A Critical Analysis of 'Real Islam'. Its People ... - Bukti dan Saksi

eheading us, and who believe such acts are pious and will win them a ticket into Muslim heaven where
scores of virgins await, anxious to provide them an orgasmic eternity. Survival dictates we not be oversensitive
to the point we avoid viewing the actual history being played out before our very eyes. To
‘Know Thine Enemy’, we need to see, feel, and understand these creatures, to solidify national support
and bring our full military might to bear to end this thing as quickly as possible.
The fact that Jihad means obligatory war for devout Muslims has been previously discussed in earlier
chapters, proved using authentic Islamic sources. Muslims who commit acts of violence and terror against
infidels can find ample justification for their actions, based on the teachings of the Qur’an and, more
importantly, the example of their prophet. The prophet himself left a trail of assassinations and other
bloody acts behind him until his own death, all of which are recorded by Muslim historians, which
become a tradition among Muslims in the early centuries of its development. The growing body of
Islamic internet site proud postings of violent videos/pictures makes it disgustingly clear the practice is
continuing through today. We now attempt to further clarify the mind and rational of Islamic militants
carrying out so many terrible instances of beheadings. Unfortunately these cruel rituals are neither new,
nor isolated incidents or aberrations.
It is a perilous fact that the practitioners of the Muslim religion are taught a philosophy that
encourages terrorism against civilians, and does not differentiate between innocent civilians and soldiers.
The Geneva Conventions and conventional rules of war have no validity and are simply rejected by Jihad
warriors, who believe they are immune because they operate under a higher law. Accordingly, all infidels
without a treaty of protection (i.e. not already subdued and paying the Jizya tax) can be dealt with at the
pleasure and discretion of the fighter. Options at his disposal include kidnapping and ransom, slavery
(including sex slavery), or to simply torture and kill the poor soul.
This review highlights some additional Islamic direction on the subject. The citations herein are but a
small portion of the enormous amount of evidence indicating that killing noncombatants or captives
appears supported by both Islamic principles and history. What is outlined herein should give Westerner
civilians caught up in Jihad a clear idea of what he/she can expect from Islamic warriors, as well as what
prisoners of war can expect from their Muslim captors.
Many of the remaining citations were taken from an article by Andrew G. Bostom, Jihad Killings of
POWs and Non-Combatants, first published September 9, 2004 at frontpagemagazine.com.
W.H.T. Gairdner, the renowned early 20th century scholar of Islam, wrote the following discussion of
Muhammad’s treatment of POWs, based exclusively on Muslim sources:
"After Badr, especially, the greatest vindictiveness and bloodthirstiness were manifested. Many prisoners were
slaughtered in cold blood, at least two of them at the personal insistence of Muhammad who had a special
grudge against them. The most famous Companions (except Abu Bakr) were then the most truculent. One of
them was for burning the prisoners en masse! [Gairdner’s emphasis] The Prophet checked these excesses. But
the very words in which he did so, the very limits set up, show clearly that defenseless prisoners might always
be slaughtered in cold blood if they could not get anyone to redeem them. The Sura produced after the event
(Q.8:67-68) explicitly commands the slaughter of prisoners on occasions when it is advisable to make an
impression by ‘frightfulness’: on such occasions the sin would be to grow rich by accepting ransoms! And there
is a whole series of traditions which make out that the ‘leniency’ shown at Badr was a sin, that Mohammed had
been against that sin, humane Abu Bakr was the chief offender, and that had that sin been punished, only the
whole-hoggers who had urged the slaughter of all the prisoners (‘Umar and Sa’d) would have escaped…the
Koran itself recommended the ransoming of war-captives as a form of charity suitable for rich Muslims. But the
Badr alternative is always there in the background, and on suitable occasions may always be brought into the
foreground. The prisoner of war is mubah damuhu: his life’s essentially forfeit." [33]
A review of Egyptian high school textbooks in 2002 reveals the classical exegesis on these Qur’anic
verses which is still being taught to students in non-Azharite (i.e. non-religious) as well as Azharite
schools.
"Studies in Theology: Tradition and Morals, Grade 11, (2001) pp. 291-92 ...This noble [Qur'anic] Surah [Surat
Muhammad]... deals with questions of which the most important are as follows: 'Encouraging the faithful to
perform jihad in God's cause, to behead the infidels, take them prisoner, break their power, and make their souls
humble - all that in a style which contains the highest examples of urging to fight. You see that in His words: