Month: June 2009

* Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish. – Unknown

Report: Female suicide bomber at large in Pakistani frontier province

Schools? No. Suicide bombs? Mais oui! “Female bombers ready in Waziristan: Punjab home secretary,” from GeoTV, JW:

LAHORE: Eastern Turkistan Islami [sic] Party has prepared a female suicide bomber in Waziristan, which may target any important personality or a building, sources told Geo News Thursday.

If the name seems familiar, Bermuda just got four new residents from the East Turkestan Islamic Movement. Analysts differ on whether ETIM and the Turkistan Islamic Party (spellings vary between “Turkistan” and “Turkestan”) are part of the same entity. Whatever the affiliation of the group in this story, their reported activity provides another example of jihadists from supposedly localized disputes finding common cause, with a common reading of Islamic teachings on jihad.

Punjab Home Secretary Nadeem Hasan Asif dispatched a letter to the Law Enforcement Agencies.

The letter says the female bomber may be wearing a cloak (burqa).

The Home Secretary warned the LEAs of Punjab to be more alert and vigilant, adding the terrorists of Turkistan Party have planned targeting the significant installations by pipe bombs.

* Gee, how do we convince Mohammedans that they got their ‘religion’ all wrong? How can we break that ‘cycle of violence that makes us just like them if we fight hate with hate?’

Somalia: Suicide attack kills security minister

The latest from the Somali theater of jihad: “Suicide bomber kills Somali security minister,” by Abdi Guled and Ibrahim Mohamed Abdi Guled for Reuters, June 18: viaJW

Prof Omar Farooq of Upper Iowa University attempted to refute ex-Muslims’ charge that Islam encourages suicide-bombings. Dr Ali Sina catches Prof Farooq in his own words to prove that Islam does encourage suicidal terrorism…

Did Prophet Muhammad Endorse Suicide Bombing?

Islam Watch

A couple of years ago, I invited Mr. Tawfiq Idris, a self-proclaimed Catholic priest who converted to Islam to explain what he finds in Islam so compelling. I sent him four emails. Mr. Idris, chose silence. I never heard a squeak from him.

Someone mentioned this in a blog created by a Muslim terrorist, known as Mujahid, and complained that the scholars’ silence vis-à-vis criticism of Islam can lead many Muslims to vacillate in their faith.

The terrorist responded,

Efforts of Murtideen don’t need a “Debate” as a response. They should get what they deserve and what Shariah order us to do with such people. Beheading them. And Inshallah this Pig of Faithfreedom will soon meet this definite fate.

Someone alerted me to this discussion and I joined that blog nicknamed as Zafar, and posing as a concerned Muslim begged this terrorist to answer the charges. This man was inviting Muslim youths to join the Jihad, kill until they are killed. Was he able to defend logically the faith for which he was ready to take so many lives?

The terrorist’s response was the same. He insisted that Muhammad never explained his religion to anyone. He sent ultimatums to the rulers and if they did not accept him, he raided their towns and imposed his religion on their inhabitants by force. He said,

…arguing with someone about Islam always lead to confusion and mislead the person towards Irtadaad (apostasy)” and added, “The True Path, The True Solution was Qitaal (fighting and killing) at that time. Is Qitaal today, and WIll be Qitaal forever, no matter how much the time will change.

The fact is that this terrorist knew his religion well; and unlike most Muslims, who shamelessly conceal the truth and lie to you in your face, he was very candid about what Islam really is. At no time Muhammad tried to reason and to explain his claim in a logical way. He simply resorted to threats and violence. That was how Islam spread during his time and after him. In the field of reason, he was very weak.

Today, some Muslim intellectuals think they can do what their prophet failed to do and try to defend Islam logically. As the result they expose the fallacies of Islam more and bring further disgrace and disrepute upon their religion.

I have extended an open invitation to all the Muslim scholars to respond to my charges against Muhammad, and to prove me wrong. I have promised to publicly announce my defeat, to shut down faithfreedom.org, and to even pay them $50,000 dollars reward if they can prove any of my charges against Muhammad wrong. Few have taken up this challenge. My debates with those, who were valiant to debate, are published for all to see. These debates have caused more doubts in the minds of Muslims and have led many of them to leave Islam.

Following the tradition of their prophet, Muslim scholars avoid real debates. They will occasionally debate with Christians and use tu quo que in lieu of logic, but never debate with ex-Muslims, because they know they cannot claim victory through logical fallacies. Even new converts to Islam, like Hamza Yusuf, Yusuf Islam, Yusuf Este, and Tawfiq Idris have been affected by the Islamic cowardice and have refused to answer this author’s invitation to debate. I asked these gentlemen to please explain what they saw in Islam that led them to convert. They did not respond. Doesn’t it mean that they cannot answer this question and their conversion has been whimsical?

However, Muslim or not, we are all humans and give in to temptation. Today, I am going to talk about the temptation of Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq, an associate professor of economics and finance at Upper Iowa University.

Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq is a valiant man. He decided to respond to ex-Muslims’ charges made against Islam and even put his name to it. However, he did not send his rebuttal to us so we can publish it and respond to it. Instead, he sent it to Islamicity.com. I said he is courageous. I did not say he is reckless.  Apparently he wrote that piece in 2005, but only now I came to learn about it. Here is my response to Dr. Farooq, which I will email it to him right away.

In his article, entitled “Did the Prophet endorse suicide bombing?” Dr. Farooq argued that the former Muslims are distorting the truth with “half truths and no truth” to dupe the uninformed or less informed readers and confuse them with “propagandist approach.”

After this premise the good doctor went on to disprove Abul Kasem, who said Islam encourages suicide bombing.

Abul Kasem quoted a hadith to back his claim. Dr. Farooq, said this hadith does not tell the full story and he quoted a more detailed version of the same hadith to prove Abul Kasem is deceptive. Here is the hadith quoted by Dr. Farooq.

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 509:
Narrated Salama bin Al-Akwa:

We went out to Khaibar in the company of the Prophet. While we were proceeding at night, a man from the group said to ‘Amir, “O ‘Amir! Won’t you let us hear your poetry?” ‘Amir was a poet, so he got down and started reciting for the people poetry that kept pace with the camels’ footsteps, saying:– “O Allah! Without You we Would not have been guided On the right path Neither would be have given In charity, nor would We have prayed. So please forgive us, what we have committed (i.e. our defects); let all of us Be sacrificed for Your Cause And send Sakina (i.e. calmness) Upon us to make our feet firm When we meet our enemy, and If they will call us towards An unjust thing, We will refuse. The unbelievers have made a hue and Cry to ask others’ help Against us.” The Prophet on that, asked, “Who is that (camel) driver (reciting poetry)?” The people said, “He is ‘Amir bin Al-Akwa’.”

Then the Prophet said, “May Allah bestow His Mercy on him.” A man amongst the people said, “O Allah’s Prophet! has (martyrdom) been granted to him. Would that you let us enjoy his company longer.” Then we reached and besieged Khaibar till we were afflicted with severe hunger. Then Allah helped the Muslims conquer it (i.e. Khaibar). … So when the army files were arranged in rows (for the clash), ‘Amir’s sword was short and he aimed at the leg of a Jew to strike it, but the sharp blade of the sword returned to him and injured his own knee, and that caused him to die. When they returned from the battle, Allah’s Apostle saw me (in a sad mood). He took my hand and said, “What is bothering you?” I replied, “Let my father and mother be sacrificed for you! The people say that the deeds of ‘Amir are lost.” The Prophet said, “Whoever says so, is mistaken, for ‘Amir has got a double reward.” The Prophet raised two fingers and added, “He (i.e. Amir) was a persevering struggler in the Cause of Allah and there are few ‘Arabs who achieved the like of (good deeds) ‘Amir had done.”

After quoting this hadith Dr. Farooq argued:

So, did Amir commit suicide and the Prophet praised his “suicidal” action? No. Amir DID NOT commit suicide and the Prophet DID NOT praise suicide. Such are the glaring misrepresentations and lies being spread about Islam!

Such exposure of lies or ignorant claims of these former Muslims may not stop them from their anti-Islamic propaganda, but Muslims themselves need to be educated about Islam and its various sources (the Qur’an, hadith, history books, commentaries, etc.). More importantly, Muslims need to be educated in these regards in a self-critical manner.

Does this hadith make Islam look better? We never said Muhammad encouraged suicide. Although he himself attempted it, he said that Allah will punish those who commit suicide. He encouraged murder-suicide. He said getting killed while killing in the path of Islam will attract the highest reward. So, if Amir had turned the sword on himself intentionally, he would have gone to hell, but since his intention was to kill a defenseless Jew and was killed accidentally by his own sword, his reward will be doubled. The moral of the story is clear. If you kill yourself you will go to hell, but if you are killed while attempting to kill an infidel you will be rewarded.

Doesn’t this encourage suicide bombing? Many of the suicide bombers are frustrated people. They are ordinary Muslims, who face a life crisis. Then they are told that if they kill non-Muslims and in the process end their own miserable life, they will be rewarded handsomely and all their problems will go away.

Using this Islamic logic, an Iraqi woman had 80 young women raped then recruited as suicide bombers.

Once these girls were raped, she told them that they are sinners, that there is no future for them either in this world or in the next. But there is one way out. The way out is to become martyrs.

In this macabre enterprise, no one was doing anything un-Islamic; everyone thought he or she will be rewarded. In Islam, you can commit all sorts of crimes; and if it is done for the advancement of Islam, you will be rewarded. The rapists thought they will be rewarded; the woman, who encouraged these victims of rape to become suicide bombers, thought she will be rewarded; and the victims themselves, who carried out the suicide bombings, thought they will be rewarded. In Islam, it is the intention that counts. If your intention is to murder non-Muslims, or even Muslims, who, you think, are murtad and do not interpret Islam in the “right” way, you will be rewarded. You can rape them, loot them, murder them and treat them with utmost savagery and you will be rewarded. This is Islam – the only major religion that is completely divorced from the Golden Rule and actually prescribes qildhat, being harsh to unbelievers. (Q. 48:29;  9:123),

Dr. Farooq ended his article saying, “Life is the most precious and sanctified thing in this world. That applies to our lives and others’ lives.”

However, he failed to mention that the life of non-Muslims is not worth much. There are countless verses and hadiths that make this point clear. For example:

Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them” (Q. 9:5; 2:191)

or

It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land. Ye desire the lure of this world and Allah desireth (for you) the Hereafter, and Allah is Mighty, Wise. (Q. 8:67)

This sura, appropriately called ‘Spoils of War’, was written after the battle of Badr. Muslims did not want to kill the captives. They wanted to return them in exchange for ransom. But the bloodthirsty prophet of Allah wanted his vengeance. Hence the above verse. He tells his followers, don’t worry about ransom, there is more to come. It does not behoove a prophet to stop killing just for a miser ransom. My thirst for blood must be satisfied. These captives derided me when I was in Mecca and now I want to take my sweet revenge. So, he ordered beheading of his captives of war. No matter how you look at it, what he did was war crime.

It is shameful for Muslims, especially those, who claim to be scholars and know the truth, to tell us that Islam respects human life when the reverse is true. From the time Muhammad managed to fool a bunch of savages in Medina, he did nothing but raiding, looting and killing. How can anyone say Islam respects life when according to an estimate more than 280 million people have been slaughtered by Muslims since the inception of Islam? Muslims follow the examples set by their prophet. The victims of Islam are increasing and will continue to increase until Islam is eradicated. No other cause has taken more tolls on humanity than Islam.

Then Dr. Farooq quoted the Talmudic fairytale about Abel and Cain that is rehashed in the Quran to claim Islam respects human life.

We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person – unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land, it would be as if he slew the whole people; and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our Apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. [Qur’an 5:35]

What this story has to do with Islam is unclear. Why Muslims keep parroting it when this is not a teaching of Muhammad, but part of a nonsensical Jewish narrative that Muhammad recounted? Who is engaging in deception here? As far as Muhammad is concerned, the non-believers have to be killed, punished by Muslim’s hands, and covered with shame (Q. 9:14). Muslims must kill; and if in the process they are killed, they would be rewarded. Doesn’t this amount to inspiration for suicide bombing?

It is amazing that Dr. Farooq is incapable of seeong the goriness of the hadith that he quoted. Muslims are so engulfed in evil that they cannot see it. That hadith alone is enough to prove Islam is evil; but to a Muslims, who has been exposed to such evil teachings since his childhood, it is normal.

I will send Dr. Farooq the link to this article. Does anyone think that he will respond? Muslims are valiant only in killing defenseless people. There ends their valor. When it comes to defending Islam logically, they are timid. And Dr. Farooq wonders why Muslim youths are leaving Islam. It’s because they can see Islam is phony and the so-called Muslim scholars are dumbfounded when Islam is criticized. All they can do is to kill, but they cannot answer logical questions.

I will publish Dr. Farooq’s response, if he ever responds. But don’t hold your breath. Hell may freeze before Muslim schoalrs find courage to confront ex-Muslims. Nothing will destroy Islam faster than such a confrontation. Muslim scholars know it well. That is why they pretend they do not see us. That is why Muhammad prescribed swift death for apostates.