, during which the month of Ramadan passed.

One of Thomas Jefferson’s many invitations extended to this envoy to meet with him at the White House was during the month of Ramadan. To accommodate the envoy’s religious obligation, Jefferson changed the time of dinner from the usual “half after three” to “precisely at sunset.”

Jefferson was being polite — not celebrating the first White House iftaar, as Akbar Ahmed suggests.

The first Ramadan iftaar was not actually held at the White House until 1996.

Indeed, in a letter dated June 26, 1822, Jefferson had this to say about Islam in a passage regarding Calvinism:

Verily I say these are the false shepherds foretold as to enter not by the door into the sheepfold, but to climb up some other way. They are mere usurpers of the Christian name, teaching a counter-religion made up of the deliria of crazy imaginations, as foreign from Christianity as is that of Mahomet.

For good measure, Akbar Ahmed also mentioned John Locke:

The Founding Fathers were also inspired by Christian thinkers like John Locke, who declared that the true Christian’s duty was to “practice charity, meekness, and good-will in general toward all mankind, even to those that are not Christians.”

Akbar Ahmed is currently Ibn Khaldoun chair and professor of Islamic studies at American University. Ibn Khaldoun was a 14th century Islamic philosopher and scholar, a man about whom Akbar Ahmed has written. Ibn Khaldoun advocated for violence against non-Muslims as a religious duty, in order to achieve the larger goal of dismantling non-Muslim civilization and imposing an Islamic caliphate.

Ibn Khaldoun makes it clear that holy war is the duty of every Muslim. From his most famous work, Muqaddimah:

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.

Akbar Ahmed is, as previously noted, an advisor to General Petraeus. One wonders if General Petraeuss has been influenced by the false teachings of this professor.

Laura Rubenfeld is an analyst for the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Unfortunately, Laura Rubenfeds rebuttal is not complete without this reference to the Barbary wars:

In March 1785, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to negotiate with Tripoli’s envoy in London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). Upon inquiring “concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury”, the ambassador replied:

It was written in their Qu’ran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every Muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.

It was because of the constant raids by the Mohammedan pirates that America build a Navy and beat the ‘Algeriennes’ at their own game. America  needs to get get real and pay the soldiers of Allah with their own currency……..



Akbar Ahmed knows how shallow Americans are and that they don’t do their research. Here he defends imam Abdul Rauf, the slumlord who wants to build a mega mosque (Cordoba House) on Ground Zero:

“Rauf’s position is coming purely from an interfaith position of ‘you love us, we love you,’ ” says Akbar Ahmed, an influential Islamic studies professor at American University. “He’s not putting the Islamic center in the context of American society and culture today. He’s disconnected from it and he’s not thinking through the consequences of his actions.”

This is from CNN, of course. For them, he is just  “Akbar Ahmed, an influential Islamic studies professor at American University.” But no, he is not. This guy is a  former Paki ambassador/ agit-prop, an agent for Islam, a sly stealth jihadist with a British passport who contaminates the minds of gullible college students behind enemy lines. That’s Akbar Ahmed. An expert in Islamo-schmooze and a traitor who should be locked up in Gitmo along with the whole crew of Mohammedans who occupy the white house.

8 thoughts on “Ahmed Akbar cops it”

  1. Great Information Sheik,we can see all the Lies of the muzzies…..Fucking muslim LIAR they lie all the time all day and night long….. they know nothing else to do.

  2. It seems AA was cherry picking to make his point. And surely so are you, except that you are doing to polarize and sow hatred. Have you no shame that you are making it your daily passion to demonize an entire people because of what they believe? The founding fathers were not perfect, they were men of their time, and theirs was not a just time. Let us not forget these very same men considered black people less than human and they almost all owned slaves. So I am not surprised they see Islam as a religion of violence. They inherited the same dark ideas of the crusaders and knew so little about Islam. What is your excuse for bigotry?

    1. Buber, you appear to be well trained and despicable in the art of deceit and taqiyya.

      ” you are doing to polarize and sow hatred.”

      I don’t. Islam divides the world in believer and unbeliever, not me. Where is your shame for those in your primitive cult who murder and terrorize the world day after day, where is your shame for the inbred, fanatical masses of Muhammad worshippers who lead worthless, unproductive lives because of the teachings of a mad, marauding pedophile serial killer from the 7th century?

      “The founding fathers were not perfect…”

      Really? Each and every one of them was worth a million times more than Muhammad, your false profit and the billion fanatical Mohammedans who follow his teachings today.

      “these very same men considered black people less than human and they almost all owned slaves”

      Islam is not a race. Nice try, but one that fails here.

      Muhammad was a slave trader who had many slaves. And a racist to boot. But for you he was insan al kamil, the perfect man, for all time…..

      The crusades? What do you know about the crusades? Your warped and twisted Mohammedan history is far from reality.

      The crusades were defensive wars after the soldiers of Allah had overrun the holy land, north Africa, the ME and large parts of Asia. The crusades kept Europe free from the the desert cult that has been a scourge on humanity for 1.400 years.

      My dear Buber, you better look in the mirror if you wanna see a bigot.

  3. * to demonize an entire people because of what they believe

    It is their “god”, satan’s sockpuppet allah, who does the demonizing, via doctrines of demons. Any attempts at further “demonizing” are redundant – the aim is to rescue muslims from satan’s snare, in spite of opposition from “allah”, its followers and enablers. What will you do, Buber – aid and abet “allah’s” demonizing, or seek to liberate muslims from bondage?

    “Now the Spirit expressly declares that in later times some will fall away from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and the teachings of demons; through the hypocrisy of men who teach falsely and have their own consciences seared as with a hot iron; forbidding people to marry, and insisting on abstinence from foods which God has created to be partaken of, with thankfulness, by those who believe and have a clear knowledge of the truth. For everything that God has created is good, and nothing is to be cast aside, if only it is received with thanksgiving.” – (1 Timothy 4:1 to 4)

    * insisting on abstinence from foods which God has created to be partaken of, with thankfulness

    Ring a bell, Buber? allah’s “halal / haram” food scam? Causing 1.x billion deceived muslims to obsess over what they may or may not eat, what they may or may not touch, and tying up Western courts and tribunals with their bondage and food fetishes.

  4. SheikYerMami, thank you for your well written response to AA and to Buber. There was another muslim on a different board who brought up this lie that Thomas Jefferson supported Islam. WTH? Another revision of history to somehow garner legitimacy in American history. Another load of garbage from the landfill of Islam history. I didn’t know people could lie so much and still claim to be holy.

    And to Buber, you conveniently left out that slave trade in Africa started with Islam in 640 A.D., and to this day in Sudan and Mauritania. Shall I remind you of what “abeed, abd, abed” stands for? You also conveniently left out that European slavery also spawned the sex slavery of European and Asian women. Or did you forget that sexual perversion of boys and girls in Islam. Do not go down this road, or you will be annihilated on factual history.

  5. Yep, Akbar Ahmed is so full of shiite that you’d think he’s made of it:

    Thomas Jefferson and Mohammed Ali Jinnah: Dreams from two founding fathers
    By Akbar Ahmed

    Sunday, July 4, 2010; B03

    “You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship. . . . We are starting in the days when there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one state.”

    These are the words of a founding father — but not one of the founders that America will be celebrating this Fourth of July weekend. They were uttered by Mohammed Ali Jinnah, founder of the state of Pakistan in 1947 and the Muslim world’s answer to Thomas Jefferson.

    When Americans think of famous leaders from the Muslim world, many picture only those figures who have become archetypes of evil (such as Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden) or corruption (such as Hamid Karzai and Pervez Musharraf). Meanwhile, many in the Muslim world remember American leaders such as George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, whom they regard as arrogant warriors against Islam, or Bill Clinton, whom they see as flawed and weak. Even President Obama, despite his rhetoric of outreach, has seen his standing plummet in Muslim nations over the past year.

    Blinded by anger, ignorance or mistrust, people on both sides see only what they wish to see, what they expect to see.

    Despite the continents, centuries and cultures separating them, Jefferson and Jinnah, the founding fathers of two nations born from revolution, can help break this impasse. In the years following Sept. 11, 2001, their worlds collided, but the things the two men share far outweigh that which divides them.

    Each founding father, inspired by his own traditions but also drawing from the other’s, concluded that society is best organized on principles of individual liberty, religious freedom and universal education. With their parallel lives, they offer a useful corrective to the misguided notion of a “clash of civilizations” between Islam and the West.

    Jefferson is at the core of the American political ideal. As one biographer wrote, “If Jefferson was wrong, America is wrong. If America is right, Jefferson was right.” Similarly, Jinnah is Pakistan. For most Pakistanis, he is “The Modern Moses,” as one biography of him is titled.

    The two were born subjects of the British Empire, yet both led successful revolts against the British and made indelible contributions to the identities of their young nations. Jefferson’s drafting of the Declaration of Independence makes him the preeminent interpreter of the American vision; Jinnah’s first speeches to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan in 1947, from which his statement on freedom of religion is drawn, are equally memorable and eloquent testimonies. As lawyers first and foremost, Jefferson and Jinnah revered the rule of law and the guarantee of key citizens’ rights, embodied in the founding documents they shaped, reflecting the finest of human reason.

    Particularly revealing is the overlap in the two men’s intellectual influences. Jefferson’s ideas flowed from the European Enlightenment, and he was inspired by Aristotle and Plato. But he also owned a copy of the Koran, with which he taught himself Arabic, and he hosted the first White House iftar, the meal that breaks the daily fast during the Muslim holy days of Ramadan.

    Absolute BS. No such thing.*

    And while Jinnah looked to the origins of Islam for political inspiration — for him, Islam above all emphasized compassion, justice and tolerance — he was steeped in European thought. He studied law in London, admired Prime Minister William Gladstone and Abraham Lincoln, and led the creation of Pakistan without advocating violence of any kind.

    No one in public life is free of controversy, of course, not even a founding father. Both were involved in personal relationships that would later raise eyebrows (Jefferson with his slave mistress, Jinnah with a bride half his age). In political life, the two suffered accusations of inconsistency: Jefferson for not being robust in defending Virginia from an invading British fleet with Benedict Arnold in command; Jinnah for abandoning his role as ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity and becoming the champion of Pakistan.

    The controversies did not end with their deaths. Jefferson’s views on the separation of church and state generated animosity in his own time and as recently as this year, when the Texas Board of Education dropped him from a list of notable political thinkers. Meanwhile, hard-line Islamic groups have long condemned Jinnah as a kafir, or nonbeliever; “Jinnah Defies Allah” was the subtitle of an exposé in the December 1996 issue of the London magazine Khilafah, a publication of the Hizb ut-Tahrir, one of Britain’s leading Muslim radical groups. (Jinnah’s sin, according to the author, was his insistence that Islam stood for democracy and supported women’s and minority rights.)

    But today such opinions are marginal ones, and the founders’ many contributions are commemorated with must-see national monuments — the Jefferson Memorial in Washington, Jinnah’s mausoleum in Karachi — that affirm their standing as national heroes.

    If anything, it is Jefferson and Jinnah who might be critical. If they could contemplate their respective nations today, they would share distress over the acceptance of torture and suspension of certain civil liberties in the former; and the collapse of law and order, resurgence of religious intolerance and widespread corruption in the latter. Their visions are more relevant than ever as a challenge and inspiration for their compatriots and admirers in both nations.

    Jefferson and Jinnah do not divide civilizations; they bridge them.


    Akbar Ahmed is the Ibn Khaldun chair of Islamic studies at American University’s School of International Service. This essay is adapted from his new book, “Journey Into America: The Challenge of Islam.”

    *The Iftar Story in the white house:

    Saturday, 14 August 2010
    “That Tunisian Envoy, That “First Iftar Dinner”

    “The first Muslim ambassador to the United States, from Tunisia, was hosted by President Jefferson, who arranged a sunset dinner for his guest because it was Ramadan — making it the first known iftar at the White House, more than 200 years ago.” — Barack Obama, speaking at the “Annual Iftar Dinner” at the White House

    See below for the entry in the Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia on this temporary envoy whom Obama describes as the “first Muslim ambassador to the United States” and pick up, from a few details, a familiar scent. Neither Jefferson, nor any of the Americans involved, thought they were giving an “Iftar dinner” but simply dinner, at a time convenient for this envoy,accommodating him because he represented a primitive and barbaric Muslim statelet on the northern littoral of North Africa, was now attacking American shipping — the protection of the Royal Navy having been withdrawn at independence — and American ships and seamen seized, as were other Christian ships and seamen who did not have enough protection. Barack Obama’s attempt to re-write history here, just a little, by calling Sidi Soliman Mellimelli an “ambassador” which implies to today’s listener a permanent posting,

    A salute from the guns of the frigate USS Congress announced the arrival of the Tunisian Envoy. Sidi Soliman Mellimelli and his attendants were greeted at the Washington Navy Yard on the morning of November 30, 1805, by full military honors and a crowd of curious onlookers. The curious were not to be disappointed by the appearance of the first Muslim envoy to the United States – a large figure with a full dark beard dressed in robes of richly embroidered fabrics and a turban of fine white muslin.

    Over the next six months, this exotic representative from a distant and unfamiliar culture would add spice to the Washington social season but also test the diplomatic abilities of President Thomas Jefferson and his administration.

    The crisis with Tunis erupted when the USS Constitution captured Tunisian vessels attempting to run the American blockade of Tripoli. The bey of Tunis threatened war and sent Mellimelli to the United States to negotiate full restitution for the captured vessels and to barter for tribute.

    Jefferson balked at paying tribute but accepted the expectation that the host government would cover all expenses for such an emissary. He arranged for Mellimelli and his 11 attendants to be housed at a Washington hotel, and rationalized that the sale of the four horses and other fine gifts sent by the bey of Tunis would cover costs. Mellimelli’s request for “concubines” as a part of his accommodations was left to Secretary of State James Madison.. Jefferson assured one senator that obtaining peace with the Barbary powers was important enough to “pass unnoticed the irregular conduct of their ministers.”

    Despite whispers regarding his conduct, Mellimelli received invitations to numerous dinners and balls, and according to one Washington hostess was “the lion of the season.” At the president’s New Year’s Day levee the Tunisian envoy provided “its most brilliant and splendid spectacle,” and added to his melodramatic image at a later dinner party hosted by the secretary of state. Upon learning that the Madisons were unhappy at being childless, Mellimelli flung his “magical” cloak around Dolley Madison and murmured an incantation that promised she would bear a male child. His conjuring, however, did not work.

    Differences in culture and customs stirred interest on both sides. Mellimelli’s generous use of scented rose oil was noted by many of those who met him, and guards had to be posted outside his lodgings to turn away the curious. For his part, the Tunisian was surprised at the social freedom women enjoyed in America and was especially intrigued by several delegations of Native Americans from the western territories then visiting Washington. Mellimelli inquired which prophet the Indians followed: Moses, Jesus Christ or Mohammed. When he was told none of them, that they worshiped “the Great Sprit” alone, he was reported to have pronounced them “vile hereticks.”

    Mellimelli was in Washington during Ramadan, a month-long period in which Muslims fast from sunrise to sunset. To accommodate his guest’s religious obligation, Jefferson’s invitation to the President’s House on December 9 changed the time of dinner from the usual “half after three” to “precisely at sunset.”

    At the same time Mellimelli was enlivening Washington society he was engaged in serious diplomatic exchanges with Jefferson and Madison. They agreed upon restitution for the captured Tunisian vessels but still grappled with the issue of tribute. Ultimately, Mellimelli used a tactic that appealed to the Americans’ humanity: He said that that if he failed in his mission he would be beheaded upon his return home. The Americans refused to yield to the idea of tribute, but in a meeting of the Cabinet it was agreed to send to Tunis gifts equivalent in cost to those sent to the United States by the bey.

    Mellimelli and his retinue left Washington in May 1806 and traveled up the East Coast to Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York City, and Boston, raising many eyebrows along the way. The ambassador sailed home from Boston in September.

    When Jefferson received “an uncommonly friendly letter from the Bey” dated Feb. 27, 1807, he concluded that the ambassador’s report had been accepted favorably in Tunis. [he was mistaken in that assumption]

    While Mellimelli’s visit did pique cross-cultural curiosity and avert the immediate threat of war with Tunis, cultural differences would continue to intrude upon the relationship between the United States and the Barbary world.

    The backdrop to this state visit was the ongoing conflict between the United States and the Barbary states, autonomous provinces of the Ottoman Empire that rimmed the Mediterranean coast of North Africa. Soon after the Revolutionary War and the consequent loss of the British navy’s protection, American merchant vessels had become prey for Barbary corsairs. Jefferson was outraged by the demands of ransom for civilians captured from American vessels and the Barbary states’ expectation of annual tribute to be paid as insurance against future seizures. He took an uncharacteristically hawkish position against the prevailing thought that it was cheaper to pay tribute than maintain a navy to protect shipping from piracy.

Comments are closed.