|
Wissam Nasr
Executive Director
Islamic Institute for Human Rights
[email protected]
15
Jul 2002
Hi
Ali,
How are you doing? Fine I hope. I am Wissam Nasr, the Executive Director
of the Islamic Institute for Human Rights. Not too long ago, I sent in a
long commentary refuting the many erroneous claims on your site. Despite
your insistence that you will take down your site if you are proven
wrong--which my commentary clearly accomplished--I see that your site
still exists.
I have read my comments on the comments page. I find it a little too
convenient that you respond to only some of the comments posted there. I
understand that it would take you a great deal of time to respond to each
one individually, so I am asking that you answer me, because I am
articulate and knowledgable enough to properly defend Islam against your
disinformation.
I am very knowledgable about Islam and I promise you that I can win
absolutely any debate with you, from philosophy to theology to Islam in
actual practice. I challenge you to publish my comments and I challenge
you to try to answer them. I must tell you right now, however, that I am
heavily armed with information and citations. As you will soon see, my
good friend, it will be impossible to prove me wrong. I will give you so
much accurate knowledge and reasoning, that inshallah you will convert to
Islam. If that sounds crazy, then look around you Ali--crazier things have
happened.
Ali, you know perfectly well why your site is here. You hate Islam. That
is clear to even the casual reader of your site. However, you need to open
your mind to logic and accurate information. Therefore I challenge you or
anyone else on your "staff" to debate ME. All I ask is that you
bring your logic to the table. If you are sincere about your challenge,
and a man of your word, then let me personally put your site out of
business.
Waiting for your response,
Wissam Nasr
Executive Director
Islamic Institute for Human Rights
The
following is what Mr. Wissam Nasr wrote to me few months ago that I did
not respond then.
Greetings Sir,
I read your website with great interest. I would like to point out to you,
however, that you have many half-truths, exaggerations, and outright lies
in your articles. Since I would prefer to believe that you are just
misinformed, and not a person spewing hate, I will gladly point out to you
your errors, and thus, accept your challenge. If you are indeed interested
in the Truth, then you will publish this email. Indeed, all that you will
read below is fact, and I have included citations.
One of your first erroneous claims is this:
"Islam as it is taught in Quran (Koran) and lived by Muhammad, as is
reported in the Hadith (Biography and sayings of the Prophet) is a
religion of intolerance, inequality, violence, discrimination,
superstition, fanaticism, and blind faith...Islam advocates killing the
non-Muslims, abuses the human rights of the minorities and women. Islam
expanded by Jihad (holy war) and forced its way by killing the
non-believers and the dissidents."
Let's examine these claims, in no particular order. You claim that Islam
is based on blind faith and superstition. That is interesting, because
when we open THE OXFORD HISTORY OF ISLAM (John Esposito, 1999) the very
first sentence of the second chapter, "Fruit of the Tree of
Knowledge: The Relationship between Faith and Practice in Islam"
reads as follows:
"Faith is never blind in Islam."
Oxford goes on to reveal that "Islam is the conscious and rational
submission of the contingent and limited human will to the absolute and
omnipotent will of God." Read the rest of the chapter, and you will
find in numerous places that Islam is based on knowledge and reason
(clearly stated on page 66).
This is a direct contradiction to what you claim on your website.
The second erroneous claim you make is that Islam is a religion of
intolerance. This is clearly not based on history. All we must do is
simply compare the expansion of the Islamic Empire with other empires.
Other empires, such as the Roman or Egyptian Empire expanded with brute
force, simply killing everyone in their way. Islamic expansion was quite
different, as any history book would tell you. Moslems would not even live
in the same town as the one they conquered. They built garrison towns next
to the towns, and lived there without harming anyone. The collected a tax
like all other governments. Any history book will tell you that Islamic
expansion was the least bloody of any expansion in history. If you take
issue with this, then read what the Oxford History of Islam says about
Islamic expansion:
"During the expansion of the caliphal empire, the Islamic community
itself spread beyond the empire. Whereas the spread of the empire was
carried out mainly by armies [as a political entity, not as a religion],
the spread of the Islamic faith beyond the caliphates borders was usually
the work of merchants or pious preachers. In many parts of the
empire, even in those conquered early on, such as
Egypt
or
Iran
, the population remained predominantly non-Muslim for centuries. With
time, more conquered peoples embraced Islam....forced conversions were
rare, but in some cases the imposition of higher taxes on non-Muslims may
have created an economic incentive for embracing Islam. For the most part,
however, the gradual Islamization of the empire’s populations was
part of a complex transformation of the whole social environment,
involving many factors that impinged simultaneously on the individual and
the family: economic and political advantage, social mobility, linguistic
and cultural affinities, marriage and kinship requirements, and, above
all, the intrinsic appeal of Islam as a belief system."
It becomes clear then, that Islam did not spread by violence (and is thus
not a violent religion), and that minorities were respected---because as
we see above Moslems were the minorities! In fact, one commentator I read
pointed out a simple fact: If Islam was a religion of violence, they would
have killed millions during their expansion. Even today, if Islam were a
religion of violence, then we would have 1.2 billion people armed to the
teeth and ready to fight what you call a "holy war". (by the
way, jihad does not mean holy war. This is one of the more well-known
misconceptions about Islam. Jihad means struggle or resistance to evil.
This takes many forms, including scholarly writings such at this one, the
struggle to purge your inner self from evil, and if no recourse exists,
then armed struggle under certain, very stringent guidelines. I would
suggest you actually read about Jihad before dismissing it as a "holy
war" Read a book and you will this error, as well as many other
errors on your website ) That is obviously not the case. Also, do not
forget the Islam is derived from the word Salaam, which means peace. All
scholars and historians and people who visited Islamic countries agree
that your normal, average Muslim loves peace. Hence the word
"extremists"--by virtue of the word itself, extremists are an
aberration of Islam.
Another completely erroneous claim that you make is that the Koran says
the Earth is flat or the sun is fixed. This is really bizarre and untrue.
When they say the Sun is on a fixed term and runs its course, it is saying
from our perspective here on Earth. If that is true, then how could
Muslims advance Astronomy so far? There is an entire section in the Oxford
History devoted to Islamic efforts in astronomy and math. Truly, reading
will set your straight and logic will prove your claim not only false, but
really farfetched. In fact, I laughed out loud when I heard such a
ridiculous claim. Let me state my point again: If Islam teaches us to
think the Earth is flat or whatever you claim, then how could we make such
notable advances in astronomy, science, and math?
In short, I have read your entire website, and you have taken so many
things out of context that your credibility is non-existent You have
twisted things to misinterpret almost every Islamic concept, and all parts
of Islamic history. I imagine that this is a mixture of your hate for
Islam with poor, biased sources. I beg, beg, beg you to read the Oxford
History of Islam to see what our foremost scholars say about this
religion. If you do not read objective, in depth sources, then you are a
victim of the same ignorance that you are accusing Moslems of. It’s
really that simple. You have so many lies and exaggerations on your
website, that I could write a book correcting you. Why should I do that
when you can read books for yourself?
There is one more thing I would like to quote from the Oxford History,
just so you know:
"About Christians themselves, the Koran is quite charitable. Apart
from accusations of heresy for their stand on the Trinity and some chiding
for the conviction that theirs is the true religion, the Koran declares
that Christians are people of compassion and mercy, that they will be able
to enter paradise, and even that they are nearest in love to the Muslim
believers. (page 307)"
"For many Christians the arrival of Islam was actually seen as a
liberation from the tyranny of fellow Christians rather than as a menace
of even a challenge to their own faith. Such acquiescence, of course, was
encouraged by the fact that under Islam they were guaranteed the right to
continue as independent communities [where is your claim of religious
intolerance here?] . The Dhimmi (minority) status, despite the obligations
and lower status attached to it, was for many people preferable option to
Byzantine oppression...the arrival of the Muslims was welcomed by a
significant portion of the population...significant numbers pf the embers
of these eastern communions eventually converted to Islam. (309)
I would also like to say that your website is clearly biased against
Islam. This, of course, ruins its credibility as an objective source of
material. There are many awful abuses of Islam’s beliefs throughout
the world. It is awful what people are doing in Islam’s name. Clear
examples are the Taliban and Iran’s bloody past. But you have to
draw distinctions between these corrupt governments and average Muslims
who do not wish for bloodshed or harm to others. Do we judge farmers in
Texas by the actions of the CIA? No, of course not. All people want human
rights, but it is GOVERNMENTS that have historically repressed them. Do
not equate Muslims with what you see their very corrupt, often dictatorial
regimes doing. Because as anyone can tell you, you cannot generalize
about 1.2 billion people, which is exactly what you are doing. You have to
do some serious studying, but even more serious thinking about the hate
you harbor towards 1.3 billion people on this Earth. Your fail to draw
distinctions, instead lumping together people with stereotypes. This is
very clear to even casual visitors to your website.
Please read more about Islam. It is only in this way that you can find the
truth from reliable sources. The books you have been reading are quite
inaccurate, as can be seen from your website’s statements. If you
do not believe me, then read the Oxford History of Islam, and tell me what
you think those scholars would say about your website.
Wissam Nasr
Executive Director
Islamic Institute for Human Rights
Dear
Mr. Wissam Nasr
Before we
proceed may I ask you if as the Executive Director of Islamic Institute
for Human Rights do you defend the human rights of women and the
minorities in Islamic countries or you are only interested about the
rights of the Muslims living in the West to promote their religion without
opposition?
Do you at all operate in any Islamic country?
If you
agree that all people are humans and their rights must be protected would
you please tell us what your Institute has done for the Christians, Hindus
or Baha'is that are persecuted systematically in the hands of the Muslims
in Sudan, Egypt, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran or other Islamic countries?
Also how
can you reconcile the human rights of the minorities in Islamic countries
with the law of Jizya that apparently you agree with? Did you defend the
right of the guy in Saudi Arabia that was condemned to execution for
possessing a copy of the Bible?
As a
defender of human right please tell us what is your opinion about this
report:
The
Wall Street Journal, April 9, 2002: In Saudi Arabia, there is the concept
of blood money. If a person has been killed or caused to die by another,
the latter has to pay blood money or compensation, as follows:
100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man
50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman
50,000 riyals if a Christian man
25,000 riyals if a Christian woman
6,666 riyals if a Hindu man
3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman
That is, a Muslim man's life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman
However, if
in your opinion the "unbelievers" and the kafirs are less humans
than Muslims and their rights are not the same as the rights of the
Muslims please disregard this question. Your silence would be an eloquent
answer.
Now
let me answer your questions:
You refute
my claim that Islam is a religion based on blind faith and to prove your
case you quote from The Oxford History of Islam written by John Esposito
that says “Faith is never blind in Islam”. Perhaps that
definition satisfies you, but it does not satisfy me. I have stopped
believing blindly in anyone, including John Esposito if enough proof are
not provided. I look at the facts and make my own mind.
The very
fact that Islam means “submission” indicates that it is contrary to
freethinking. This word does not drive from Salama which means health or
Salam which is a wish for good health or peace. Islam drives from Taslim
which means surrender or submission. You cannot think independently and
submit your intelligence and your will to someone else at the same time. A
prerequisite of freethinking and rational thinking is doubt. Belief is the
antithesis to doubt.
Let me make
this concept clear. Belief means accepting something without evidence.
According to Oxford Dictionary belief is: “The feeling that something
is real and true”. Thus belief is based on feeling not facts. And
feelings can be wrong.
You say,
“Faith is never blind in Islam”. Please tell me how factual are
the beliefs in Miraj, in Jinns, in splitting the moon or in the Quranic
story of creation? All these beliefs are contrary to science and human
logic. They are based on blind faith and sheer ignorance. Instead of
listening to John Esposito or other apologists of Islam you better listen
to what science and commonsense dictate. How any intelligent rational
being can believe in Miraj, Jinns or other Islamic nonsense? Isn’t this
blind faith?
What the
belief in Muhammad as a messenger of God is based on?
Who said Muhammad was truly a messenger of God and not an impostor?
Can you present any solid evidence for that belief? Muslims believe
Muhammad was whom he claimed to be because that is what is written in
Quran. But the Quran came out of the mouth of Muhammad. If he was a liar
the Quran is also a lie. Isn’t this circular reasoning? Isn’t this
blind faith? Can you prove that Quran is truly the world of God? This book
is full of mistakes and sheer nonsense. How can one believe in Islam
without blind faith?
In your
second point you claim that Islam did not expand through violence. Sir,
who do you want to fool? Are you going to deny all the books of history
including your own? Islam has advanced through violence since the day one.
What do you think Muhammad was doing in his Qazvahs (raids)? The reason
the first time you send me this message I just published it without
responding to it is because I have no time to waste with people who either
have not read anything about Islam and defend it or just resort to deceit
and lies.
You claimed
that after the invasion of Arabs the population of Iran and Egypt remained
predominantly non-Muslim for centuries. That is true but you forget to
mention that this resistance was a bloody resistance. Iranians fought a
long time against Islam until they succumbed under the brutal forces of
darkness.
You wrote:
“With
time, more conquered peoples embraced Islam....forced conversions were
rare, but in some cases the imposition of higher taxes on non-Muslims may
have created an economic incentive for embracing Islam.”
It amazes
me that you cannot see the evil in this confession of yours and use it to
present Islam as a non-violent religion. Here you admit that people were
“conquered”. Tell me how this is possible without war and the use of
violence? You say forced conversion were rare. They were not rare. But the
fact that you admit that people were forced to convert demonstrates that
Islam is not a "religion of peace". You talk of imposition of
taxes on non-Muslims as an incentive for people to embrace Islam.
So by your own admission people did not convert to Islam because they
found it a true religion but because they were under duress. If you know
this much of Islam aren’t you ashamed to belong to this oppressive and
violent cult? What do you think if the West starts levying especial taxes
on Muslims? Would that be fair? How many Muslims will remain faithful when
they have to give 50% of their income as penalty for being Muslims? (50%
is what Muhammad charged the Jews after raiding their town in Kheibar) Is
this a humane law?
I want you to answer this because you are not stranger to human rights.
This is your business. You should know. In any non-Islamic country impose
special tax such as Jizyah on Muslims, you Mr. director of human rights
would be up in arms fighting tooth and nail crying injustice. Why you say
nothing about Jizyah then?
You say
Islam did not spread through violence. Then how do you suppose it spread?
Through dialogue and open discussion? Would you publish this letter of
mine in your site (just as I publish yours in mine) to prove that you mean
what you say and you are not afraid of open discussions? My friend, which
Islamic country allows open discussion on Islam? Which Islamic Internet
site allows it? In which one of Islamic countries you can decide to leave
Islam and live to tell about it? Do
you know what is the punishment of the apostates in Islam? Read this if
you want to refresh your memory
http://main.faithfreedom.org/Articles/quran_teaches.htm
You say
that if Islam was the religion of violence then all the 1.2 billion people
would be armed to the teeth to fight in the holy war. As a matter of fact
the good news is that most of the Muslims are not living by what Islam
requires from them. We even have nations such as Bangladesh and sometimes
Pakistan that elect women as their rulers. This is completely against what
Muhammad said about the women. He said "Never
will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler."
So
fortunately Muslims are not aware of the inhumane teachings of Islam and
the majority of them still are under the delusion that Islam means peace.
Nevertheless Muhammad was clear about it. He not only said that Paradise
is under the shade of the sword but also made his Allah reveal:
2:216,
Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike
it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you
Now can you
please tell us how fighting can be good for us? Please don’t tell me
that the meaning of that verse is “self-defense”. There is no need for
God telling people to fight, kill and maim their enemies in self-defense.
Self-defense is natural in all living organisms including ameba and
bacteria. It is just ridiculous to claim that all these violent verses are
for self-defense. Does this verse sound to you a teaching for
self-defense?
9:5,
But when the forbidden months are past, then
fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer
them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem.
You say
Jihad means struggle against "self". Really...? Was Muhammad
struggling against his self when he raided the Jewish quarters of
Medina massacred all their men and enslaved their women and children? Do
you really believe that by waging war against innocent people killing them
and raping their wives Muhammad was just struggling against his selfish
ego?
Volume
4, Book 53, Number 392:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, "Let us
go to the Jews" We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras. He said
to them, "If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know
that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you
from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is
permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to
Allah and His Apostle."
Perhaps you
have forgotten the famous saying of your messenger of peace who said:
"I have been
ordered by God to fight with people till they bear testimony to the fact
that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammed is his messenger, and
that they establish prayer and pay Zakat (money). If they do it, their
blood and their property are safe from me" (see Bukhari Vol. I, p.
13).
If you
disagree with the meaning of this hadith, please try to convince your own
coreligionists first. For example try Dr. Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti,
the Azhar scholar, who in his book, "Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s
Biography" says:
"The
Holy War, as it is known in Islamic Jurisprudence, is basically an
offensive war. This is the duty of Muslims in every age when the needed
military power becomes available to them. This is the phase in which the
meaning of Holy War has taken its final form. Thus the apostle of God
said: ‘I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and
his message ..."’ : (page 134, 7th edition)
Notwithstanding
the errors in your letter, you said something that I agree completely and
that is the “normal, average Muslim loves peace”. This is
absolutely true. But the “normal, average” Muslim knows nothing about
Islam. He reads the Quran but does not understand it. Muslims are unaware
of the violence that exists in that book. They are oblivious of who was
Muhammad and how ruthless, pervert, crazy and violent was that man. And
that is why our site, the faithfreedom.org and its dedicated writers try
to remedy. We are mostly ex-Muslims who started to read the Quran and
after going through the initial stages of shock and denial came to see the
real face of Islam. Now we are determined to unveil the real Islam to the
world and especially to our Muslim brothers and sisters. By extremists we
do not mean all the Muslims, we mean the REAL Muslims who understand the
Quran and practice it.
Furthermore
you denied the fact that Quran says Earth is flat and Sun rotates around
it. I am not going to discuss that here because I have discussed it
elsewhere and if you care you can read it in this link:
http://main.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/genesis.htm
See
also this article:
http://main.faithfreedom.org/Articles/avijitroy/flatearth.htm
But
I totally disagree with you for crediting Islam for the intellectual
prowess and scientific achievements of the great minds born as Muslims.
This is utterly dishonest.
What
the talents and achievements of Khayym, Ibn Arabi, Ibn Sina and other
luminaries born as Muslims have to do with Islam? Does Quran teach
Algebra, Chemistry, Biology or Astronomy? Muhammad made a mistake in parting
the inheritance. This guy could not add simple fractions. Why you
want to credit Islam for the achievements of these great minds? Our people
had a culture and a civilization that predated Islam by thousands of
years. It is amazing that we call our own architecture, art, science and
literature “Islamic”. What is Islamic about them? We even call Arabic
names Islamic. What do you think Arabs used to call themselves before
Islam? I noticed that Pakistanis and Bengalis have Persian names and they
call these purely Iranian names like Parviz, Afrasiab, Sardar, Kamran,
etc. “Islamic” names. This is amazing. Please, give credit where
credit is due. What our people created with their own genius is not
Islamic. It is ours. The accomplishments of our luminaries are no more
Islamic than the theories of Einstein are Jewish and those of Darwin are
Christian. Yet no Christian or Jew would credit his religion for the
greatness of the scientists and philosophers born amongst them. Only
Muslims who do not mind to live a delusional faith of self deceit make
such claims.
What Islam did for art? What it did for music? What
did the prophet say about the poets? What were his views on Economy
or Astronomy?
How much he knew about Agriculture? He once said it is useless to
pollinate the female date trees with the flowers of the male trees. Then
when the trees did not produce dates he said I am just a man and I make
mistakes. This man was an absolute ignorant. That is why those who
believe in him have sunk into fanaticism and have not advanced. We have
1.2 billion people following a lunatic. What can be expected from
them?
What happened to Ibn Sina and Ar Razi? They were called apostates and
their philosophical views rejected. Ar Razy wrote a tome on rationalism
and rejected the mumbo jumbo of religion. He called prophets "Billy
goats" and "charlatans" His book was destroyed. All
is left are fragments of his sayings in a book of refutation to him. In
Islam the freethinking is discouraged. If it weren’t for Islam most
likely we would have the enlightenment happen in Iran 400 years before it
took place in Europe. During the Caliphates of the Abbasids, many
great minds were born. This was possible because these rulers were secular
and tolerant rulers and allowed certain degree of freethinking, that was
lost later through the rise of Islamism. This tolerance however should not
be attributed to Islam because the Sharia does not allow any degree of
tolerance. The regime of Taliban was the true embodiment of what Islam is
about. Saudi Arabia and Islamic Republic of Iran are real Islamic
courtiers.
Imagine
where would we be now if we had achieved what we achieved in the field of
science after the Renascence 400 years earlier in Iran! We will never know
the extent of the damage that Islam caused to the world of humanity. Just
think of all the libraries and books that the Islamic forces burned. Who
knows how much human knowledge was lost then. I had an Iranian who
challenged me to show him one great Iranian poet prior to Islam. He
claimed that before Islam there were no great minds in our country as if
we have to thank Islam for great men of our land. What he wanted from me
was to produce what his savage masters destroyed 1400 years ago. This
brainwashed man does not ask himself how Iran became a world power if it
did not have any great minds. How can I produce the evidence when Muslim
invaders destroyed il?
Once
upon a time Iran was one of the great powers of the world. Iranians were
contributors to human civilization. My people wrote the first Charter of
Human Rights. We banned slavery completely 2500 years ago. Women
ruled our great land. All nations that were part of our vast empire
were free to practice their religions. This is mentioned in the Bible too.
We believed in the benevolent Ahura Mazda, the god of light and practiced
good words, good deeds and good thoughts.
Today we have forsaken our god of light and follow the sadistic deity of
Muhammad who craves for blood and calls for the heads of those who do not
want to submit to his despotic authority. Today we are a poor third world
country sinking deeper and deeper day after day. Human rights are
inexistent, women are second-class citizens, minorities are persecuted,
poverty is rampant and we are known as a nation of terrorists. This is the
gift of Islam to us.
Look at our countries; all Islamic counties; look at us! See how
miserable, barbaric and pitiful are our societies. Show me one Islamic
country that is not in war. If we are not fighting with others, we are
fighting amongst each other. What do you expect from a people who are
brought up to believe that “paradise is under the shade of the sword”?
What do you expect of the ignorant people that eulogize martyrdom and
celebrate death? What do you expect from the society that its spiritual
leader (Khomeini) says: “Economy is for the donkey”? What do you
expect from a society that dresses up a
toddler as suicide bomber and take pride in their own stupidity? What
do you expect of a society that massacres 3 million of his own people (Pakstanis
in Bangladesh) and their spiritual leader issues the fatwa that raping the
Bengali women is acceptable according to the Sharia and the Sunna of the
Prophet because according to him Bangladeshis were not enough Muslim? Now
please don’t say he was wrong because he based his fatwa on this Quranic
verse:
4:24
Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those (captives) whom
your right hands possess.
Or see this story of Muhammad’s
raid of Kheybar where he gives permission to his followers to enslave war
captives and rape them, Sahih
Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 367
Or this one:
Sahih
Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus
interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said,
"Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice,
"There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into
existence, till the Day of Resurrection."
Do you know what is coitus
interruptus? The followers of the Holy Prophet used to rape the women they
captured in their raids and withdrew before ejaculation. They report that
to the Holy Prophet (peace be upon his immaculate soul) and the only thing
that occurred to that man was that even if they withdraw and spill their
semen on the ground, if Allah wills the women will become pregnant.
Forget
about the stupidity of this statement; think about the inhumanity of this
man.
These are not stories narrated by Jews. These are stories counted by the
followers of Muhammad, people who believed in him and loved him. Would
anyone fabricate damaging stories such as these for the object of his
adoration? These stories are true. The Ahadith are filled with tales of
inhumanity and barbarity of Muhammad. Is this the man you call the prophet
of God? Is this the person you follow?
Considering what Quran teaches it is clear that one cannot be a Muslim and
humane at the same time. Time has come that we separate the good people
from Muslims who truly follow Muhammad. Read the Quran this time with open
mind. Don’t try desperately to look for good in it rather look for the
evil in it because if Quran contains a thousand good things and one bad
thing it cannot be from God. But Quran contains a thousand bad things for
one good thing.
Don’t let the idea of monotheism fool you. That is another fallacy that
we shall discuss in another occasion.
Dear
Mr. Nasr, you “beg, beg, beg” me to read the Oxford History of Islam
to see what your “foremost scholars” say about this religion. Please
tell me why should I listen to your foremost scholars when I can read the
Quran, the Hadith and the history of Islam on my own? Why should I rely on
the regurgitated sanitized version of your scholars when I can go to the
source and see what Muhammad said and what he did on my own? This is the
problem with Muslim world Sir. I read tons of these apologetic lies about
Islam written by high-ranking "scholars" and Mullahs prior to
reading the Quran. But only when I read the Quran I came to see the light
and found out all those books are propagandas not worth the paper they are
written on. Read the Quran Sir. If you want to understand Islam please
read the Quran and then read the Hadith. Do not let someone who has
received millions of dollars from his Saudi or Iranian Masters fool you
with his apologetic propagandistic lies. Read the Quran if you want to
know the real Islam.
From
your “Oxford History of Islam” you quoted:
"About
Christians themselves, the Koran is quite charitable. Apart from
accusations of heresy for their stand on the Trinity and some chiding for
the conviction that theirs is the true religion, the Koran declares that
Christians are people of compassion and mercy, that they will be able to
enter paradise, and even that they are nearest in love to the Muslim
believers. (page 307)"
But
does this book say that the above lovey dovey approach towards the
Christians is abrogated? Does it say that later when Muhammad became
powerful he “revealed” very harsh verses ordering Muslims not to
befriend the Christians and the Jews and impose on them extortion
tax? Does Mr. Esposito quote the following verses?
3:
85 "Whoso
desires another religion than Islam, it shall not be accepted of him; in
the next world he shall be among the losers."
3:
28 "Let
not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than
believers:
9:29,
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor
the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath 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.
Q.3:
118 O you who
believe! Take not as (your) bitaanah (advisors, consultants, protectors,
helpers, friends, etc.) those outside your religion (pagans, Jews,
Christians, and hypocrites) since they will not fail to do their best to
corrupt you. They desire to harm you severely. Hatred has already appeared
from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse.
And
Q.5:
51 O you who believe! Take not the Jews
and the Christians as awliya’ (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.),
they are but awliya’ to one another…
Does
Mr. Esposito mention the fact that Muhammad in his death bed ordered all
the Jews and Christians to be expelled from Hijaz? An order that Omar
executed when he became the Caliph? I doubt if Mr. Esposito has
mentioned anything about that. So why should anyone trust his biased book?
Now who is telling "half truths"? John Esposito or I?
From
the page 309 of the same book you quoted:
"For
many Christians the arrival of Islam was actually seen as a liberation
from the tyranny of fellow Christians rather than as a menace of even a
challenge to their own faith. Such acquiescence, of course, was encouraged
by the fact that under Islam they were guaranteed the right to continue as
independent communities . The Dhimmi (minority) status, despite the
obligations and lower status attached to it, was for many people
preferable option to Byzantine oppression...the arrival of the Muslims was
welcomed by a significant portion of the population...significant numbers
pf the embers of these eastern communions eventually converted to Islam.”
Then
you asked me: “where is your claim of religious intolerance here?”
Dear Mr. Nasr, John Esposito is lying. He is reinventing the history. I
don’t have to quote you the violent history of Islam. Any book of
history will tell you that. How ridiculous is this claim that the
Christians “welcomed” being conquered by a brutal force such as
Muslims, be reduced to second class citizens, pay extortion tax, be called
Najis (filty, impure) feel subdued and humiliated 9:29
and still be grateful. This not only demonstrates Esposito’s total
intellectual dishonesty but also his lack of judgment. Could anyone say a
lie more conspicuous than this?
Please read The
Status of Jews and Christians in Muslim Lands, 1772 CE to
understand the abuse that these "people of the book" were
subjected to in Islamic paradise. Just to whet your interest to read this
documentary I quote a few paragraphs from it:
Jews
and Christians shall never begin a greeting; if you encounter one of them
on the road, push him into the narrowest and tightest spot.' The absence
of every mark of consideration toward them is obligatory for us; we ought
never to give them the place of honor in an assembly when a Muslim is
present. This is in order to humble them and to honor the true believers.
Entrance
into Muslim territory by infidels of foreign lands under the pact
guaranteeing protection to the tolerated peoples is permitted only for the
time necessary to settle their business affairs. If they exceed this
period, their safe-conduct having expired, they will be put to death or be
subject to the payment of the head-tax,
Their
men and women are ordered to wear garments different from those of the
Muslims in order to be distinguished from them. They are forbidden to
exhibit anything which might scandalize us, as, for instance, their
fermented liquors, and if they do not conceal these from us, we are
obliged to pour them into the street.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/jewish/1772-jewsinislam.html
At the end of your letter you urged me to make a distinction between Islam
and the action of the “bad” Muslims. Obviously, despite your claim of
having read my ENTIRE site, you haven’t read anything. If you had you
would have known why I blame Islam and not the Muslims. I regard the
Muslims, with all their violence and acts of terrorism, victims of this
barbaric cult of Islam. I have proven case after case that all the
mischief of the Muslims is inspired by violent teachings of the Islam. I
have shown that the more a person is “Islamist” and the more he lives
by the Quran and the Sunnah, the more he is a potential terrorist.
The enemy is the Islam not the Muslims. Just as there was no need to
exterminate the Germans but the nazism to achieve peace, we must uproot
the ideology that breeds Islamic terrorists. Fighting Islamic terrorism
without fighting Islam is removing the symptom instead of the cause.
You wrote: "I will give you so much accurate knowledge and
reasoning, that inshallah you will convert to Islam. If that sounds crazy,
then look around you Ali--crazier things have happened."
Yes
I agree; that would be crazy. Wouldn't it?. But for that to happen, I have
to be crazy--Really crazy. Fortunately I am still sane. And I hope
humanity is heading towards sanity and not towards craziness.
Ali Sina
1 | 2
| 3 | 4
| 5 | 6
| 7 next
> |
