Truth Prevails condones genocide for treason

Submitted by Jan Janssen (Austria), Jan 26, 2008 at 16:38

Truth Prevails,

As a matter of fact. I am a special non-muslim, I am an ex-muslim.

I left Islam after studying the generally accepted sources of Islam, being the Quran, the Hadith of Bukhari and Muslim, the Sira by Ibn Ishaq, Tabari and Ibn Sa'd. Those are the sources that muslim scholars use to study Islam. I checked my understanding with the tafseer of Ibn Katheer and the Shariah handbook of the Shafi'i school that tells how top muslim scholars interpret the Quran and the Hadith and put it into law.

I got a clear picture of Islam when I read the biography by Ibn Ishaq and systematically read the Quran verses that are referenced throughout the book. I recommend you to do the same. There is no way to understand the message of Islam without the context. Without context, you can only speculate about the meaning of the Quran.

What I found was horrible. The start of Islam, especially the time of Muhammad in Medina was accompanied by an extreme form of violence. During those ten years, there was a perpetual war. Muhammad sent people out to kill his critics, he expelled or killed all Jews of Medina, because they did not accept his Prophethood. He killed captives after war was finished because he had trouble with them in his time of Mecca. Muhammad and also the Quran sanction rape of captive women and slaves. And Muhammad participated in this horrendous kind of practice rather than abolishing it as the final messenger with a message for all of mankind for all times to come.

Please do not lecture me on the culture or habits of that time. If he could stop the consumption of alcohol and the killing of female babies and so many other things, he could have stopped slavery and the rape of captive women and slaves. Do you know that the religious authorities of Pakistan sanctioned the rape of Hindu women when they were at war with the Bangladesh part of what once used to be Pakistan? This happened a mere 30 years ago. In Algeria the islamic terrorist movements rediscovered this opportunity and reintroduced this divinely sanctioned practice of raping "ennemy" women. And this is only a decade ago.

The worst episode that I read was about an old woman that was torn in two by tying one camels to each of her legs. What can she have done to have deserved such a fate? It is not written. What is written is the name of the guy who supervised the "operation". His name is Zayd Bin Haritha, the adopted son of Muhammad. Zayd is mentioned in the Quran in 33.37 which says that he is " one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour". So I guess Allah knew what he was doing and sanctioned his behaviour.

If you read Ibn Ishaq, you will find that all revelations were adhoc when Muhammad was in need for something, he produced an ayah, and always after the facts. The most striking was when he wanted to steal his daughter in law from his adopted son. Yes the same Zayd bin Haritha. The permission of marrying the divorced wife of your adopted son came after he had already done it, just as if Allah did not know this beforehand. Because Muhammad was never in need to marry an adopted daughter, there is nothing in the Quran about it.

So I feel you really need to be very brainwashed or uninformed not to notice that the whole Quran is invented by Muhammad. If the all-knowing Allah wants to send a message to mankind, he would be able to give a readable text rather than a text that confuses people and needs 10 books of Tafseer to make any sense. If you follow the news and look around you, you will notice that the Quran inspires some muslims to live like angels and other to live like terrorists. And both groups say the other group does not follow the real Islam. The angel muslims say the terrorists have hijaced their religion and the terrorists muslims say that the angels are hypocrites (mentioned as al-munafiqoon in the Quran) who pretend to be muslims but do not want to fight jihad fi sabeel illah to free muslims all over the world from "oppression".

By writing and editing the books of tafseer, muslims confirm themselves that Allah can not write a clear book. And the reason that the Quran is not understandable is because most ayahs refer to specific situations that are not clarified. The context was clear when the quran was "revealed" but not now.

Contrary to Allah, humans however can write clear books. I have a shariah book from the Shafi'i school and if you want to know what Islam prescribes, it is all clearly exmplained. Within minutes, you can find out what Islam says about marriage, divorce, killing of apostates, prayer, ... Why was Allah not able to do this job so we have only one shariah book, clear for everybody without discussion.

So I left Islam because the Quran is a confusing book and ALL islamic sources describe Muhammad as a merciless warlord who had some good sides as well but in whole disqualifies as a Prophet.

And now all good muslims have to kill me because I am busy to cause corruption, strife, social unrest, ... by talking negatively about what I learned about Islam from books written by devout muslims..

Now to come back to the Bani Qurayza.

The Quran refers to it in 8.58 "If thou fearest treachery from any group, throw back (their covenant) to them, (so as to be) on equal terms: for Allah loveth not the treacherous."

What happened? During the battle of the ditch at Medina, the muslims had dug a ditch around Medina as protection except on the location of the living quarters of the Bani Qurayza that was fortified by a wall. The Meccans sent somebody to ask if they could pass there and some of the leaders of the Bani Qurayza said yes and others no. In the end the Meccans returned to Mecca and the war stopped. To be complete, I have to say that Muhammad sent somebody to all parties to cause confusion. So you could say there was treason from his side as well.

Now for treason to be present some actions have to be done. This was not the case. Assumptions or "fear of treason" are not enough to kill people in my view. Now if Muhammad were merciful, he would have made an investigation and brought the leadership to justice, not to kill all males from the tribe without any investigation or hearing of the people involved.

The procedure to appoint somebody to determine the sentence does not make it right to commit genocide. Anyway, Muhammad was present and he sanctioned the verdict. You told that Sad bin Mu'adh was favourable to the Bani Qurayza and his verdict was to kill all males. Can you imagine what would have happened if he was not favourable? To kill them by making minced meat out of them in a big machine? Do you see the absurdity of your statement?

If you still think it is right what Muhammad did, let's go to the 21st century. There a over a million muslims living in Britain. If you live in a country as a native or as an immigrant, you need to abide by the law and not attack the country or its people or military. This is your contract. Now some muslims have travelled to Bin Laden who has told he is fighting against the UK and those muslims have agreed to help him. Until there we are in the situation of the Bani Qurayza. Some muslims in Britain want to attack and others do not.

Now you will agree with me that the government of the UK has every right to kill all muslim males. In this they follow the example the Prophet of Islam and most muslims including yourself sanction the genocide on the Bani Qurayza. This can not be a wrong decision. But wait, the muslims must be able to select the guy to pass verdict. The government proposes Salman Rushdie. Salman Rushdie was once a muslim and though he criticises Islam he does not want any harm to the muslims; Most of his family is still muslim. After besieging the muslims for 14 days, they agree to accept the verdict of Salman Rushdie. To everybody's surprise he orders all muslim males to be killed. And you will agree with this of course.

Now the situation in Britain is actually worse, there have been the London bombings. So there is not only a suspicion of treason, there is war. That changes the situation, but for the worse.

Thanks God, the British are merciful people and do not follow the example of the Prophet and our muslim brothers and sisters can live safely in the UK. And the secret services continue to hunt down the ever increasing number of organised or free-lance terrorists. And avoid to arrest innocent people.

I hope you see the absurdity of your position now! And you leave Islam and join humanity. Do you understand that Islam has made you justify the behaviour of the Prophet of Islam even in its most ugly form? In spite of the fact that you are most likely a very decent person.

Best greetings, Jan

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".