Boreal

MAKING BAD LOOK GOOD

Unwitting Invitations

The word Da'wah in Arabic means to invite to something. When used in conjunction with Islam it is understood to mean "Inviting to the Way of submission and surrender to Allah."

Islamtomorrow

Terrorist acts committed in Allah's name tend to lead to a conversion bonanza. One reason I suspect for the heightened interest in Islam after innocent people have been massacred by Islamic terrorists is the mainstream media's rush to publish opinions about Islam being a religion of peace.

By portraying Islam as something it is not, the Western press invites interest from people who would not normally consider switching religion, including those who have a yearning to commit mass murder and not go to Hell.

The Ottawa Citizen does this all the time, inviting people to what George W. Bush first publicized as The Religion of Peace after 9/11. It was his way of distancing the religion from the act and is a reason why so many non-Muslims believe that Islam is all about peace, in spite of all the horrific massacres.

The Ottawa Citizen is of course not alone in making unwitting invitations to submit to the Will of Allah. The Globe and Mail issued a very persuasive invitation—as it often does after most newsworthy massacres—in a contrived interview with Sheema Khan, a regular contributor on Islamic Affairs, following the slaughter at Charlie Hebdo.

Khan quickly took control of the discussion from a hapless Lorna Dueck, host of Context TV, a program which, to quote the producer "explores news and current affairs stories from a Christian world view."

Like so many others who would explain to the layperson why believers kill, Khan begins by shifting some of the blame to the so-called Islamophobes and accuses them of misinterpreting what the Koran teaches.

Bracketed "()" text, which you find in the transcript of the interview, may indicate that information was added for emphasis prior to publication by the Globe and Mail.

Lorna Dueck: These are difficult days to be a Muslim, and I want to go public with some private conversations you and I have been having on the trouble of radicalization in Canada … What are the core beliefs in Islam that are being used to justify violence?

Sheema Khan: These are indeed, very trying times … So, let us begin our dialogue from a place of strength, power and courage. Muslim extremists and Islamophobes are two sides of the same coin – in their exclusivist vision based on hatred. Thus it is not surprising that both quote (or should I say, misquote) the same Koranic passages as justification for their views. Violence is not a “core belief” of Islam. Violence has a role in armed conflict, but with strict conditions. As an example, extremists will use Koranic passages 2:190-193 to justify the killing of those who do not ascribe to their worldview.

Khan gives examples of verses condoning violence, which she says are misquoted by extremists and the nameless Islamophobes. She only provides the verse numbers. Following are the revelations referenced in their entirety:

2:190 And fight for the Cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not be aggressive. Surely Allah does not like the aggressor.

2:191 Kill them wherever you find them and drive them out from wherever they drove you out (from Mecca). Sedition is worse than slaughter. Do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight you at it. If they fight you there kill them. Such is the reward for the unbelievers.

2:192 But if they desist, Allah is truly All-Forgiving, Merciful.

2:193 Fight them until there is no sedition and the religion becomes that of Allah. But if they desist, there will be no aggression except against the evildoers.

In the Koran, unbelievers and evildoers are generally synonymous, and against evildoers aggression is not only permitted, but encouraged. As Revelation 2:193 makes abundantly clear "fight them until the religion becomes that of Allah," i.e., fight them until we are all Muslims.

In her accusation about people misquoting verses from the Koran about killing unbelievers, Khan conveniently omits Revelation 9:5, the Verse of the Sword, the overriding verse for Muslim extremists.

The so-called People of the Book, i.e., Christians and Jews, are not to be killed “wherever you find them”, if they are submissive, and are willing to humbly pay the jizya, a form of poll-tax (a tax levied on people rather than on property) so that their lives might be spared.

9:29 Fight those among the People of the Book who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day, do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden and do not profess the true religion, till they pay the poll-tax out of hand and submissively.

One argument made for Islam's failure to conquer all of Europe was the Ottoman Caliphs placing a limit on converts from the conquered people of the Balkans. Muslim rule was much preferable to the rule of the Christian feudal lords from which the Ottomans had liberated them. But, what the Ottomans needed was people to tax which is why they placed strict quotas on how many Christians could convert to Islam in any given year.

Allah, with his imposition of the jizya on Christians and Jews, not only made a ready source of income to wage war available to the Prophet, and all the subsequent leaders of the believers (the meaning of caliph), but in the process made Christians and Jews de facto second-class citizens.

Lorna Dueck: What about all the Koranic injunctions, and the other sayings, that say non-believers should be second class citizens?

Khan has to know that the jizya and other inequities against Christians is what the compliant host of Context TV wants to talk about. No matter…

Sheema Khan: When you speak of second-class “citizens”, you are talking about a state. In the past, members of “states” were primarily defined by religious affiliation, and governance of the state was based on interpretations of the Koran in that time and age. Within that paradigm, Muslims and non-Muslims had different rights and obligations within the state. That still holds true today, for example, in Saudi Arabia. Today, governance of nation-states has changed in many parts of the world, where citizenship is based on individual human rights and obligations to the state – irrespective of religious affiliation. Modern nation states with Muslim majorities have a range of statutes regarding minorities.

At a personal level, the Koran, and the life example of the Prophet, make it very clear that we are to treat people with kindness and respect, for we are all part of the human family. He was a mercy to humanity, and Muslims are to carry forth his legacy of compassion.

A man who bragged about using terror to get his way "a mercy to humanity." I don't think so.

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Apostle said, "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror, and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand."

Bukhari 52.220

The Koran is clear on the concept, only believers are worthy of compassion. This may explain Khan associating mercy with Allah’s Messenger and not Allah Himself.

Sheema Khan: Extremism is often accompanied with harshness, rather than compassion and mercy (which were the hallmarks of Prophet Mohammed). Murder is completely antithetical to the Prophet’s life example.

The extremism we have to this day is a continuation of the terror that Muhammad bragged made him victorious. It is part and parcel of his example, and so is murder.

It is true that there is no account, to my knowledge, of Muhammad personally killing someone in cold-blood, but he did ask, on more than one occasion, that people for whom he had developed an animosity be assassinated forthwith.

When the remaining Jews of Medina asked for mercy, he let a mortally wounded warrior make the decision knowing full well that it would be death for the men, and slavery for their wives, sons and daughters.

Khan's solution to the problem of extremism is "reformation while remaining authentic to the spirit of the Koran and the example of the Prophet." Go figure!

----

In this posting I have only given example from influential Canadian news media. Then there is CNN and the lies about the Koran that it allowed to go unchallenged, not for the first time. I remember watching the first Muslim elected to Congress in an interview on CNN claim that Islam had never committed a war of aggression and not being called out by his acquiescent interviewer for such a blatant egregious lie.

Bernard Payeur