Dr. John Andrew Morrow

Home »

Archives

The Muslim Menace Next Door! Islamophobia politicizes (fabricates) crime statistics

John Andrew Morrow

Dhu al-Hijjah 10, 1438

The Muslims are coming. They are invading America. They are taking over. They are imposing seventh-century Shari‘ah Law on good, God-fearing, Christians. They are oppressing women. They are living off the welfare system like blood-sucking leeches. They are spreading crime and disease. Just look at Muslim-dominated Detroit, writes Geoffrey Grider, “a full-time minister for the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” it is America’s most violent, crime-filled city. Pause. Reflection. Reason. Comparison.

Detroit, Michigan, is not a Muslim-dominated city. It is a city dominated by Christians and secularists; 42.16% of people in Detroit identify as religious: 16.83% are Catholic; 6.9% are Baptist; 2.2% are Lutheran; 1.9% are Methodist; 1.6% are Pentecostal; 1.5% are Presbyterian; 0.34% are LDS while 6.5% belong to other Christian denominations. 0.001% of people in Detroit are Jewish; 0.26% practice an eastern faith while a mere 3.62% affiliate with Islam.

To assert that Detroit is “Muslim-dominated” is ignorant and nonsensical. At 38%, Christians represent the largest religious group in the city. Since secularists represent nearly 58% of the population, Detroit is a mainly irreligious city. This number is higher than the national average. In the US, an average of 50% of Americans describe themselves as secular.

It is Dearborn, Michigan, that has a large Arab American population. At nearly 30% of the population, however, they are hardly a majority. And although most of the Arabs in Dearborn are Muslims, the community includes a considerable number of Christians, mostly Maronites, Assyrians, Chaldeans, and Syriacs. How does Dearborn, a city with nearly 30% Muslims, compare with Detroit, a city with nearly 40% Christians?

On a scale from 1 to 100, with a higher number corresponding with more crime, the “Muslim” city of Dearborn earns 31.7 in violent crimes and 51.6 in property crime whereas the “Christian” city of Detroit earns 95.5 in violent crimes and 66.1 in property crimes. To put matters into perspective, the US average for violent crimes is 31.1 while property crimes are 38.1. The Arab American Muslims from Dearborn appear to act more like law-abiding, civilized, citizens, than the American Christians and secularists who make up 83% of Detroit’s population.

If we compare the crime rates, per 100,000 people, between “Islamic” Dearborn and “Christian” Detroit, based on FBI statistics from 2006, which differ little from those for 2016, the results are revealing (refer to the table of data below):

 
Detroit, MI Dearborn, MI National
murder 47.3 2.1 7.0
forcible rape 67.1 22.4 32.2
robbery 818.6 174.7 205.8
aggravated assault 1486.0 286.6 336.5
burglary 2050.3 713.9 813.2
larceny theft 2406.8 3454.2 2601.7
vehicle theft 2591.1 1102.8 501.5

When it comes to killing, the “Islamo-fascists” from Dearborn cannot compete with the “Crusaders” from Detroit. Although it is no longer “Murder Capital, USA,” Detroit comes in third place, after St. Louis and Baltimore, as the most murderous, blood-soaked, cities in the country. Its overall crime rate is 105% higher than the national average. While far from perfect, Dearborn is safer than 28% of the cities in the United States.

So, what happens when Muslims move into the neighborhood as they did in Dearborn, Michigan, in the 19th and 20th centuries and continue to do so today? They work hard as Muslims most always do. They build strong families. They help one another. They create businesses. They educate their children and especially their young women. They become professionals. They serve in the military. They enter politics. They become wealthy. They become philanthropists. In short, they integrate into American society. The same, however, cannot be said of those “Christians” in Detroit, some will argue. “But they are poor, dispossessed, and discriminated against.” Sure, it can be said, but so were the Arab Muslims who settled in Dearborn. “You can’t compare them to us. They are Christians but we are Black…” Racism comes full circle…

The comparison between African American Christian Detroit and Arab American Muslim Dearborn is not necessarily fair. The historical, sociological, and economic situation is complex and the variables are many. Contrasting the two communities, however, serves a didactic purpose and helps refute the lies of racists, bigots, and hate-mongers who try to pass themselves off as journalists. Muslims are not a menace, not any more than Christians are a menace. People are people. They are the product of their environment. Generalizing is generally wrong. However, if we look at the example of Arab Americans, particularly those from Dearborn, Michigan, the empirical evidence indicates that Muslims make the best of neighbors and are invaluable assets to the United States of America.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is both Muslim and Michif. An academic and a religious scholar, he has authored a large body of articles and books in the fields of Islamic, Hispanic, and Indigenous Studies. An activist and advisor to world leaders, he received an ISNA Leadership Award in 2016. He can be followed @drjamorrowwww.johnandrewmorrow.com, and www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. His videos can be viewed on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube.

Terrorists massacre entire village Murdering and mutilating men, women, and children

John Andrew Morrow

 Dhu al-Hijjah 10, 1438

The militants had been spreading west for years, raping, mutilating, and murdering as they extended their reign of terror. Since his people were defenseless, the village elder decided that surrender was the only option. Considering that his village was on the front line of the war between foreign fanatics and the national resistance, death and destruction was a certainty.

Since the invaders outnumbered the local fighting forces, surpassed them technologically, and were on the verge of overrunning the village, the tribal chief, along with hundreds of elders, arranged to meet with the terrorist leader. So long as the villagers relocated to terrorist territory 40 miles away, and flew the flag of the foreign invaders, they were guaranteed protection.

As instructed, the local leader marched his people to an area controlled by religious fanatics. The rag-tag group consisted of elderly men, who were too old or ill to fight, along with women and children. The young men from the village refused to submit and decided to join the resistance.

Exhausted by the grueling march, and having left most of their belongings behind, the tribal members were in a state of desperation. They set up makeshift tents on the outskirts of an-extremist controlled village. They flew the flag of the foreigners. They even raised a white flag to inform other militants that they were a peaceful population that had submitted to them.

Next day, as the flags fluttered in the wind, the refugee settlement, numbering 200 old men, women, and children, was surrounded by nearly 700 militants. To the surprise and shock of the internally displaced, a terrorist commander gave order to attack. Two sub-commanders refused to obey and ordered their men not to fire. The commander cried out, “Damn any man who sympathizes with Infidels! I have come to kill Infidels, and believe it is right and honorable to use any means under God’s heaven to kill Infidels… Kill and scalp all, big and little.”

With zealous fury, the terrorists commenced to slaughter the defenseless population. Were they being punished for the fact that their young men had joined the resistance? Were they being punished for belonging to another race or ethnic group? Were they being punished for not sharing the religious beliefs of the fanatics? All they knew is that they had been set up for systematic slaughter by the people who had promised them protection in exchange for surrender. Loyalty did not protect them from treachery.

John Milton Chivington

As for what happened next, the testimony of the following six witnesses shed light on the darkness of that day,

I saw the bodies of those lying there cut all to pieces, worse mutilated than any I ever saw before; the women cut all to pieces… With knives; scalped; their brains knocked out; children two or three months old; all ages lying there, from suckling infants up to warriors… By whom were they mutilated?

I saw one Infidel lying on the bank, whose leg had been broken. A soldier came up to her with a drawn weapon. She raised her arm to protect herself; he struck, breaking her arm. She rolled over, and raised her other arm; he struck, breaking that, and then left her without killing her. I saw one Infidel cut open, with an unborn child lying by her side.

There was one little child, probably three years old, just big enough to walk through the sand. The little fellow was perfectly naked, traveling in the sand. I saw one man draw up his rifle and fire. He missed the child. Another man came up and said, “let me try to get the son of a bitch. I can hit him.” He got down, kneeled-down and fired at the little child, but he missed him. A third man came up, and made a similar remark, and fired, and the little fellow dropped.

Fingers and ears were cut off the bodies for the jewelry they carried. The body of one man, lying solitarily in the creek bed, was a prime target. Besides scalping him the soldiers cut off his nose, ears, and testicles — the last for a pouch…

Men, women, and children’s privates cut out. I heard one man say that he had cut a woman’s private parts out and had them for exhibition on a stick. I heard of one instance of a child, a few months old, being thrown into the feed-box of a wagon, and after being carried some distance, left on the ground to perish; I also heard of numerous instances in which men had cut out the private parts of females and stretched them over their hats.

Just to think of that dog and his dirty hounds… His men shot down human beings, and blew the brains out of little innocent children.

Before leaving the area, the commander and his men pillaged the meager belongings of the butchered refugees. As the smoke cleared, they looked for the wounded, and finished them off one by one. They scalped many of the dead: women, children, and infants. They used scalps and other body parts, including human fetuses, and male and female private parts, to decorate their weapons, hats, and gear. After raping the women, they cut out their genitals and stretched them over the base of their headgear. Other parts appeared as buttons at the front. The militants cut off the scrotums of the men and used them to make pouches. They publicly displayed these body parts as battle trophies throughout town.

“Islam is from the Devil.” “Muslims are all evil.” “Ban them all.” “Kill them all.” Sorry, gentle reader, this atrocity did not take place in Syria or Iraq in 2017. It took place in southeastern Colorado Territory on November 29, 1864. The commander in question was John Milton Chivington (1821–1894), a Christian pastor. The victims identified as Infidels were Indians or Native Americans: two-thirds of them were women and children. The psychopathic rapists, mutilators, and murderers who committed these crimes were not Muslims. They were Christians. They were under the command of an ordained Methodist minister. They invoked the name of God. They acted in the name of Christ. They were what we Amerindians call wasichus or white devils.

Unlike white supremacists who demonize all non-whites, and unlike Christian supremacists who demonize all non-Christians, we indigenous people do not generalize. Those that generalize know nothing of our ways. We believe that all human beings, regardless of their race, are the children of the Creator. Some are righteous. Others are wicked. We judge people on the content of their character, not their color or creed. While some so-called followers of Christ are really followers of Anti-Christ, we distinguish between true Christians who are godly and false Christians who are demonic. If it is wrong for non-whites and non-Christians to view all whites and all Christians as devils, it is wrong for whites and Christians to view all Muslims as devils as well. And “Allah is the most just of judges” (95:08).

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an Amerindian with Canadian and American citizenship. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He worked as an Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor of Foreign Languages for over a decade and a half at Park University, Northern State University, Eastern New Mexico University, the University of Virginia, and Ivy Tech Community College. He is the author of over thirty academic books in the fields of Hispanic, Islamic, and Indigenous Studies. A public figure and activist, he lectures all around the globe and acts as an advisor to world leaders. In recognition for his accomplishments, Dr. Morrow received an ISNA Interfaith Leadership Award in 2016. He may be followed on Twitter at @drjamorrow. His websites are www.johnandrewmorrow.com as well as www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. His videos can be viewed on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube.

The Role of Faith in a Culture of Fear in America

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Shaykh Ilyas Islam)

Delivered at the 54th Annual ISNA Convention on Friday, June 30, 2017, in Chicago, Illinois

A‘udhu billahi min al-Shaytin al-rajim. Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim. Alhamdulillahi rabb al-‘alamin wa salawat ‘ala khatim al-nabiyyin, Muhammad al-Amin, wa ‘ala alihi wa sahbihi ajma‘in.

I take refuge in Allah from Satan the Rejected. In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and blessed be the Seal of the Prophets, Muhammad, the Truthful and the Trustworthy, as well as all his Family and Companions.

Ladies and gentlemen. Brothers and Sisters. Distinguished panelists. I wish you all a warm welcome to the 54th Annual ISNA Convention and thank you for selecting this session on the most timely of topics: The Role of Faith in a Culture of Fear.

Welcome to America! A country rooted in fear: the fear of the First Nations, the savages who, in many ways, were far more noble than the civilized. A country rooted in the fear of African slaves and ex-slaves who grew so numerous that they posed a threat to the white supremacists and colonialists who brought them here in the first place. A country rooted in the fear of foreigners, particularly the Hispanic, feared by the capitalists who brought them here by the millions as a source of cheap labor. A country founded on the fear communists, a convenient excuse to engage in wars of imperial domination on a planetary scale.

And now, a country founded on the fear of Islam and Muslims, a pretext to attack, destroy, invade, and occupy sovereign nations for highly profitable geo-political purposes. They make a killing by killing. Billions of bucks to buy bombs. They make a killing by stealing natural resources. Billions of dollars in fossil fuels and the building of pipelines for natural gas. And they make a killing by rebuilding. Billions of dollars in business deals.

Don’t get me wrong. I love America. I am America. I am part French Canadian and part First Nations: Michif-Otipemisiwak: 500,000 strong, in Canada, and the United States. Proud to be Métis. We hold no grudges. We have no hatred in our hearts. As our elders teach us, “Meet hatred with love. Meet evil with good.”

We live in a culture of fear. The foreign policy of the US government and the Western world contributes to this culture of fear both internationally and nationally. The corporate-controlled mass media is now devoid of any real connection to journalism. They are propaganda engines that pump out sensationalistic one-sided stories that stoke the flames of fear.

Muslims, in particular, are stigmatized, demonized, and dehumanized. The media blames Muslims for terrorism. The media expects Muslims to bear the burden of blame for the thousands of victims of terrorist actions, actions that Muslims neither committed nor condoned. The media also ignores the fact that Muslims make up 95% of the victims of terrorism.

The media focuses on the thousands of innocent people killed by terrorists while completely ignoring the fact that the “War on Terror” has killed millions upon millions of innocent Muslims. That death-count speaks for itself: the War on Terror has become a War of Terror.

The foreign policy of the United States can only be described as a Sick Circle. The CIA supports Takfiri extremists in the Muslim world as part of its proxy wars: the Mujahidin and the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Takfiris in Libya, and the Takfiris in Iraq and Syria. They use them to fight their enemies: the Russians, the Libyans, the Syrians, and the Iranians.

The conflict caused by these Takfiri terrorists provides grounds for military intervention in the region. The Americans and their allies get embroiled in actions abroad. The terrorist groups that they have supported all along turn around and target the Western world. This heightens sentiments of Islamophobia.

If Westerners witnessed the atrocities committed by Western governments in the Muslim world, public opinion would turn against them. They would demand an end to military actions. If they saw images of the millions of civilians that were slaughtered by their governments, they would be protesting in the streets. There would be an Anti-War Movement like the one that existed during the Vietnam Era.

So, what do you do? How do you ensure that the public continues to support the War on Terror which is really a War on Islam and Muslims? By means of terrorist attacks. By means of false flag operations. That way, the eternal and endless war of the globalist, totalitarian, fascists, continues unabated to the pleasure of Big Brother or, as we known him in Islam, the One-Eyed Liar. The philosophy is clear: keep the focus on fear. So, let us examine the issue of fear, its dangers, and its consequence.

As Imam ‘Ali, radi Allahu ‘anhu, may Allah be pleased with him, the first Imam and third Caliph of Islam stated: “People are enemies of what they do not know.” In other words, people fear what they know not. Ignorance leads to fear. Fear leads to hatred. Hatred leads to violence. And violence leads to suffering. I sound like Yoda. I know many of you have thought about it but it is high time for someone to say it: Yoda is a Muslim and all the Jedi Masters are Muslims. They believe in the Force. They believe in Eternal Life. They abide by a code of morality and they adhere to a path of spirituality.

So, what is fear? A phobia is a fear: an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something. There are literally hundreds of phobias. In some cases, the phobic person feels sentiments of dislike, disapproval, prejudice, hatred, discrimination, and hostility towards the object of the phobia. Ignorance is the breeding ground of fear. It is the petri dish in which the bacteria of fear is cultivated.

Fear of the unknown is a survival mechanism. Human beings lived in family groups, in family clans, and in tribes for tens of thousands of years. People who were known to you, people who looked like you, people who acted like you, and people who spoke like you were a sense of security and safety.

Outsiders or Others were unknown. They were un-vetted. They were viewed and treated as a threat. This fear of the unfamiliar is the root of tribalism, racism, sectarianism, and nationalism. If unchecked, it gives rise to colonialism, imperialism, and globalism. It leads to death, destruction, and suffering. Hatred is the product of fear. Fear is the product of ignorance. So, what is the opposite of ignorance? Knowledge. So, what is the cure to ignorance? Knowledge.

The Prophet Muhammad, sallalahu ‘alayhi wa alihi wa salaam, made the seeking of knowledge obligatory on all Muslims, male and female. He told us to “Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave.” He told us to “Seek knowledge, even in China.” He commanded his Companions to learn foreign languages and learn about other religions and cultures.

Knowledge is of two kinds. Knowledge of Self and knowledge of God. But both are intertwined. As the Messenger of Allah, ‘alayhi salawatu wa salam, said: “Whoever knows himself knows God.” The path to the Divinity passes through our singularity. Or, to help our young people comprehend: our souls are like cell-phones that are connected to the Master Server.

We are the mirrors in which God sees Himself. When we know ourselves, we know God. When we see ourselves, we should see God. Everything that exists is a manifestation of God. Everything that you see or sense is a sign of the Supreme. Every signifier points to the Signified.

As the Quechua-Aymara Indians teach their children when they are young: “As you see others they see you.” They instill in their children that they are the same as other children and other children are the same as them. They instill a sense of unity and humanity. If I see God in Myself and Myself in God, I will see God in Others and Others in God.

The Seven Grandfather Teachings of the Métis and other First Nations consist of Respect, Love, Truth, Bravery, Wisdom, Generosity, and Humility. The first Teaching or Commandment is Respect: Respect your fellow living beings. Do not look down upon others. They are all children of the Creator. The second Teaching is Love: Love yourself so that you can love others. The third Teaching is Truth: Judge yourself before judging others. In other words, focus on your own faults before focusing on the faults of other. Forget about your qualities and work on improving your shortcomings. When dealing with others, look at their strengths instead of their weaknesses.

The fourth Teaching is bravery, the product of right mind and right action. The fifth Teaching is Wisdom which is defined as eloquently expressing one’s ideas and the ideas of others. For indigenous people, wisdom is the ability to understand others. The sixth Teaching is Generosity which means the ability to meet the needs of others and to stand together. Finally, the seventh Teaching is Humility, namely, humbling oneself before other fellow human beings.

The traditional teachings of the Eastern Woodland Indians and Métis of North America are completely compatible with the traditional teachings of Islam. They are teachings based on Tawhid that were transmitted by the prophets, messengers, and friends of the Creator who were sent to the people of Turtle Island, the continent you know as the Americas.

We need ‘ilm or knowledge. We need ma‘rifah or direct knowledge of the Divinity. We need knowledge of Self that translate in knowledge of Others. As Almighty Allah, subhanahu wa ta‘ala, makes explicitly clear in al-Qur’an al-Karim:

O humankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things). (49:13)

Humanity is called to Unity. We are called upon to be One with each other and to be One with the One. As the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “None of you has faith until you love for your neighbor what you love for yourself.” He did not say “Muslim neighbor.” He said neighbor. In short, the command applies to all human beings. As Almighty Allah asserts in the Holy Qur’an:

As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did. (6:159)

We must oppose destructive sectarianism in the Muslim Community. There can, and should, be diversity; however, there should also be unity within that diversity. As Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, is reported to have stated: “Difference of opinion in my Community is a mercy for people” [ikhtilafu ummati rahmatun li al-nas]. We must move away from destructive theologies of hatred and injustice to constructive theologies of compassion and justice.

We must build bridges between the People of the Qiblah and the People of the Book, namely, between Muslims, Jews, and Christians. Speaking of the Ahl al-Kitab, Almighty Allah has this to say:

Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (For the right): They rehearse the Signs of Allah all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration. (3:113)

Jews and Christians are not all the same. They must never be condemned categorically. We, Muslims, have been stereotyped. Like us not do to others what we do not like others to do to us. As Imam ‘Ali, karama Allahu wahjuhu, may Allah bless his glorious countenance, said: “Our enemies are not the Jews or Christians, but our enemy is our own ignorance.”

If Jews, Samaritans, Christians, Zoroastrians, and members of other faith communities only understood each other better, they could come together on common ground. In fact, this is precisely what the Qur’an commands:

Say: O People of the Book! Come to a common word between us and you: that we shall worship none but God, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside God. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are they who have surrendered (unto Him). (3:64)

The Ummah of Muhammad, the Community of the Prophet, was never the realm of exclusivism: it was always the real of pluralism. We must reconnect the Muslim masses with the true teachings of the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the Shari‘ah. We must reconnect the Muslim masses with the true teachings of spirituality: tasawwuf and ‘irfan. We must reconnect the Muslim masses with ethical principles or akhlaq. We must reconnect the Muslims masses with a true understanding of history. And, most importantly, we must teach Muslims how to think critically so that they do not succumb to the scourge of literalism, fundamentalism, and extremism.

In America, today, in 2017, we live in a culture of fear. There are those what sow, fertilize, irrigate, and cultivate hatred. You reap what you sow. You sow what you reap. If you spread hatred and violence you get served with hatred and violence. It is a sick circle. Let us help break that cycle. The only way to fight fear is through faith. The only way to fight fear is through faith. The only way to fight ignorance, is through knowledge: knowledge of Self and Knowledge of God. So, let us pray together, in the words of the Glorious Qur’an: “O my Lord! Increase me in knowledge” [Rabbi zidini ‘ilma] (20:114).

Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Imam Ilyas ‘Abd al-‘Alim Islam) is a Métis Canadian Muslim scholar who embraced Islam over thirty years ago at the age of sixteen. He has studied the Islamic sciences for over three decades at the hands of both traditional Muslim scholars as well as Western academics. He completed post-doctoral studies in Arabic in Fez and Rabat and considers Morocco to be his second home. Dr. Morrow worked as a university professor for two decades, retiring from teaching after reaching the rank of Full Professor. He has authored a vast body of work, including over one hundred academic articles and thirty scholarly books. One of his most influential studies, The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, inspired the creation of The Covenants Initiative, an international Muslim movement devoted to promoting the letters, treaties, and covenants of the Messenger of Allah with the People of the Book. An activist and advisor to world leaders, he received an ISNA Leadership Award in 2016. He can be followed @drjamorrowwww.johnandrewmorrow.com, and www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. His videos can be viewed on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube.

Takfirismo e Islamofobia: Las dos caras de la misma moneda

Por John Andrew Morrow

1° de Julio de 2017

Aunque algunos terroristas, que ya eran propensos al extremismo, han encontrado un hogar confortable en el literalismo Takfiri-Wahabí, la mayoría de ellos son, simplemente, criminales de baja estofa, traficantes de drogas, adictos, proxenetas, pedófilos, violadores y degenerados mentalmente trastornados. Son la escoria de Oriente y Occidente. Son perdedores en esta vida y en el más allá.

Los musulmanes y no musulmanes necesitan entender que los terroristas takfiritas tienen muy poco que ver con el Islam, más allá de una fachada ritualista (grotesca). Aunque a algunos de ellos les han lavado el cerebro y los adoctrinaron en el gueto salafista, los otros son simplemente mercenarios que asesinan por dinero. En la mayoría de los casos notorios, los agresores no son más que instrumentos. Los verdaderos delincuentes son los expertos que llevan adelante las operaciones clandestinas, es decir, quienes planean y ejecutan las operaciones (terroristas) de bandera falsa.

El takfirismo y la islamofobia son las dos caras de una misma moneda. Ambos son impulsados por las mismas fuerzas (del mal). El denominado terrorismo islámico está orquestado por las mismas personas que se presentan como contrarias al terrorismo islámico. El takfirismo y la islamofobia fueron creados para llevar adelante planes geopolíticos de hegemonía demoníaca.

En el Oriente Musulmán, en el norte y oeste de África, los musulmanes y no musulmanes son masacrados en nombre del Islam por personas a las que generalmente se las presenta  como musulmanas a través de un cruzada llevada adelante por los principales medios de comunicación. Y digo esto porque los supuestos perpetradores de esos crímenes “aparecen muertos” antes de que pueden ser interrogados para conocer sus motivaciones, las que aún son un misterio. La región se desestabilizó y despobló de musulmanes y no musulmanes debido a las guerras por encargo entre las fuerzas autoritarias locales y las potencias totalitarias. Para estos, cientos de miles de muertes son casi nada con tal de tener acceso a los recursos energéticos y a los contratos de reconstrucción (de lo que ellos mismos destruyen).

En el mundo occidental, los no-musulmanes (junto con algunos musulmanes) son masacrados en nombre del Islam por personas a las que se considera musulmanas. El aumento de la islamofobia y los ataques contra miles de musulmanes resulta beneficioso. Ayuda a desviar la opinión pública de los crímenes cometidos por las potencias occidentales en el país y en el extranjero. Los Estados Unidos, por ejemplo,  mataron a más de 20 millones de personas en 37 naciones desde la segunda guerra mundial.

Los no musulmanes denuncian los ataques contra los Estados Unidos atribuidos a los musulmanes, pero permanecen totalmente ajeno o incluso justifican los ataques norteamericanos contra los musulmanes. La invasión y ocupación de Irak por parte de los Estados Unidos, dio lugar a la muerte de más de un  millón de musulmanes. Otro medio millón de musulmanes perdieron la vida en la llamada “guerra contra el terrorismo” llevada adelante por Estados Unidos desde el 11 de septiembre de 2001. Según los cálculos de la mayoría de los expertos, hay aproximadamente 100.000 terroristas takfiritas en el mundo. Si el mundo occidental ha asesinado a 1,5 millones de musulmanes en su intento por erradicar los 100.000 terroristas, la “guerra contra el terrorismo” ha sido un fracaso: se ha convertido en una “guerra terrorista”.

TERRORISMO FABRICADO

Hay amenazas reales y sustanciales que no necesitan ser fabricadas  y preparadas. La violencia armada común y corriente de un “lobo solitario” es para los norteamericanos una amenaza mayor que la del “terrorismo interno” según el estudio estadístico. En el período 2002-2011 hubo aproximadamente 118.000 asesinados con armas y menos de 3.000 atribuibles al terrorismo. Por eso es que no resulta difícil entender porqué el FBI está desesperadamente decidido a crear un extremismo o terrorismo nacional, al que supuestamente derrotaría, además de ocuparse del otro terrorismo (islámico).

Individuos informados y conscientes saben muy bien que las potencias occidentales convivieron “fraternalmente” con los terroristas takfiritas desde el siglo pasado, luego de la caída del sultanato otomano, hasta ahora. Es decir, respaldaron a los criminales “educados” en las madrasas financiadas por Arabia y que se esparcen por Afganistán, Irak, Siria y Yemen. Los Imperios del Mal de la Época apoyan y se oponen a la vez a los takfiritas que llevaron (y llevan) la muerte y destrucción al mundo musulmán y cristiano.

El FBI, en su último recuento, tenía más de 1.000 miembros del ISIS bajo vigilancia en los Estados Unidos. La administración de Estados Unidos, tanto bajo Obama y Trump, se negó y niega  a capturarlos, acusarlos, enjuiciarlos y castigarlos. Mientras Washington habla oficialmente de una disposición antiislámica, permite que los delincuentes del ISIS gocen de libertad para planear ataques terroristas contra la patria. Esos elementos terroristas, conocidos y vigilados por la CIA, el FBI y la NSA, cometen una y otra vez  asesinatos en masa en suelo estadounidense.

Aunque las naciones europeas se presentan en cierta manera como críticas de los Estados Unidos, comparten claramente la misma agenda encubierta. Europol informó que según sus últimos datos en la Unión Europea había 5.000 combatientes de ISIS operando sin inconvenientes. Gente que era conocida y vigilada por las agencias de inteligencia europeas y británicas, asesinaron una y otra vez a muchas personas en Europa y el Reino Unido.

Veamos las cosas como son. Vivimos en una sociedad bajo control. Julián Assange, Chelsea Manning y Edward Snowden han dejado esto muy claro. Nuestros gobiernos reúnen información de todos nosotros. Las agencias de inteligencia, como la NSA, olfatean todo, recogen todo, saben todo, procesan todo y se aprovechan de todo. Los gobiernos de los Estados Unidos, el Reino Unido y Europa occidental saben quienes son los terroristas. De hecho, los conocen muy bien, por el nombre y el apellido.

Aunque pueda ser asombroso, sorprendente o desconcertante para la mayoría, el Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos tiene los nombres de más de cien mil terroristas en una lista secreta. Y aunque podría ser más complicado capturar a los criminales en el extranjero, es algo posible. Más aún, nada impide en verdad que los Estados Unidos detenga a mil miembros del ISIS que son ciudadanos estadounidenses y residen aquí.

En el marco de la “Lucha Contra el Extremismo Violento” (CVE), la detención y enjuiciamiento son recursos de última instancia. Para los llamados expertos dentro del gobierno de Estados Unidos, el objetivo final es ayudar a los terroristas a convertirse en miembros respetuosos de la ley y productivos para la sociedad. En vez de mostrar simpatía por las víctimas de esos subhumanos con convicciones satánicas, los personeros de la CVE se presentan piadosos con los terroristas y los comprenden porque es gente mentalmente traumatizada, estigmatizada y condenada al ostracismo por los crímenes que cometieron. O los apoyan explícitamente.

En lugar de centrarse en lo que implican, en la prevención (de sus actividades), en impedir legalmente su libre movimiento, en rehabilitarlos y reinsertarlos en la sociedad, las autoridades occidentales deben reconsiderar sus criterios ilusos y centrarse en la detención, procesamiento, encarcelamiento o ejecución (de los mismos). Si, como admiten, las agencias de inteligencia occidentales siguen a miles y miles de terroristas sanguinarios, uno debe preguntarse razonablemente: ¿a qué se debe que se nieguen a detenerlos por razones de seguridad nacional? Para los analistas de inteligencia, la respuesta es obvia: los terroristas están a su servicio. Son recursos valiosos e imbéciles útiles.

Según Fedro, “las cosas no siempre son lo que parecen; el primer aspecto engaña a muchos; lo que se ha ocultado cuidadosamente lo percibe la inteligencia de unos pocos”. Lo que estamos presenciando en el mundo es todo teatro. Estratos superpuestos de mentiras. La gente ve a las marionetas, a los títeres. Pero no ve a los titiriteros: la Mano Oculta. Si las amplísimas poblaciones  de musulmanes y no musulmanes no abren sus corazones y mentes, no se liberarán nunca del (núcleo) principal (en la sombra, los titiriteros). 

“““““

El Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Ilyas ‘Abd al-‘ Alim Islam) es nativo de la Isla de la Tortuga y un orgulloso miembro de la Nación Métis, el Michif-Otipemisiwak, el Pueblo Libre, el Pueblo sin Amos. Recibió su doctorado de la Universidad de Toronto en el año 2000. Es autor de más de 30 libros académicos, incluido el aclamado bestseller de Amazon, “Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo”.

Su sitios web es http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com y www.johnandrewmorrow.com.

Sus videos y conferencias pueden encontrarse en el canal en YouTube  “Los Pactos del Profeta”:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA.

Su cuenta de Facebook incluye @johnandrewmorrow y @covenantsoftheprophet.

Su Twitter es @drjamorrow.

Acerca de John Andrew Morrow ver:

https://crescent.icit-digital.org/authors/john-andrew-morrow

Takfirism and Islamophobia: Two Sides of the Same Coin

By John Andrew Morrow

Shawwal 07, 1438

Although some terrorists who were already prone to extremism have found a comfortable home in Takfiri-Wahhabi literalism, most of them are merely low-life criminals, drug dealers, substance abusers, pimps, pedophiles, rapists, and mentally deranged degenerates. They are the scum of the East and West. They are losers in this life and the hereafter.

Muslims and non-Muslims need to understand that takfiri terrorists have very little to do with Islam beyond a veneer of public ritualism. Although some of them have been brainwashed and indoctrinated into Ghetto or Street Salafism, others are just mercenaries out for murder and money. In most of the high-profile cases, the perpetrators were merely pawns. The real criminals were the clandestine operations experts who planned and executed the false flag operations in question.

Takfirism and Islamophobia are two sides of the same coin. They are both fueled by the same forces. So-called Islamic terror is orchestrated by the same people who are waging the war on Islamic terror. Takfirism and Islamophobia are employed to advance a geopolitical agenda that is both hegemonic and demonic.

In the Muslim East, North Africa, and West Africa, Muslims and non-Muslims are massacred in the name of Islam by people who are generally projected to be Muslims by a crusading mainstream media (since the vast majority of them are “dead by design” before they can be interrogated, their innate motivations are still a mystery). The region is destabilized and depopulated of Muslims and non-Muslims in proxy wars between authoritarian local powers and totalitarian world powers. Hundreds of thousands of deaths are a small price to pay for access to energy resources and reconstruction contracts.

In the Western world, non-Muslims (along with some Muslims) are massacred in the name of Islam by people who are once again projected to be Muslims. The rise of Islamophobia and attacks against thousands of Muslims is but a bonus. It helps to deflect public opinion from the crimes committed by Western powers both at home and abroad. The United States, for example, has killed more than 20 million people in 37 victim nations since World War II.

Non-Muslims denounce attacks against America attributed to Muslims while remaining completely oblivious or even justifying American attacks against Muslims. The US invasion and occupation of Iraq resulted in over one million Muslim deaths. Another half a million Muslims have lost their lives in the US-led “War on Terror” since September 11, 2001. According to the calculations of most experts, there are approximately 100,000 takfiri terrorists in the world. If the Western world has murdered 1.5 million Muslims in their self-professed attempt to eradicate 100,000 terrorists, the “War on Terror” has been a failure: it has become a “War of Terror.”

Threats that are real, and substantial, do not need to be manufactured and concocted. Run-of-the-mill “lone wolf” gun violence is so much of a greater threat to Americans than “domestic terror” by every statistical metric that it is almost impossible to overstate the disparity (from 2002–2011, there were approximately 118,000 gun murders in the US as compared to less than 3,000 deaths attributable to terrorism). In that regard, it is not difficult to understand why “domestic terror” and “homegrown extremism” are things the FBI is desperately determined to create.

Informed and conscientious individuals are well aware that Western powers have been in bed with takfiri terrorists for the past century, from the fall of the Ottoman Sultanate to the present, supporting the very criminals they cultivated in the Saudi-financed madrasahs peppered across Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. The Evil Empires of the Age are simultaneously supporting and opposing the controlled takfiris who have rained down death and destruction in both the Muslim world and the scorched remains of the Christian world.

At last count, the FBI had over 1,000 ISIS members under surveillance in the United States. The US administration, under both Obama and Trump, refuses to round them up, charge them, prosecute them, and punish them. And while official Washington has preached about a Muslim Ban, it continues to allow ISIS-affiliated criminals the liberty to plot and plan terror attacks against the homeland. Time and again, mass murder is committed on US soil by parties who were both known and surveilled by the CIA, FBI, and NSA.

As much as they may appear critical of the United States, European nations clearly share the same covert agenda. At last count, Europol reported that there were 5,000 ISIS fighters operating freely in the European Union. Repeatedly, mass murder is committed in Europe and the United Kingdom by parties who were both known and surveilled by European and British intelligence agencies.

Let’s face facts. We live in a surveillance society. Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, and Edward Snowden have made that abundantly clear. Our governments gather information on all of us. Intelligence agencies like the NSA sniff it all, collect it all, know it all, process it all, and exploit it all. The governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and Western Europe know who the terrorists are. In fact, they know them on a first name basis.

While it may be startling, unnerving or perplexing to most, the US State Department has the names of over 100,000 known terrorists on a secret list. And while it might be more complicated to round up criminals from abroad, it remains within the realm of possibility. What is more, nothing truly prevents the United States from detaining those 1,000 ISIS members, both citizens and residents, who are currently on our soil.

According to the framework of “Countering Violent Extremism,” arrest and prosecution are intended as a measure of last resort. For the so-called experts at the service of the US government, the final goal is helping terrorists to become law-abiding and productive members of society. Rather than show sympathy for the victims of these sub-humans and their satanic persuasion, the proponents of CVE pity the poor little terrorists, and sympathize with the fact that they are mentally traumatized, stigmatized, and ostracized for the crimes they committed or explicitly support.

Rather than focus on engagement, prevention, intervention, interdiction, rehabilitation and integration, Western authorities should reconsider their naive notions, and focus on detention, prosecution, incarceration, or execution. If, as they admit, Western intelligence agencies are tracking thousands upon thousands of bloodthirsty terrorists, why, one must reasonably ask, do they refuse to detain them for reasons of national security? For intelligence analysts, the answer is obvious: the terrorists are at their service. They are valuable assets and useful idiots.

As Phaedrus stated, “Things are not always what they seem; the first appearance deceives many; the intelligence of a few perceives what has been carefully hidden.” What we are witnessing in the world is all theater. Layers and layers of lies. People just see the puppet patsies. They fail to see the puppet-masters: the Hidden Hand. Unless they open their hearts and minds, the masses of Muslims and non-Muslims will never free themselves from the Matrix.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow (Ilyas ‘Abd al-‘Alim Islam) is an indigenous inhabitant of Turtle Island and a proud member of the Métis Nation, the Michif-Otipemisiwak, the Free People, the People Who Own Themselves. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He is the author of over 30 scholarly books, including the critically-acclaimed Amazon best-seller, The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and http://www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. His Twitter handle is @drjamorrow.

The Cyber War Against ISIS: Using Technology to Tackle Terrorists

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

I: Introduction

From a strategic standpoint, the struggle against extremism and terrorism relies upon both soft power and hard power, the proverbial carrot or the stick. Soft power is non-coercive. It attempts to change and influence social and political opinion. It seeks diplomatic solutions. Its currency is culture, political values, and foreign policies. Hard power refers to modes of coercion, including economic sanctions and direct military confrontation. If hard power seeks to coerce, soft power seeks to co-opt.

With the exception of lawful combatants under the command of state actors who abide by the articles of war, most Muslims are not in a position to participate in direct military conflicts against Takfiri terrorists in West Africa, North Africa, the Middle East, Asia or elsewhere. Such Muslims can, however, engage in social, political, and economic activities that support the war against sub-human psychopaths who pretend to be Muslims.

If a handful of ugly ISIS losers and rejects can operate a propaganda campaign from some cesspool in Syria, producing videos and publications which are then shared to tens of thousands of other fools and failures, individual Muslims, along with Islamic organizations and associations can easily set up cyber centers that are far more efficient and professional. If a small-band of overly-hairy ISIS apes can ruin the image of Islam over the course of a few years, similar-sized brotherhoods and sisterhoods of beautiful bona fide Muslims can create a new narrative.

II: Structure

In terms of the information war or cyber jihad against ISIS and extremism, the Covenants Initiative proposes the following in terms of structure:

1) Rather than have a single, centralized, cyber center, various smaller centers should operate around the word.

2) Intelligence and computer experts estimate that ISIS employs as little as half a dozen full-time internet propagandists.  With a dedicated staff of similar size, ISIS efforts could be countered. With a larger staff, an information center could flood the field, dilute, and drown out the discourse of the extremists.

4) The possibility of coordinating efforts with media giants such as Google merits serious consideration. Private sector partners could prove particularly useful. Some of our partners are working with Google to disrupt ISIS recruiting online. Such efforts should be supported and expanded.

5) At one point, possible collaborative efforts between the various anti-ISIS information centers and law enforcement/intelligence agencies can be envisioned. While some agencies have the technological tools to target ISIS and other extremists, they do not necessarily have sufficient content knowledge to fully comprehend the enemy and to determine the most effective strategies to implement. Unfortunately, many of the major powers in the world today have a history of simultaneously supporting and opposing extremist groups. Consequently, caution is the order of the day. In most cases, Muslims should take the initiative to act independently.

III: Tools 

For Muslim contemplating the creation of counter-radicalization cyber centers, the Covenants Initiative proposes the following guidelines:

1) The soft war on terror must employ all available technology, including, but not limited to email, social media, and videos.

2) The content should be multilingual. Languages need to be prioritized on the basis of their frequency in propaganda and recruitment efforts. English and Arabic come first followed by French, German, Danish, Norwegian, Dutch, Swedish, Urdu, and Russian.

3) Bots, fake friends, or computer algorithms that act like real people, should be created by the tens of thousands to disseminate anti-extremist content.

4) Using “Artificial Intelligence-information systems,” just like a spyware or a spam or pop-up detector for online browsing, an application and/or plug-in could alert the end user if the information being read or discussed in live communication is leaning in an “ISIS-friendly” direction, say with 5 color-coded levels of alert. A smart app could then offer context-sensitive suggestions to help tackle misinformation to protect untrained minds. (This feature could be packaged along with the existing McAfee or Norton type products).

5) A plagiarism check system, such as turitin.com, could be used to identify “sources” of information shared by ISIS-friendly parties, since most of the content used by ISIS for recruitment over the internet could very well be coming from the same sources. For instance, ISIS recruiters might quote certain verses or hadiths more often; this would be an easy way to detect their presence.

6) A Checklist/Scorecard/Detection system to be developed that can be used by Muslims and Non-Muslims to quickly (with some higher level of accuracy) ascertain “ISIS-friendly” content, and clear action plan on how to deal with such people/situations.

7) Just as in the cold war era, hold exercises or drills in schools, colleges, work places, temples etc. about how to deal with “ISIS-friendly” situations. Offer training in how to conduct these drills through webinars/seminars just as courses on “responsible use of social media” are currently being offered through schools/colleges.

8) Short films could be shared on YouTube showing the public how ISIS and similar groups carry on recruiting.

9) Since 13 to 27 is likely the age group in the West most often targeted by ISIS recruiters, schools/colleges should consider offering courses like “ISIS versus Islam,” which could be a 0.5 credit hour mandatory class showing how to combat ISIS.

10) Distribute free or steeply discounted tablets with free internet access in war torn countries. Let this access be restricted so that only specific content may be viewed by young people there, making sure that ISIS and other extremist content is completely blocked. These tablets could be used to offer free degree programs to the youth, allowing them to pick up skills, advance knowledge, receive therapy etc. In other words, create other opportunities so youth have less time and inclination to connect with ISIS-friendly people or recruiters.

11) Entertainment should be one factor in any anti-extremist endeavors. Comedy, for example, is a useful tool against extremism. It has been used effectively throughout the Muslim world. Mockery and parody of extremists by comedians, artists, writers, and poets helps to ridicule them in the minds of the Muslim majority. The academic approach only tends to impact educated people but the use of entertainment reaches a much broader segment of the population. Whether it is comedy, theatre, music, videos, short films or full-length features, entertainment is a powerful tool that can be used to counter the extremist narrative.

12) While Muslim volunteers would be welcome, as seeing that ISIS does not pay its propagandists, they do it for free, cyber centers could also rely upon paid staff, even hiring non-Muslim hackers as mercenaries and allies at the service of Islam.

13) Since as little as 4% of the internet is visible to ordinary users, the rest occupying the unindexed deep web which contains mostly legitimate information, and the encrypted dark web, used by bankers, swindlers, phishers, scammers, the military, illegal pornographers, pedophiles, human traffickers, drug traffickers, hit-men, terrorists etc., computer experts should take the war to the cyber battlefield and systematically attack and expose Takfiri Satanists and their sponsors in these arenas.

IV: Conclusions

There is no good without evil and no evil without good. As the Prophet Muhammad, blessings and peace be upon him, foretold, the Kharijites would resurface sporadically from the seventh century until the end of time when they will be finally vanquished by the Messiah Jesus and the Imam Mahdi. Extremists and terrorists are the catamites of the Anti-Christ. All Muslims must fight them in the name of Allah and His Messenger. And while there is a time and place for the sword, most Muslims must rely upon the word. As the Prophet Muhammad and Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq confirmed: “The ink of a scholar is more precious than the blood of a martyr.” As important as military might may be, it does not have the power to destroy a pernicious and perverse ideology. In a war of ideas, it is the most convincing and compelling idea that will ultimately win. Only true Islam can defeat fake Islam: “With Allah is the perfect proof and argument” (6:149). So raise your pens, Soldiers of Allah, and spill your ink in His Path!

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is Native North American a proud member of the Métis Nation. After taking his Shahadah at the age of 16, he became both a qualified Western academic and a Muslim ‘Alim. He has authored over thirty peer-reviewed books and over one hundred scholarly articles. His most influential work to date is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and http://www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA . His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

[See more at: http://newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/islam-versus-anti-islam–simple-strategies-to-help-counter-isis-and-other-violent-extremists/d/111282#sthash.HUuuojXp.dpuf ]

Terrorists Rape and Disembowel Pregnant Women: A Chronicle of Unspeakable Crimes

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

As if the mass rapes committed by self-professed Islamists in Syria, Iraq, and Nigeria did not suffice, I am saddened to report a long string of attacks in another nation. According to confirmed reports, as many as one hundred and forty-eight women and girls have been abducted, tortured, hanged to death or burned alive. In some cases, the victims were sexually assaulted as part of the process. In at least four cases, the victims were pregnant. Some of them had their stomachs slit open.

The first case involves a young woman who supposedly gave a glass of poisoned lemonade to a teenage extremist. Although the terrorists tried to force her to confess, she steadfastly refused and was hanged.

The second case involves a woman accused of killing a terrorist who supposedly stumbled upon some stolen goods in her home. The terrorists murdered her 15-year old son in front of her eyes although he was not involved in any theft or murder. The boy was killed to traumatize his mother. After gang-raping the accused woman, they wrapped a rope around her neck and hanged her from a bridge.

The third case involves a mentally ill woman who was accused of murdering her female employer. In festive mood, local terrorists placed in a car, tied a rope around her neck, and fastening it to a tree limb. They cheerfully drove off at high speed, strangling her to death. Her body was dragged out of the car, her eyes were blown out with pistols, and her body literally cut in half by a shower of shot-gun pellets and riffle bullets.

The fourth case deals with a seventeen-year old girl who was sexually assaulted by two terrorists who broke into her home. Her brother responded to her cries and maimed or murdered one of the rapists. The courageous young girl reported her sexual assault to authorities, believing that the culprits would be put to death according to religious law. Rather than punish the rapists, the authorities accused the victim of fornication and placed her in prison. Frustrated that the victim’s brother escaped retaliation, a dozen terrorists dragged the young girl out of prison and hanged her in his place.

The fifth case involves a brave woman who denounced the murder of her husband to the authorities. After one of their men was murdered, the terrorists started randomly murdering any men who might have been involved, including the husband of the woman in question. To punish her for speaking out, the terrorists hanged her by her feet, doused her with gasoline and oil, and set her body on fire. One terrorist took out a long knife used to disembowel animals by butchers and slit her stomach open. The baby of the victim, who was eight months pregnant, tumbled to the ground with a “little cry.” With shouts of joy, the terrorists tramped the baby to death then sprayed bullets into the blistered body of its dying mother.

The sixth case deals with two young men and two young women. The older man, who was twenty, was accused of murdering a terrorist for sexually assaulting the young women in question. They placed his testicles in the jaws of a vice and slowly closed them until he confessed to murder. Both he and his younger brother were instantly put to death. The women were to be hanged from a bridge as a warning to other women. The older woman, who was four-months pregnant from her rapist, fell from a bridge twice as she tried to escape. The final fall would prove fatal. The terrorists laughed at how difficult it was to kill such a big woman. The younger sister, who was only 14, was almost full term when she was murdered by the terrorists. Since nobody claimed to bodies, some terrorists decided to bury the remains of the young girl on the second of her murder. One witness claimed that the movements of the unborn child could still be detected.

The seventh case involves a young married woman. Armed extremists broke into her home, threatened her husband with rifle barrels to his head, and abducted her. The bloodthirsty mob of terrorists took her outside of town, stripped her naked, subjected her to mass rape, and hanged her from a tree. Thousands upon thousands of villagers witnessed the gruesomely horrific scene.

The eighth and final case involves a husband and wife who were accused of murdering a man. One thousand terrorists hunted them down and tied them to trees. Their fingers were cut off, one at a time, and their ears were chopped off. In an orgy of blood and gore, the terrorists used bore screws to extract pieces of raw, quivering, flesh from their arms, legs, and bodies, which they then kept as souvenirs. If one wandered through town, human remains in jars of alcohol were proudly displayed on the windowsills of terrorists.

This war against women, waged by misogynistic men, has cost the lives of nearly one-hundred-and-fifty daughters, wives, and mothers. The crimes were committed in Syria and Iraq between 2012 and 2017. The perpetrators of these atrocities all belonged to the same race. They all belonged to the same religion. Their actions were widely supported by religious and political leaders. The perpetrators were all Arabs and Muslims. The victims were Jamilah Salim, Layla Nur, Naylah Badawi, Maryam Salaam, Mariyyah Samir, Habibah Halabi, Ruh Husayn, and Karimah Hindi. Surely, Islam and Muslims are to blame.

In reality, the crimes were committed in the United States of America in the early decades of the 20thcentury. The perpetrators of these atrocities were all white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant Christians. They acted with the active and passive support of judges, police officers, and politicians. The victims were all African American women: Jennie Steers, Laura Nelson, Anne Barksdale, Marie Scott, Mary Turner, Miss Holbert, Maggie Houze, Alma Houze, and Cordella Stevenson. White Christian Americans: you have been served your own bitter medicine. Let it be a lesson to you all.

“How can we, white Christian Americans, be held accountable for crimes that we never committed?” you may ask. You cannot and neither can we as Muslims. “Well, why don’t you Muslims speak out against terrorism?” We do, but what about you? Why didn’t your ancestors speak out against slavery, segregation, racism, discrimination, and mass lynching? Slavery in America lasted from 1501 to 1865. Why did it take your good Christian ancestors three hundred and fifty years to stop it? Segregation lasted until 1964. Why did it take your Christian parents and grandparents nearly a century to put an end to such a despicable and dehumanizing practice?

If Islam is to blame for every crime committed by Muslims then Christianity is to blame for every crime committed by Christians. African Americans, Catholic Americans, and Native Americans were murdered, in the name of Christ, with crosses blazing, by the thousands. Millions upon millions of human beings were murdered by Christians during colonialism, imperialism, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Afghan War, and the Iraq War. The criminals self-identified as Christians. They attended church services. They received the blessings of army chaplains. They even identified some of the conflict in question as Crusades, Christian holy wars against non-Christians. So how dare you, self-professed Caucasian Christians, scapegoat all Muslims and lay the burden of blame on the religion of Islam. Learn something from the Christ you claim to follow: “Do not do unto others as you would not them to do unto you.”

As horrific and hard-hitting as these accounts may be, they serve as a sober reminder that the human condition is the same in all places and among all people regardless of their religious background. Since history is written to serve the interests of people in power, the barbarity of white Christians has always been minimized, including the savagery of the First and Second World Wars, while the barbarity of black Africans, Amerindians, and Asians, who were defending themselves from white aggression, has always been exaggerated. Whether it was in Europe, Africa, Asia or the Americas, white, so-called Christians, committed crimes beyond belief, both maliciously and hypocritically, “in the name of Jesus.”

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an Amerindian with Canadian and American citizenship. He received his PhD from the University of Toronto in the year 2000. He worked as an Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor of Foreign Languages for over a decade and a half at Park University, Northern State University, Eastern New Mexico University, the University of Virginia, and Ivy Tech Community College. He is the author of over thirty academic books in the fields of Hispanic, Islamic, and Indigenous Studies. A public figure and activist, he lectures all around the globe and acts as an advisor to world leaders. In recognition for his accomplishments, Dr. Morrow received an ISNA Interfaith Leadership Award in 2016. He may be followed on Twitter at @drjamorrow. His websites are www.johnandrewmorrow.com as well as www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. His videos can be viewed on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube.

Los Pactos del Profeta Frente a la Inquisición Española: Una Refutación a la Revisión Realizada por José Carlos Martínez Carrasco

25 de mayo de 2017

SHAFAQNA – El último crítico en confrontar Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo antes de la publicación de El Islam y la Gente del Libro es José Carlos Martínez Carrasco, quien publicó una revisión de la versión española, que apareció bajo el título El minarete y el campanario: los pactos del Profeta Mahoma con los cristianos del mundo. Lo hizo en Miscelánea de estudios árabes y hebraicos (Vol. 66: 348-351) del corriente año.

Más que enfocar cuestiones de contenido, como lo haría cualquier revisor de buena reputación, Martínez Carrasco acomete un ataque personal poniendo en duda mis credenciales y manifiesta que nunca ha sido más importante conocer al autor antes de conocer su trabajo. Alega que la traducción al español de Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo “no es un estudio académico al uso, con una metodología acorde con el campo de estudios al que a priori pertenecería.”

Martínez Carrasco afirma que la revisión de mi CV demuestra que la formación académica que poseo tiene poco o nada que ver con el área de Estudios Árabes e Islámicos. Observa, con razón, que soy un profesor de lenguas extranjeras, un experto en la lengua española y estudios hispánicos y que completé una tesis doctoral sobre La Presencia Indígena en Rubén Darío y Ernesto Cardenal (2000). También afirma que mi interés en un campo que es tan diferente al de área de competencia profesional es el resultado de mi conversión al Islam a la edad de 16 años, algo que me lleva a profundizar los estudios relativos a la tradición islámica, tanto dentro como fuera del mundo académico.

Según Martínez Carrasco yo manifiesto que el Imam ‘Ali dijo a los Jariyitas: “En lo que dicen hay verdad y hay mentira.” Es cierto que terminé una licenciatura en español y francés, lengua y literatura, junto con una M.A. (Maestría) y un Ph.D. (Doctorado) en literatura hispanoamericana. Nunca oculté mis logros académicos.

El motivo por el que completé las especialidades de grado y posgrado en el Departamento de Español de la Universidad de Toronto se debió a que era el único lugar donde podía especializarme en los tres campos que más me fascinaban: estudios hispánicos, estudios nativos y estudios islámicos.

Como hispanista estudié el idioma y la lingüística española. Tomé cursos de historia española y logré una gran instrucción respecto de la influencia árabe en la lengua española. Como parte de mi formación, estudié cultura, historia y civilización española, incluidos los casi 800 años de gobierno árabe musulmán en al-Andalus. Por lo tanto, estoy perfectamente versado en la historia de la España islámica.

Obviamente, estudié literatura española y la influencia recibida de la literatura árabe e islámica. Esto se llama literatura comparada. Es lo que hacen eruditos como Luce López-Baralt. No se pueden comparar dos tradiciones literarias a menos que se sea experto en ambas. En consecuencia, no solo estoy muy bien preparado en literatura española sino que también lo estoy en literatura árabe. En consecuencia, soy hispanista y arabista.

Siendo estudiante de grado fui introducido a la literatura morisca por el distinguido Dr. Ottmar Hegyi. Fue él quien me animó a entrar en la escuela de posgrado y terminar una tesis sobre literatura aljamiada. Pasé más de una década investigando el tema en la preparación de mi tesis pero mi mentor, el profesor Hegyi, se retiró antes. Ese trabajo Shi’ismo en el Magreb y en al-Andalus, se publicará en un futuro cercano. Lo investigué y redacté mientras era estudiante de posgrado en la Universidad de Toronto.

Desde el retiro de mi mentor –una eminencia en literatura Aljamiada-morisca y la influencia del Islam en la literatura española– me quedé sin director de tesis. Entonces decidí completar una tesis sobre La presencia e influencia islámica en la América precolombina, una obra que relacionaba los estudios hispánicos e islámicos. Completé las investigaciones necesarias y escribí una parte importante del trabajo para enterarme que un sector de eruditos no lo consideró “políticamente correcto.” Sostuvieron de manera dogmática la idea de que antes de Colón nadie había entrado en contacto con las Américas. Mi trabajo, en su opinión, era revisionista histórico. Estoy seguro que padecieron ataques de ansiedad al establecerse que los escandinavos ya habían andado por estas tierras en el siglo x. Lance aux Meadows (en la isla de Terranova) debe haber sido una pesadilla para ellos. Aunque creo que algunos musulmanes y los nacionalistas negros exageran groseramente los reclamos de los contactos de africanos y árabes con las Américas, no dudo que algunos de los mismos cruzaron el Atlántico antes que Colón.

Decidí entonces seleccionar un tema aceptable para todos los miembros de la Facultad en el Departamento: La presencia indígena en Rubén Darío y Ernesto Cardenal. Este tema vinculaba dos elementos: el mundo hispano y el mundo indígena. Y aunque la conexión islámica no se presente evidente a los neófitos, cabe señalar que la obra de Ernesto Cardenal está influenciada por el sufismo y el Islam político. El hecho de que me especializase en la obra de Ernesto Cardenal explica mi redacción de Religión y revolución: el Islam espiritual y político en Ernesto Cardenal, una obra que sólo podía realizar una persona especialista en literatura hispánica e islámica.

Martínez Carrasco podría argumentar que yo carezco de preparación académica formal en el campo de la religión o estudios islámicos, pero no es así. En la Universidad de Toronto cursé filosofía, estudios religiosos y estudios islámicos. Uno de mis profesores fue el académico egipcio-armenio cristiano Dr. Solomon Alexander Nigossian, quien dictó cátedra en el Departamento de Religión de la Universidad de Toronto durante décadas y es autor de muchas obras sobre Islam. Fue él quien me enseñó la metodología empleada en el campo de los estudios islámicos y religiosos.

Martínez Carrasco tampoco menciona que completé estudios postdoctorales en árabe en varios institutos de idiomas en los Estados Unidos y Marruecos, por lo que no soy únicamente profesor de español sino también de francés y árabe. Fui quien concibió, planificó la totalidad del programa de árabe para una Universidad estatal, incluidas todas las ofertas de curso. Más aún, fui contratado por la Universidad de Virginia para enseñar estudios religiosos. Impartí un curso sobre Ibn Battutah, así como un curso sobre el Islam para su semestre en el Programa de Mar. Por último, todos mis cursos en cultura y civilización española incluyen un componente sobre la historia de al-Andalus.

Aunque Martínez Carrasco no le da importancia, también realicé el ciclo completo de estudios islámicos tradicionales de manera independiente y de la mano de eruditos musulmanes sunitas, shiitas y sufíes. Soy ampliamente reconocido como ustad [profesor de Islam], sheik [líder religioso musulmán], ‘alim [erudito religioso islámico] y hakim [fitoterapeuta o entendido en hierbas islámico]. No se trata de nominaciones asumidas con arrogancia sino otorgadas por mis pares.

El Imam Ilyas Fawzy de la Universidad al-Qarawiyyin afirmó respecto a mi persona: “su conocimiento de Islām es profunda.” Al-Sheij al-Habib ‘Ali al-Jifri dijo: “El Doctor John es extraordinariamente sólido en estudios islámicos.” Soy convocado para revisar obras de juristas musulmanes. Los responsables religiosos me consideran una autoridad religiosa. Esto debería ser suficiente como prueba de mis calificaciones. No considero necesario citar más elogios a mi persona de mis colegas y pares académicos. No obstante, Martínez Carrasco podría afirmar que las personas citadas son clérigos y no académicos. Pero todos saben que hay sacerdotes, rabinos y muftis eruditos.

Además, estoy muy lejos de ser el único que maneja los estudios hispánicos e islámicos. Hay otros eruditos en la materia: Ottmar Hegyi, Luce López-Baralt, María Rosa Menocal, J.T. Cutillas-Ferrer, María Luisa Lugo Acevedo, Francisco Marcos Marín, T.B. Irving, L.P. Harvey, Gerald Albert Wiegers, A.G. Chejne, Vincent Barletta, Karima Bouras y muchos más que se especializan en la literatura morisca-aljamiada y de la España islámica. Yo soy un aljamiadista y eso me hace hispanista, islamólogo y arabista. 

De todos modos, Martínez Carrasco repite: “no considero El minarete y el campanario… sea un estudio se ciña a criterios científicos, sino que se trata más bien de una apología religiosa cubierta de una retorica pseudo-histórica.” En otras palabras, el hecho de que yo sea musulmán me excluye automáticamente de ser un académico objetivo basado en una metodología científica. Esto es lisa y llanamente intolerancia. Es un decreto discriminatorio dictado desde un podio de prejuicios. Si ser musulmán me descalifica de escribir objetivamente sobre el Islam, ser no musulmán descalifica a Martínez Carrasco de escribir sobre Islam. Se trata de una persona que hace juicio de valores motivados en sentimientos y manifiesta hostilidad hacia el Islam.

Después de describir brevemente el contenido del libro, Martínez Carrasco afirma que “Ya desde las primeras páginas del libro, queda patente el objetivo que J. A. Morrow persigue con El minarete y el campanario…: lavar la imagen de los musulmanes en América y defenderse de quienes los tachan de extremistas”

Martínez Carrasco afirma que Los Pactos del Profeta es una respuesta a quienes acusan a Muhammad de ser un asesino sangriento que expande el Islam por medio de la espada. Por esta razón, afirma al crítico español, yo me centro exclusivamente en los Pactos con los Cristianos en tanto soy mucho más crítico de los judíos. Al parecer, eso se debería a que vivo en “un ambiente eminentemente cristiano.”

No soy un apologista. No tengo una agenda. Soy un académico. Estudio fuentes y dejo que hablen por sí mismas. Escribí y me referí a la gestación de Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo. Martínez Carrasco debería haber realizado algunas investigaciones antes de hacer tales acusaciones engañosas. Aunque intentó a su manera verificar mis antecedentes y juzgó mi libro, no pudo darse cuenta que los pactos del Profeta con los judíos, samaritanos y zoroastrianos me interesan tanto como los pactos con los cristianos.

Martínez Carrasco se queja de que “[t]odo el libro gira en torno a la idea del Islam como religión de paz, aglutinadora y superadora de los monoteísmos anteriores.” Y en base a eso argumenta que Héctor Horacio Manzolillo y yo destacamos la necesidad de un entendimiento interreligioso frente a nuevos desafíos, como el ecogenocidio que enfrenta el planeta. En otras palabras, Manzolillo y yo somos, en realidad, islámicos dominionistas (Nota del traductor: Dominionismo es un término usado para describir la filosofía de cristianos conservadores políticamente activos que, según se cree, buscan ejercer influencia o control sobre el gobierno civil secular a través de la acción política, especialmente en los EEUU, y cuyo objetivo es el establecimiento de una nación gobernada por cristianos, o de una nación gobernada por una comprensión cristiana conservadora de la ley bíblica. El uso y la aplicación de esta terminología es controvertida y existe un debate en curso acerca de la utilidad de este término). Dice Martínez Carrasco:

A pesar de ese afán por ir más allá de las diferencias entre cristianos, judíos y musulmanes, las páginas objeto de análisis esconden un mensaje un tanto peligroso sobre el que hay que llamar la atención. Quizás convenga recordar que se trata de una obra escrita por un converso al Islam. Subyace una carga ideológica que culpa de todos los males al materialismo de la civilización occidental, que se contrapone a la espiritualidad de un mundo árabe tomado (erróneamente) como un bloque homogéneo. Esta idea convierte a Morrow, a su pesar y de manera inconsciente, en rehén de una visión colonialista que hace de los árabes un pueblo ahistórico, ajeno a los cambios experimentados en el mundo a lo largo de los siglos, que los mantiene en un estado de «inocencia».

Nunca he visto tal interpretación retorcida en mi vida. ¿Desde cuando confundo árabes con musulmanes? La distinción la hago muy claramente. Soy el último que podría idealizar a los árabes y musulmanes. Acepto absolutamente al Profeta Muhammad. Respeto a otras autoridades del Islam clásico. Y fustigo a cualquiera que no adhiera a los principios éticos primordiales.

¿Qué tipo de persona considera que los pactos del Profeta con la Gente del Libro son peligrosos? Por el contrario, sostengo que los que se les oponen son particularmente peligrosos. Y en tanto yo culpo a Occidente por sus pecados y deficiencias, también soy el primero en alabarlo. Y lo mismo se aplica para el Este, el Norte y el Sur. Digo lo que es. Alabo cuando corresponde y critico cuando me veo obligado a hacerlo. Es mi deber como estudioso y académico responsable.

Martínez Carrasco alega que la crítica de Manzolillo a la democracia, utilizada como una panacea, es una indicio del tono general de la obra. ¿Cómo es posible que haga de un comentario en el prefacio algo valedero para lo esencial de la obra? Tal comentario no tiene que ver con la médula del trabajo. Al parecer, el crítico le dio tanta importancia al mismo, que pide a los lectores que (en base a eso) saquen “sus propias conclusiones.” En otras palabras, Morrow y Manzolillo se oponen a la democracia. Los juicios del crítico apestan a kilómetros de distancia.

Si Martínez Carrasco llevó a cabo la investigación adecuada, sabría perfectamente que Manzolillo y yo apoyamos firmemente la democracia participativa y representativa y que nos oponemos a toda forma de dictadura y despotismo. El hecho de criticar a la seudo-democracia de los antiguos griegos y romanos y las democracias de hoy que están controladas por corporaciones no nos hace anarqistas o totalitarios en nuestros criterios políticos.

Los comentarios de Manzolillo ciertamente tocaron una fibra sensible que a Martínez Carrasco afectan como un hueso en la garganta. Afirma que en lo esencial el libro consiste en una comparación entre las democracias occidentales, liberales y parlamentarias con el Islam a fuer de una entidad político-religioso. Manifiesta el crítico:

Argumenta J. A. Morrow que la democracia grecorromana era esclavista y profundamente desigual, mientras que el Islam, desde sus inicios, se mostró contrario a la esclavitud y propició la igualdad de todos, creyentes o no, independientemente de la edad o el género, lo que lleva inmediatamente, según este autor, a la superioridad del Islam frente a las democracias. Quizás olvide que, a día de hoy, se sabe que en el mundo islámico pervive el tráfico de esclavos, si bien se desconoce su volumen; como también quizás olvide Morrow que puede escribir libros como este gracias a los derechos que le garantiza un sistema tan pernicioso como la democracia.

No tengo la más mínima duda que la revelación del Islam promulgada por el Profeta Muhammad es muy superior a las llamadas democracias de los griegos y romanos. De hecho, cuando a los judíos, samaritanos, cristianos de Oriente Medio, norte de África y la Península Ibérica se les da a elegir entre los gobiernos islámico y bizantino de entonces, la mayoría optó por el régimen islámico, a pesar de que había pocos o ningún gobernante de los musulmanes que aplicase los estándares establecidos por el Mensajero de Allah. Así y todo, con sus deficiencias, el sistema de gobierno aplicado en las tierras musulmanas garantizaba los derechos, las libertades y la protección que recién emergió en el mundo Occidental en el siglo XX.

Si Martínez Carrasco es sincero, debería distinguir entre las enseñanzas del Islam predicada por el Profeta y las prácticas no islámicas de pseudo-musulmanes. El Profeta Muhammad nunca poseyó esclavos. Nunca animó a sus compañeros a que posean esclavos. Dijo que los traficantes de esclavos eran lo peor de la raza humana. Promovió e incluso impuso la liberación de los esclavos. Él y sus compañeros liberaron decenas de miles de esclavos. Basándose en una investigación de las primeras fuentes, se estima que liberaron 39.000 seres humanos esclavizados.

En lugar de atacar el Islam por el hecho de que algunos bárbaros en lugares como Sudán, Chad y Malí apañan la esclavitud, podría mirarse en el espejo de Occidente, donde las mujeres y niños son esclavizados en enormes cantidades. En los Estados Unidos se venden para la esclavitud sexual más de 100.000 niñas por año. En Europa los números son parecidos. La esclavitud sexual que practica el ISIS concita una gran atención de la prensa. Sin embargo, es un pálido reflejo de lo que abarca la esclavitud sexual en las democracias occidentales. Si bien en parte del Africa negra hay esclavos, esa situación prácticamente no se ha modificado desde la época medieval. Pero la esclavitud sexual en Europa Occidental y en los Estados Unidos –autoproclamados bastiones de la democracia y de los derechos humanos– es bastante distinta, independientemente de que ambas, las de Oriente y de Occidente, son absolutamente condenables.

Martínez Carrasco afirma: “[c]on estas premisas como punto de partida, es legítimo pensar que no se trata de un estudio científico acerca de unos hechos históricos en base a evidencias textuales. Por el contrario, lo que articula Morrow es un discurso netamente religioso, que no busca establecer un conocimiento más o menos riguroso del pasado, sino una Verdad teológica, con todo lo que ello implica.”

Martínez Carrasco insiste en que en el discurso teológico de Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo es evidente el uso incorrecto –por ignorancia– de la terminología histórica, que se interpreta continuamente de manera religiosa. El crítico afirma que mi abordaje de las fuentes islámicas casi siempre es acrítica y que cualquier hipótesis que cuestione el Canon islámico se desestima rápidamente porque sería producto de “eruditos espiritualmente inseguros.”

Aunque no tengo un título en historia, estoy formado en metodología histórica. Sé muy bien cómo manejar las fuentes. Cientos de académicos, incluidos historiadores, han elogiado y aprobado los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo. Por supuesto, estos hechos son ignorados por algunos cavernícolas españoles. Y en el caso de Carrasco, non capire que los pactos muhammadianos no forman parte del Canon islámico. Fueron ignorados. Fueron suprimidos. Fueron extirpados. Y ahora están siendo recuperados. Si el crítico se tomó la molestia de leer el libro en su totalidad, en lugar de centrarse en unas pocas palabras del traductor, sabría que no defiendo el status quo. Por el contrario, sostengo que los pactos del Profeta fueron ocultados por los supuestos dirigentes musulmanes que querían libertad de acción y no tomar verdaderamente en consideración los principios proféticos. En verdad, soy implacable en mi crítica al literalismo, al fundamentalismo y al extremismo.

Martínez Carrasco afirma que yo añoro “la «edad de oro» que representa el período profético durante el que Muhmmad ejerció el gobierno; un Muhammad presentado como un hombre de paz, anti-colonialista, pero que al mismo tiempo se muestra como gran estratega militar.”

Ni Manzolillo ni yo añoramos una “edad de oro” del Islam. No somos salafistas que sueñan con una imaginaria, legendaria y mítica utopía musulmana del siglo VII. Valoramos los aspectos positivos. Criticamos los aspectos negativos. Nos damos cuenta que nada es perfecto. Puesto que vivimos en el presente y planificamos para el futuro, no vivimos en el pasado. Sin embargo, estudiamos el pasado para obtener conocimiento, evitar errores anteriores y adoptar estrategias que resultarían exitosas. No pretendemos imitar. Tratamos de no reproducir. Buscamos derivar principios y aplicarlos.

En cuanto a Muhammad, el hombre era completo, polifacético. Era tanto un místico como hombre de pueblo. Era analfabeto y a la vez erudito. Era poderoso pero humilde. Podía transmitir conceptos tanto a estudiosos especializados como a simples pastores. Era cariñoso y compasivo pero podía ser feroz en la batalla. La guerra y la paz van de la mano. Si quieres la paz, lo mejor es que te prepares para la guerra. Se trata de la realidad. El propio Profeta Muhammad dijo: “sonrío y lucho.” Vino con la palabra y con la espada. Pero se trataba de la espada de la justicia social.

Continuando con el mismo postulado ridículo, Martínez Carrasco advierte: “El discurso queda enmascarado tras una pretendida equidistancia entre la «leyenda negra» y la «leyenda rosa.” Pero lo que realmente ofrece es una actualización de la segunda adornada con una argumentación que no se sostiene ante un análisis crítico, como la afirmación de que fue Muhammad quien elaboró el dogma de la Inmaculada Concepción.”

A menos que se esté familiarizado con la historia hispánica, la referencia a la “leyenda negra” y la “leyenda rosa” no será comprendida por la mayoría de los lectores. En el contexto hispano, la “leyenda negra” se refiere a las afirmaciones que los españoles cometieron genocidio contra los habitantes indígenas de las Américas. En el contexto musulmán, la “leyenda negra” mencionado por Martínez Carrasco sería la demonización del Islam y los musulmanes, algo común a lo largo de la historia europea, mientras que la “leyenda rosa” es la presentación del Islam –particularmente en la Península Ibérica–como una especie de “Edad de oro.”

En la mente del crítico, Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo es simplemente una versión reenvasada de la “leyenda rosa” que no resiste el análisis valorativo. Una vez más, si el crítico realmente leyó o en verdad entendió lo leído, sabría que elogio los principios y las protecciones que aplicó el Profeta en sus pactos con los judíos y los cristianos, a las que  considero deslumbrantes, impactantes. Y estoy positivamente asombrado por los líderes musulmanes que se ciñeron a ellos. En resumen, son la prueba de fuego que utilizo al evaluar la islamicidad de los llamados gobernantes islámicos.

En cuanto a la afirmación de Martínez Carrasco respecto a que yo dije que fue Muhammad quien elaboró el dogma de la Inmaculada Concepción, dejo que mi libro hable por sí mismo: “Aunque la mayoría de los musulmanes y los cristianos no son conscientes de esto, la primera persona en formular la doctrina de la Inmaculada Concepción fue Muhammad, algo reconocido por teólogos tanto católicos como protestantes (Grassi 74). Algunos pueden afirmar que el Profeta había aprendido tales doctrinas de los cristianos orientales cuando, en realidad, fueron ellos los que las aprendieron de él” (13). Pero, como cualquier lector inteligente observa, no soy yo quien hace la afirmación sino M. Grassi (Alfio) en su Charte Turque ou Organisation religieuse, civile et militaire de l ‘empire ottoman, publicada en París en 1826. Yo digo, simplemente, que hay una fuerte evidencia que apoya esta afirmación. No obstante, el comentario en cuestión es totalmente periférico en el estudio como un todo. ¿Estúpido o artero? Citando a Carrasco, dejaré que los lectores “saquen sus propias conclusiones.”

Para concluir lo que sería su revisión islamofóbica, Martínez Carrasco escribe: “El minarete y el campanario… habría que inscribirlo en el extremo opuesto a las obras de aquéllos revisionistas que cargan las tintas sobre los aspectos negativos del Islam. Persigue un objetivo legítimo, pero lo hace a costa de falsear el pasado, lo cual no conduce a un mejor conocimiento de la realidad islámica, sino a su conversión en una suerte de «paraíso perdido», en una utopía difícilmente realizable, repitiendo el tópico de la escasa capacidad de adaptarse a los cambios por parte de los musulmanes, siempre pendientes de un pasado que los paraliza.”

Aunque prácticamente no concuerdo con nada de lo que dice Martínez Carrasco, me siento orgulloso en coincidir en que Los Pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los Cristianos del Mundo es una obra muy alejada de las revisionistas, es decir, la de académicos come papeles, musulmanes o no, decididos a destruir los fundamentos del Islam. Lejos de “falsificar el pasado”, lo ilumino intensamente, lo revivo y lo reivindico. Presento el Islam auténtico: como era, como es y como siempre debería ser. No será el “Islam” de los saudíes, los salafistas, los fundamentalistas, los extremistas, los literalistas, los absolutistas o los liberales, las feministas y los reformistas. Pero sí es el Islam del Profeta: sin condicionamientos, añadidos o peros.

En cuanto a la crasa generalización de que los musulmanes, en general, son incapaces de adaptarse al cambio y la modernidad, promueve estereotipos impropios de un erudito de categoría y renombre. Los musulmanes enfrentan muchos desafíos. Han luchado frente al colonialismo e imperialismo. Sufren la intervención extranjera en sus asuntos internos. Sufren el hedor que asfixia el espíritu, proveniente del libertinaje occidental, el materialismo, el hedonismo y el nihilismo. Y no obstante sobreviven, prosperan y están llenos de aspiraciones. Independientemente de lo “retrógrado” que puedan ser muchos musulmanes y a pesar de sus defectos morales, me enorgullece que representan el único gran grupo que niega someterse al secularismo militante, en tanto otras poblaciones se arrodillan precipitadamente con entusiasmo y ansias a los pies de Mammón.

Creo que el mayor punto débil de Martínez Carrasco es que se centra en la crítica a las intenciones del autor y del traductor. Por eso mismo se centra bastante en el prólogo. Pero aparte de mencionar los capítulos del libro y de qué trata cada uno, no hace ninguna crítica, ningún comentario, no aporta nada -ya sea a favor o en contra- a lo escrito en el libro. En vez de juzgar la obra juzga la intencion con la que se redactó la obra. O sea, a él no le importa la obra, no le importa la documentación, sino solamente desprestigiar la misma en base a las supuestas intenciones que tendría el trabajo, pero no por lo que dice el trabajo sino por lo que escribe Manzolillo y por que Morrow se convirtió al Islam a los16 años. Además, al proceder así es él quien muestra sus verdaderas intenciones.

Y ya que Carlos Martínez Carrasco comenzó su reseña del libro cuestionando mis acreditaciones, es lógico que concluya mi refutación con una revisión de sus títulos o diplomas. O falta de ellos. El señor Carrasco es “licenciado en historia por la Universidad de Granada.” O sea, no tiene una maestría ni un doctorado; no tiene un posgrado. El señor Carrasco es “investigador del Centro de Estudios Bizantinos, Neogriegos y Chipriotas.” En otras palabras, es un investigador en esos campos pero no tiene preparación académica formal en estudios religiosos, árabes o islámicos. El señor Carrasco no es profesor adjunto. Y sin duda, no es profesor titular. Simplemente, es adjunto en el Departamento de Historia Medieval de la Universidad de Granada. En cuanto a sus logros académicos, es autor de diez artículos, dos reseñas de libros y una conferencia. También escribió una novela.

Si Carlos Martínez Carrasco quiere criticar mi trabajo, que complete una maestría y doctorado en estudios religiosos, estudios árabes y estudios islámicos. En concreto, en cualquier grado superior de un campo relacionado en las humanidades. Y como también soy sheij, además de ser académico, permitamos que el señor Carrasco también se convierta en sacerdote católico o, si prefiere, en rabino. De ese modo, si no puede criticar mi trabajo como académico, por lo menos podrá criticarlo como clérigo. Y mientras se ocupa de eso, que se supere en las filas académicas convirtiéndose en profesor adjunto, profesor asociado y luego full professor o, como se denomina en España, Profesor Titular. Debería publicar también un centenar de artículos académicos, presentar docenas de revisiones bibliográficas de sus pares y realizar conferencias. Entonces y solo entonces José Carlos Martínez Carrasco sería uno de mis pares y estaría calificado para la revisión de mis libros. Y Dios es Justo; Todo lo Oye, Todo lo Ve.

El Doctor John Andrew Morrow es una autoridad religiosa, un académico y un activista. Ha publicado numerosos libros en el campo de los Estudios Islámicos. Su obra más elogiada por la crítica es El minarete y el campanario : los pactos del Profeta Muhammad con los cristianos del mundo. 

La cuenta de Twitter del Doctor John Andrew Morrow es @drjamorrow. Sus cuentas de Facebook son @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. Sus sitios de internet incluyenwww.johnandrewmorrow.com as well as www.covenantsoftheprophet.com. Sus videos pueden verse en la siguiente estación: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA

Islam versus Anti-Islam: Simple Strategies to Help Counter ISIS and Other Violent Extremists

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow for New Age Islam

25 May 2017

Introduction

Preventing, combating, and countering radicalization is a complex matter without simple solutions. Consequently, a multi-pronged approach must be employed. The information war against Takfirism represents but a single piece of the puzzle. Extremism, fanaticism, and terrorism are simply symptoms of a broader problem. Unless all the causes are addressed simultaneously, subject to certain parameters, the war against Takfirism is ultimately bound to fail.

Whether it is ISIS, Boko Haram, al-Shabab or other similar groups, terroristic nihilism feeds on ignorance, poverty, as well as socio-economic and political injustice. There is no band-aid solution to these problems. There are no short-term solutions. They require long-term strategies.

Ignorance needs to be addressed through education. While some Muslim countries have excellent secular education, their religious education is lacking or indoctrinates students into intolerant, radical, and violent interpretations of Islam. If Islamic education is to be provided in the Muslim and non-Muslim world, it is traditional, civilisational, and classical Islam that is to be taught, not Salafism/Wahhabism/Takfirism/Jihadism/Islamism or Political Islam.

Strategies

In the struggle and information war against extremism and terrorism, we propose that the following strategies be adopted:

1) All efforts should be rooted in traditional, civilisational, and classical Islam. The content should promote an Islam without extremes. It should present the full spectrum of Islamic opinion. It should encourage Muslims to move from the fringes, restore the balance, and stick to the center.

2) The message should promote Islamic unity, oppose sectarianism, and encourage Taqrib or rapprochement between the various schools of thought. This is not to suggest that all schools of thought should merge; however, it should be stressed that diversity and difference is a blessing. There can be unity without uniformity. There can be unity within diversity.

3) Since the focus is on presenting Universal Islam, an Islam that embraces a full range of positions, the Muslim faith should not be promoted as a foreign faith, but the last chapter of a Divine Message that started eons ago. It may be time to look at Faith and Religion, not from a religious perspective, but from God’s viewpoint.

4) Promote The Study Qur’an, edited by Sayyid Hossein Nasr, as it provides a full spectrum of interpretations of the Qur’an. This can counter the one-sided, absolutist, approach taken by religious extremists.

5) Spread the traditional teachings of Islam to counter so-called Political Islam.

6) Disseminate the Constitution of Medina. Islamists claim that they wish to create an Islamic State; however, they ignore the fact that the Prophet Muhammad produce the first political constitution in the history of humanity, an inclusive and pluralistic Political Charter that granted equality to all citizens regardless of religion, race, or gender.

7) Disseminate the covenants and treaties that the Prophet Muhammad concluded with Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian communities. These include the Treaty of Maqnah, the Treaty of Najran, the Covenant with Monks from Mount Sinai, the Covenant with the Christians of Persia, the Covenant with the Assyrian Christians, the Covenant with the Armenian Christians, the Covenant with the Coptic Christians, the Covenant with the Syriac Orthodox Christians, and the Covenant with the Parsis, among others.

8) Disseminate the covenants that the Caliphs and Sultans concluded with non-Muslim communities. These include the Covenant of Abu Bakr with the Christians, the Covenant of ‘Umar with the Christians of Jerusalem, the Covenant of ‘Ali with the Christians, the Covenant of Salah al-Din with the Christians, the Covenant of Sultan Mehmet with the Franciscan Catholics of Bosnia…

9) Familiarize Muslims, and non-Muslims, with the over three hundred initiatives against extremism and radicalization, including:

ISNA’s Muslim Code of Honor?

A Common Word between Us and You

Shoulder to Shoulder

Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa against Terrorism and Suicide Bombing

Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa against ISIS

The Covenants Initiative

The Genocide Initiative

Shaykh Bin Bayyah’s Fatwa against ISIS

The Letter to Baghdadi

The Amman Message

The Statement by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation

The Fatwa from Al-Azhar

The Statement from the Arab League

The Fatwa of Mufti Mehmet Gormez

The Statement of CAIR

The Statement of the Muslim Council of Great Britain

The Fatwa of the Fiqh Council of ISNA

The Joint Sunni-Shiite Fatwa by 100 UK Imams

The Statement from the Muslim Public Affairs Council

The Statements from Nahdlatul Ulema from Indonesia

Shaykh Yaqubi’s Refuting ISIS

The Muslim Youth Group’s Jihad Against Extremism

The Statement by Dr. John Andrew Morrow

The Mass Fatwa by 100,000 Muslim Clerics from India, Bangladesh, and beyond

The Marrakesh Declaration

The Grozny Declaration

10) Expose the historical and current ties between “radical jihadis” and Western imperialists; namely, the use of the Wahhabis by the British Empire in order to undermine the Ottoman Empire; the use of “Jihadists” by all parties in the First and Second World Wars; particularly, the ties of so-called “Islamists” with the Third Reich during the Second World War; the CIA-support of the “Mujahidin” and al-Qaedah in Afghanistan; the CIA-support of “Jihadists” in Bosnia and Kosovo; and the continued support of the United States for “radical Islamists” who serve their geo-political interests. Show to Muslims that the “radical Jihadi” approaches benefit the enemies of Islam, so much so that those enemies facilitate or fabricate Jihadi groups and attacks.

11) Teach critical thinking to Muslims. Provide them with the tools to distinguish between Traditional Islam and so-called “Radical Political Islam,” better known as Salafism/Jihadism/Takfirism.

12) Educate Muslims on the true meaning of Jihad and the rules of just war to which all combatants are bound. Disseminate the commands that Abu Bakr and ‘Ali used to give to their fighters, prohibiting them from killing non-combatants, abusing women, destroying property, etc.

13) Enlist Muslim athletes and celebrities to promote traditional, civilisational, and classical Islam. Getting these artists/celebrities involved is another way of cracking the media.

14) Educate Muslims about the history of Islam in the Western world, from Muslims who accompanied European explorers to African Muslim slaves to the large waves of Muslim pioneers from Syria and Lebanon who settled the American Mid-West.

15) Showcase examples of coexistence between Muslims and the People of the Book throughout Islamic history, focusing on the Golden Age of al-Andalus, Sicily, and the Ottoman Empire.

16) Present positive quotes about the Prophet and Islam made by non-Muslims. This helps boost Muslim pride and illustrates that not all non-Muslims are enemies of Islam and Muslims.

17) Spread Qur’anic verses and prophetic traditions, particularly hadith qudsi, that focus on values, ethics, morals, compassion, mercy, and love. However, balance the focus on Mercy with the same focus on Justice.

18) Highlight contemporary cases of Muslims helping non-Muslims along with non-Muslims helping Muslims. This might include Muslim efforts to rebuild churches that were burned to the ground, cases of Muslims surrounding synagogues to protect them; instances in which Jews and Christians surrounded mosques to defend them from armed racists and Islamophobes.

19) Tell the full truth about the evils of imperialism and Zionism, that the USA and other Western governments are the world’s biggest terrorists, etc. so that (justifiably) angry individuals find mainstream Muslims to be legitimate. If orthodox Muslims stood up for justice as they are Qur’anically-commanded, fewer “idealistic” young people would be drawn into the ranks of Islamist terrorists. When Muslims listen to Uncle Tom Muslims on NPR, etc. it makes some of them want to join the global “jihad.” Many “moderate” voices contribute to the radicalization of young Muslims who have legitimate grievances against capitalism, secularism, and imperialism.

20) Allow Muslims to express their legitimate grievances against their governments peacefully and constructively and pressure such Muslim-majority States to abide by the traditional principles of Islam.

21) Expose the injustice, discrimination, racism, political and economic violence that is directed toward Muslim minorities in certain parts of the Western world. Support the struggle of such Muslims and provide them with the means to pressure their governments and improve their well-being by grass-roots, community, economic, and political efforts.

22) Support the legitimate aspirations of 2/3rds of the world’s Muslims for the re-establishment of the Muslim Ummah, a sane one, not the lunatic anti-Islamic ISIS version, which was created precisely to cast aspersions on the whole notion of a Caliphate. Although it can take many forms, an Islamic State must be based on the foundations of traditional, mainstream, classical Islam, and should be modeled on the Constitution of the Medina and the Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad. It must be a tolerant, inclusive, and pluralistic state based on the spirit of Islamic values and ethics; and not on fossilized medieval interpretations of Islam.

23) Muslims must attain and maintain independence, namely, they must not depend on the support, financial or ideological, of foreign or domestic regimes. Otherwise, they lose all credibility in the eyes of disaffected and disenfranchised youth.

24) Chanel the legitimate frustration and grievances of Muslims constructively instead of destructively. Get them engaged in political and social activism, locally, regionally, nationally, and internationally. Organize Muslim missionary work. Create a Muslim Peace Corp. Many methods can be employed to exact desired change.

25) Provide educational opportunities to Muslim youth at home and abroad. Provide them with job opportunities. Encourage entrepreneurship. Help them build up businesses. Help them form families. People who have hope do not kill themselves and others. Extremism and violence feed on chaos and despair. Proper social, psychological, and spiritual services can prevent young people from descending into the darkness of extremism, fanaticism, and nihilism.

26)  Remember that as terrible as Takfiri terrorism may be, it forms part of an even more horrific plan; a genocidal agenda on the part of Western imperialists. The essence of this plan is to exterminate 80% of the world population, the “human surplus” which is increasingly being replaced by technology. If these elitist globalists, who wish to turn the planet into their own personal resort, have spread terrorism in the Muslim world to help cull its population, they have spread drugs, along with material and moral corruption, in the Western world to destroy it from within.

Conclusions

The Muslim Ummah is currently in conflict. A battle is being waged for the heart and soul of Islam. In some cases, the forces of True Islam and Fake Islam are facing off in full-fledged civil wars. In most instances, the overwhelming majority of orthodox Muslims are being assailed by a fringe minority of violent heretics. If anything prevents mainstream Muslims from cleaning up camp, it is the fact that they are powerless and at the mercy of oppressive leaders who have traditionally supported Takfiri terrorists to do their dirty geo-political work covertly while simultaneously condemning them overtly. It is shameful that a billion-strong majority of Muslim tigers are being pestered by one hundred thousand rats. It is time for them to act like big cats, as opposed to kittens, and to consume the rodents before they reproduce more and spread the bubonic plague. And when the tigers terminate the rats, they will need to turn their claws and jaws on those who released the rats in the first place. Then, and only then, will balance return to the ecosystem of Islam.

—-

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is Native North American a proud member of the Métis Nation. After taking his Shahadah at the age of 16, he became both an academic and a Muslim ‘Alim. He has authored over thirty peer-reviewed books and over one hundred scholarly articles. His most influential work to date is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and http://www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA . His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

– See more at: http://newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/islam-versus-anti-islam–simple-strategies-to-help-counter-isis-and-other-violent-extremists/d/111282#sthash.s9RAl941.dpuf

How Moderate are Moderate Muslims? The Facts Speak for Themselves

By Kevin Barrett on May 24, 2017

Editor’s note: I hate the Empire’s “good Muslims vs. bad Muslims” BS. It is a direct descendent of the “good injuns vs. bad injuns” dichotomy that fueled the genocide of Native Americans. “Good injuns” were the ones that sold out to the whites and were complicit in their own genocide. “Bad injuns” were the ones who resisted the genocide.

So I consider myself a “bad Muslim,” following in the warpath of the “bad injuns.” I am at all out war with the genocide against Islam and Muslims launched by the false flag atrocity of 9/11/2001. I support legitimate armed resistance against aggression everywhere. And I have eyes and can see that virtually the entire Islamic world is locked in a struggle against outside aggression. As Huntington said, “Islam has bloody borders” – because the Muslim-majority lands are weak and vulnerable to predation by aggressors. I strongly support an emergency military build-up by the Muslim Ummah, using asymetrical warfare of various kinds (mainly ideological and based on speaking truth to power) to put an end to that aggression. The obvious focal point of this jihad is in Occupied Palestine.

So I don’t consider myself “moderate” in the sense of “willing to tolerate aggression, oppression, and injustice.” I would much rather die fighting back than cave in to injustice, and in that event would be happy to take as many oppressors with me as possible. I believe the Qur’an’s promise that those who die resisting oppression have been promised a very high station in Paradise.

The whole ideological war on Islam is designed to legitimize aggression against Muslims and to criminalize Muslim self-defense. That is what 9/11 was designed to achieve. It did not succeed. Aggression is and will always be the supreme war crime, hated by God. And self-defense is by definition legitimate.

That said, I am appalled by examples of idiocy, obscurantism and cruelty, regardless of whether or not the culprits are Muslim. And there are plenty of cruel, obscurantist idiots hiding their ugly actions behind “religious” rationalizations. As John Andre Morrow suggests in this article, it is indeed people whose interpretation of Islam follows the Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiri orientation who are disproportionally represented among the cruel, obscurantist idiots. Fortunately these people are in a small minority. Unfortunately, they are backed by vast amounts of Rothschild-petrodollar-supporting oil money from the Persian Gulf, mainly “Saudi” Arabia.

One of the worst aspects of some Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris is their violation of traditional Islamic tenets against targeting civilians (i.e., terrorism). Terrorism is an age-old military tactic, and it is being used wholesale against Muslims today. But it is wrong,  haram, hated by God. We must only target the enemy, the guilty, the oppressors – never the innocent.

In the article below, Dr. Morrow points out that the vast majority of  “Islamic terrorism” today targets Muslims, who make up 90% of its victims. That is because it is engineered synthetic terrorism, a strategy created by Benjamin Netanyahu and Bernard Lewis at the 1979  Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism to wage war on Islam in general, and Israel’s enemies in particular. 9/11 was the propaganda stunt that launched their orchestrated campaign to link the concepts “Islam” and “terror.”

In any event, it takes at least moderate courage to criticize the Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris and their powerful Saudi masters. So I salute eloquent Muslim scholars like my recent radio guest Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, and the author of the article below, John Andrew Morrow, who are sounding the alarm about this pernicious fifth column afflicting the Muslim Ummah.

Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

How Moderate are Moderate Muslims? The Facts Speak for Themselves

(A Refutation of Hussein Aboubakr’s Video “Where are the Moderate Muslims?”)

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

After every new terrorist attack in the West, that is falsely committed in the name of Islam by so-called Muslims, some left-wing liberal politicians reassure us that the crime in question does not reflect the true nature of mainstream Islam while some right-wing conservative politicians seize the opportunity to scapegoat all Muslims and demonize an entire world religion.

There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world today. The believe in One God. They believe in the Prophets of God, including Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad. They believe in the Books of God, the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur’an. They believe in the Day of Judgment and Heaven and Hell. Muslims pray, fast, give charity, perform pilgrimage to the Holy land, promote the good, and forbid the wrong.

When I speak, I speak for over 1 billion Muslims: followers of traditional, civilizational, and classical Islam. For some, however, Muslim moderates are few and far between, if not entirely non-existent. If they support terrorism and the shariah, and oppose fundamental rights and freedoms, where, then, are the moderate Muslims? The facts, the full facts, speak for themselves.

According to Europol, there were 2,131 terrorist attacks in the EU between 2006 and 2010. So-called Muslims committed 0.3% of them. Between 2011 and 2014, there were 747 attacks: less than 1% of them were attributed to so-called Muslims. According to the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, there were 2,400 terrorist attacks on US soil between 1970 and 2012: 60 of these were committed by so-called Muslims, namely, 2.5%.

According to the FBI, the Global Terrorism Database, and other reliable sources, terrorists represent approximately 0.001% of the population of the Muslim world. According to the Gallup Poll, so-called Muslim extremists, who are not terrorists per se, account for 7% of the population. There is no doubt that most Muslims are moderate, law abiding, citizens. Anyone who argues otherwise is dishonest, duplicitous, and deceptive.

How moderate are moderate Muslims? Given the allegations made by Islamophobes, it would seem to be a fair question. Let me start by telling you something of my own story. I was raised in a middle-class home in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. I am Michif-Otipemisiwak, the Free People, the People who own themselves, Les Gens Libres, a proud member of the Métis Nation, an Amerindian, an indigenous person, and a Muslim.

I am one of the millions of Westerners who have embraced Islam over the past century. 80% of converts to Islam in the West are women and many of them are university-educated professionals. We are not extremists. When I speak, I speak for over 1 billion Muslims: followers of mainstream, traditional, civilizational Islam; the majority of Muslims: followers of Classical Islam.

Anyone who claims that “every day that passes on the Islamic Nation without a Caliphate is a sin;” anyone who claims that “the failure and miseries of the Muslim world started the moment we Muslims gave up conquests and wars against infidels;” anyone who claims that “our prosperity depended on conquering new lands and converting new believers;” and anyone who claims that “anyone who leave the faith must die” does not come from a moderate Muslim family.

Why do I distinguish between Muslims and so-called Muslims? The reason is simple. Almost 100% of terrorist actions committed in the name of Islam are committed, not by Muslims, but by Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris.

93% of the Islamic World is made up of orthodox Muslims: Sunnis, Shiis, and Sufis. 7% of the Islamic World is made up of Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris. They are the people that are referred to in the West as Islamists, Jihadists, and Islamo-Fascists.

They are the followers Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, a radical reformist from Arabia, who lived two hundred years ago. These heretics believe that they are the only true believers and that orthodox Muslims are infidels whose should be put to the sword.

Whether it is the Taliban, al-Qaedah, Boko Haram, al-Shabab, al-Nusrah or ISIS, all these terrorists share the same Satanic ideology. According to a Gallup Poll, over 93% of Muslims condemn these criminals and extremists.

Did Muslims celebrate 9/11 with joy? Absolutely not. Did Takfiri-Wahhabi terrorists relish in the death and destruction of September 11th. I am sure they did.

According to the Gallup Poll, however, so-called Muslim radicals account for 7% of the Muslim population. Over 93% of Muslims condemn these extremists. Why? Because Muslims bear the blunt of their terror.

In 2011, the US government’s National Counter-Terrorism Center reported that “Muslims suffered between 82 and 97% of terrorism-related fatalities over the past five years.”

The Takfiris or “Radical Islamists” target Christians and Yazidis; however, most of their victims are orthodox, mainstream, Muslims. In fact, Muslims make up 95% of the victims of terrorism.

While it is true that some, but not all Muslim jurists, believed that adulterers should be stoned to death, that is the very same punishment found in the Bible. As we read in Deuteronomy 22:22: “If a man is discovered committing adultery, both he and the woman must die. In this way, you will purge Israel of such evil.”

And while it is true that some, but not all Muslim jurists, believed that the punishment for homosexual intercourse was death, that is the very same punishment found in the Bible. As read in Leviticus 20:13: “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (Leviticus 20:13)

If Islam is extreme, then so is Judaism and Christianity. If there are no moderate Muslims, then there are no moderate Jews and Christians.

While it is true that large numbers of Muslims in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan, and Nigeria believe that apostates should be put to death, the very same punishment exists in Judaism.

Most Muslims, like most Jews, would recognize that rejecting belief in One God, and becoming an atheist or a polytheist, results in spiritual death, few of them, however, would pick up a rock and stone someone.

There are those who, in acts of academic dishonesty, focus on the fact that many Muslims from the Middle-East and South Asia support the death penalty for apostasy. However, they conveniently ignore the broader picture.

71% of Tunisian Muslims, 73% of Thai Muslims, 78% of Tajik Muslims, 83% of Turkish Muslims, 82% of Indonesian Muslims, 85% of Bosnian and Russian Muslims, 89% of Kosovar Muslims, 92% of Albanian Muslims, and 96% of Kazakh Muslims oppose the death penalty for people who leave Islam.

The problem is not religious. The problem is a combination of cultural, historical, political, economic, and educational factors. The problem is complex. However, there is a direct correlation between Saudi influence and the spread of extremism. There is also a direct link between military intervention in the Muslim world and the spread of terrorism in the region. Conflict and chaos are the breeding ground for Islamist terrorists.

Rather than try to terrify non-Muslims by claiming that most Muslims believe in the shariah, we need to define our terms. When Islamophobes speak of the shariah, they invoke medieval corporal punishment: lashing, stoning, and beheading. When Muslims speak of shariah, they speak of the law. So, yes, most Muslims believe in obeying the law.

When a Muslim asks another Muslim whether he follows the shariah, he is asking whether that person prays, fasts, and gives charity; not whether that person goes around chopping off hands and heads. The shariah is to Muslims what the Halakha is to Jews or Canon Law is to Catholics. It’s like asking: “Do you keep kosher?” or “Do you go to mass?”

According to the Pew Research Center, 60% of white evangelical Protestants say that the Bible should be the guiding principle in making laws in the United States. One Public Policy Poll found that 57% of Republicans wanted to dismantle the Constitution and establish Christianity as the official religion and the Bible as the law of the land.

Are Evangelical Christians who wish to live a Biblical life extremists? Are Orthodox Jews who live according to the Torah and Talmud extremists? Are the Amish, Mennonites, and Hutterites extremists because they live according to Biblical principles? The real extremists, some would argue, are the secular fundamentalists who wish to deprive believers of their religious rights.

When Muslims say that they favor making the shariah the official law in their country, they are not speaking of the perverted version of the shariah proposed by “Islamo-Fascists.” They are speaking about the traditional interpretations of Islamic law which are updated and adapted to modern times.

In fact, when surveyed, Muslims express widespread support for democracy and religious freedom. When tallied, over 60% of Muslims support democracy. When asked about religious freedom, 92.6% of Muslims asserted that it was a good thing.

When Muslims speak of shariah, they speak of a free, democratic state, which protects religious freedom, but which is based on the moral and ethical principles found in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim tradition. They believe in an Islam that provides rights as opposed to a fake Islam that deprives people of rights.

Anyone who claims that “most of the world’s Muslims believe that any acts of violence against Israel, including suicide bombers in buses and restaurants, are justified” is a liar. As the Pew Research Center confirms, most Muslims oppose extremism, terrorism, and suicide bombing. If one were to dig deeper, one would find that virtually all the so-called Muslims who support indiscriminate violence and terror are radical Islamists and Jihadists with ideological roots in Saudi Arabia.

If there are no Muslim moderates, or Muslim moderates are few and far between, why is it that the overwhelming majority of Muslims have a negative view of ISIS?

According to the Pew Research Center, 79% of Indonesians, 84% of Palestinians, 95% of Jordanians, and 100% of Lebanese Muslims repudiate the death-cult that is Daesh. As the Pew Research Center confirms, most Muslims oppose extremism, terrorism, and suicide bombing.

In some cases, Muslims are more moderate than non-Muslims. Take, for instance, the issue of military attacks against civilians. 78% of American Muslims oppose them compared to 58% of American Christians and 52% of American Jews.

As for the stereotype that Muslims are all anti-Israel, think again. According to a Gallup Poll, 81% of Muslim American and 78% of Jewish Americans believe that an independent Palestinian state should co-exist alongside of Israel.

Saying that Radical Islamists and Jihadists are terrorists does not make one an Islamophobe. I do it all the time and I am a committed Muslim.

Putting all Muslims in the same boat, painting them with the same brush, falsifying facts, and trying to convince people that even educated, unveiled, and accent-free Muslim women are extremists is the epitome of Islamophobia.

It is Islamophobic to assert that the Muslim world, as a whole, is currently dominated by bad ideas and bad beliefs.

It is Islamophobic to assert that millions of Muslims fail to denounce terror because they, themselves, are not moderates. They do so all the time. Muslim voices, however, are muffled out by the mainstream media.

It is Islamophobic to assert that the word “moderate,” as we understand it in the Western world, does not apply to Muslims.

It is also Islamophobic to assert that Muslims collectively oppose fundamental rights and freedoms.

Moderate Muslims do not number in the millions. There is over one billion of them. They are the critical mass.

The Muslim world is not a grey zone where you cannot distinguish between friend from foe. It is critical to distinguish between the masses of Muslim human beings from the tiny minority of sub-human terrorists.

The traditional values of Islam are perfectly compatible with the traditional values of the Western world; Judeo-Christian values and Humanitarian values.

The principles of the Prophet influenced the European Renaissance, the Napoleonic Code, the American Constitution, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Prophet Muhammad produced the first constitution in the political history of humanity. The Covenants of the Prophet were the first to enshrine modern notions of civic and human rights.

Radical Fake Islam is a deadly disease. It is a cancerous tumor that is attached to the body of Islam. It is a contagious virus that has entered the bloodstream of Islam. It does not belong to the body. It will debilitate, destroy, and kill it. It must be amputated. It must be annihilated by means of antibiotics. The sooner that the cancerous tumor is surgically removed; the sooner that the bloodborne pathogen is neutralized, the better it will be for both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow (al-Ustadh al-Duktur Ilyas Islam) is an Amerindian Muslim leader and a proud member of the Métis Nation. After embracing Islam at the age of 16, he became both a Western academic and a traditional Muslim scholar. He is the author of a large body of scholarly works, the most influential of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include www.covenantsoftheprophet.com andwww.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

Related Posts:

How Moderate are Moderate Muslims? The Facts Speak for Themselves

By Kevin Barrett on May 24, 2017

Editor’s note: I hate the Empire’s “good Muslims vs. bad Muslims” BS. It is a direct descendent of the “good injuns vs. bad injuns” dichotomy that fueled the genocide of Native Americans. “Good injuns” were the ones that sold out to the whites and were complicit in their own genocide. “Bad injuns” were the ones who resisted the genocide.

So I consider myself a “bad Muslim,” following in the warpath of the “bad injuns.” I am at all out war with the genocide against Islam and Muslims launched by the false flag atrocity of 9/11/2001. I support legitimate armed resistance against aggression everywhere. And I have eyes and can see that virtually the entire Islamic world is locked in a struggle against outside aggression. As Huntington said, “Islam has bloody borders” – because the Muslim-majority lands are weak and vulnerable to predation by aggressors. I strongly support an emergency military build-up by the Muslim Ummah, using asymetrical warfare of various kinds (mainly ideological and based on speaking truth to power) to put an end to that aggression. The obvious focal point of this jihad is in Occupied Palestine.

So I don’t consider myself “moderate” in the sense of “willing to tolerate aggression, oppression, and injustice.” I would much rather die fighting back than cave in to injustice, and in that event would be happy to take as many oppressors with me as possible. I believe the Qur’an’s promise that those who die resisting oppression have been promised a very high station in Paradise.

The whole ideological war on Islam is designed to legitimize aggression against Muslims and to criminalize Muslim self-defense. That is what 9/11 was designed to achieve. It did not succeed. Aggression is and will always be the supreme war crime, hated by God. And self-defense is by definition legitimate.

That said, I am appalled by examples of idiocy, obscurantism and cruelty, regardless of whether or not the culprits are Muslim. And there are plenty of cruel, obscurantist idiots hiding their ugly actions behind “religious” rationalizations. As John Andre Morrow suggests in this article, it is indeed people whose interpretation of Islam follows the Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiri orientation who are disproportionally represented among the cruel, obscurantist idiots. Fortunately these people are in a small minority. Unfortunately, they are backed by vast amounts of Rothschild-petrodollar-supporting oil money from the Persian Gulf, mainly “Saudi” Arabia.

One of the worst aspects of some Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris is their violation of traditional Islamic tenets against targeting civilians (i.e., terrorism). Terrorism is an age-old military tactic, and it is being used wholesale against Muslims today. But it is wrong,  haram, hated by God. We must only target the enemy, the guilty, the oppressors – never the innocent.

In the article below, Dr. Morrow points out that the vast majority of  “Islamic terrorism” today targets Muslims, who make up 90% of its victims. That is because it is engineered synthetic terrorism, a strategy created by Benjamin Netanyahu and Bernard Lewis at the 1979  Jerusalem Conference on International Terrorism to wage war on Islam in general, and Israel’s enemies in particular. 9/11 was the propaganda stunt that launched their orchestrated campaign to link the concepts “Islam” and “terror.”

In any event, it takes at least moderate courage to criticize the Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris and their powerful Saudi masters. So I salute eloquent Muslim scholars like my recent radio guest Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, and the author of the article below, John Andrew Morrow, who are sounding the alarm about this pernicious fifth column afflicting the Muslim Ummah.

Kevin Barrett, Veterans Today Editor

How Moderate are Moderate Muslims? The Facts Speak for Themselves

(A Refutation of Hussein Aboubakr’s Video “Where are the Moderate Muslims?”)

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

After every new terrorist attack in the West, that is falsely committed in the name of Islam by so-called Muslims, some left-wing liberal politicians reassure us that the crime in question does not reflect the true nature of mainstream Islam while some right-wing conservative politicians seize the opportunity to scapegoat all Muslims and demonize an entire world religion.

There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world today. The believe in One God. They believe in the Prophets of God, including Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad. They believe in the Books of God, the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur’an. They believe in the Day of Judgment and Heaven and Hell. Muslims pray, fast, give charity, perform pilgrimage to the Holy land, promote the good, and forbid the wrong.

When I speak, I speak for over 1 billion Muslims: followers of traditional, civilizational, and classical Islam. For some, however, Muslim moderates are few and far between, if not entirely non-existent. If they support terrorism and the shariah, and oppose fundamental rights and freedoms, where, then, are the moderate Muslims? The facts, the full facts, speak for themselves.

According to Europol, there were 2,131 terrorist attacks in the EU between 2006 and 2010. So-called Muslims committed 0.3% of them. Between 2011 and 2014, there were 747 attacks: less than 1% of them were attributed to so-called Muslims. According to the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, there were 2,400 terrorist attacks on US soil between 1970 and 2012: 60 of these were committed by so-called Muslims, namely, 2.5%.

According to the FBI, the Global Terrorism Database, and other reliable sources, terrorists represent approximately 0.001% of the population of the Muslim world. According to the Gallup Poll, so-called Muslim extremists, who are not terrorists per se, account for 7% of the population. There is no doubt that most Muslims are moderate, law abiding, citizens. Anyone who argues otherwise is dishonest, duplicitous, and deceptive.

How moderate are moderate Muslims? Given the allegations made by Islamophobes, it would seem to be a fair question. Let me start by telling you something of my own story. I was raised in a middle-class home in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. I am Michif-Otipemisiwak, the Free People, the People who own themselves, Les Gens Libres, a proud member of the Métis Nation, an Amerindian, an indigenous person, and a Muslim.

I am one of the millions of Westerners who have embraced Islam over the past century. 80% of converts to Islam in the West are women and many of them are university-educated professionals. We are not extremists. When I speak, I speak for over 1 billion Muslims: followers of mainstream, traditional, civilizational Islam; the majority of Muslims: followers of Classical Islam.

Anyone who claims that “every day that passes on the Islamic Nation without a Caliphate is a sin;” anyone who claims that “the failure and miseries of the Muslim world started the moment we Muslims gave up conquests and wars against infidels;” anyone who claims that “our prosperity depended on conquering new lands and converting new believers;” and anyone who claims that “anyone who leave the faith must die” does not come from a moderate Muslim family.

Why do I distinguish between Muslims and so-called Muslims? The reason is simple. Almost 100% of terrorist actions committed in the name of Islam are committed, not by Muslims, but by Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris.

93% of the Islamic World is made up of orthodox Muslims: Sunnis, Shiis, and Sufis. 7% of the Islamic World is made up of Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiris. They are the people that are referred to in the West as Islamists, Jihadists, and Islamo-Fascists.

They are the followers Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, a radical reformist from Arabia, who lived two hundred years ago. These heretics believe that they are the only true believers and that orthodox Muslims are infidels whose should be put to the sword.

Whether it is the Taliban, al-Qaedah, Boko Haram, al-Shabab, al-Nusrah or ISIS, all these terrorists share the same Satanic ideology. According to a Gallup Poll, over 93% of Muslims condemn these criminals and extremists.

Did Muslims celebrate 9/11 with joy? Absolutely not. Did Takfiri-Wahhabi terrorists relish in the death and destruction of September 11th. I am sure they did.

According to the Gallup Poll, however, so-called Muslim radicals account for 7% of the Muslim population. Over 93% of Muslims condemn these extremists. Why? Because Muslims bear the blunt of their terror.

In 2011, the US government’s National Counter-Terrorism Center reported that “Muslims suffered between 82 and 97% of terrorism-related fatalities over the past five years.”

The Takfiris or “Radical Islamists” target Christians and Yazidis; however, most of their victims are orthodox, mainstream, Muslims. In fact, Muslims make up 95% of the victims of terrorism.

While it is true that some, but not all Muslim jurists, believed that adulterers should be stoned to death, that is the very same punishment found in the Bible. As we read in Deuteronomy 22:22: “If a man is discovered committing adultery, both he and the woman must die. In this way, you will purge Israel of such evil.”

And while it is true that some, but not all Muslim jurists, believed that the punishment for homosexual intercourse was death, that is the very same punishment found in the Bible. As read in Leviticus 20:13: “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (Leviticus 20:13)

If Islam is extreme, then so is Judaism and Christianity. If there are no moderate Muslims, then there are no moderate Jews and Christians.

While it is true that large numbers of Muslims in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan, and Nigeria believe that apostates should be put to death, the very same punishment exists in Judaism.

Most Muslims, like most Jews, would recognize that rejecting belief in One God, and becoming an atheist or a polytheist, results in spiritual death, few of them, however, would pick up a rock and stone someone.

There are those who, in acts of academic dishonesty, focus on the fact that many Muslims from the Middle-East and South Asia support the death penalty for apostasy. However, they conveniently ignore the broader picture.

71% of Tunisian Muslims, 73% of Thai Muslims, 78% of Tajik Muslims, 83% of Turkish Muslims, 82% of Indonesian Muslims, 85% of Bosnian and Russian Muslims, 89% of Kosovar Muslims, 92% of Albanian Muslims, and 96% of Kazakh Muslims oppose the death penalty for people who leave Islam.

The problem is not religious. The problem is a combination of cultural, historical, political, economic, and educational factors. The problem is complex. However, there is a direct correlation between Saudi influence and the spread of extremism. There is also a direct link between military intervention in the Muslim world and the spread of terrorism in the region. Conflict and chaos are the breeding ground for Islamist terrorists.

Rather than try to terrify non-Muslims by claiming that most Muslims believe in the shariah, we need to define our terms. When Islamophobes speak of the shariah, they invoke medieval corporal punishment: lashing, stoning, and beheading. When Muslims speak of shariah, they speak of the law. So, yes, most Muslims believe in obeying the law.

When a Muslim asks another Muslim whether he follows the shariah, he is asking whether that person prays, fasts, and gives charity; not whether that person goes around chopping off hands and heads. The shariah is to Muslims what the Halakha is to Jews or Canon Law is to Catholics. It’s like asking: “Do you keep kosher?” or “Do you go to mass?”

According to the Pew Research Center, 60% of white evangelical Protestants say that the Bible should be the guiding principle in making laws in the United States. One Public Policy Poll found that 57% of Republicans wanted to dismantle the Constitution and establish Christianity as the official religion and the Bible as the law of the land.

Are Evangelical Christians who wish to live a Biblical life extremists? Are Orthodox Jews who live according to the Torah and Talmud extremists? Are the Amish, Mennonites, and Hutterites extremists because they live according to Biblical principles? The real extremists, some would argue, are the secular fundamentalists who wish to deprive believers of their religious rights.

When Muslims say that they favor making the shariah the official law in their country, they are not speaking of the perverted version of the shariah proposed by “Islamo-Fascists.” They are speaking about the traditional interpretations of Islamic law which are updated and adapted to modern times.

In fact, when surveyed, Muslims express widespread support for democracy and religious freedom. When tallied, over 60% of Muslims support democracy. When asked about religious freedom, 92.6% of Muslims asserted that it was a good thing.

When Muslims speak of shariah, they speak of a free, democratic state, which protects religious freedom, but which is based on the moral and ethical principles found in the Judeo-Christian-Muslim tradition. They believe in an Islam that provides rights as opposed to a fake Islam that deprives people of rights.

Anyone who claims that “most of the world’s Muslims believe that any acts of violence against Israel, including suicide bombers in buses and restaurants, are justified” is a liar. As the Pew Research Center confirms, most Muslims oppose extremism, terrorism, and suicide bombing. If one were to dig deeper, one would find that virtually all the so-called Muslims who support indiscriminate violence and terror are radical Islamists and Jihadists with ideological roots in Saudi Arabia.

If there are no Muslim moderates, or Muslim moderates are few and far between, why is it that the overwhelming majority of Muslims have a negative view of ISIS?

According to the Pew Research Center, 79% of Indonesians, 84% of Palestinians, 95% of Jordanians, and 100% of Lebanese Muslims repudiate the death-cult that is Daesh. As the Pew Research Center confirms, most Muslims oppose extremism, terrorism, and suicide bombing.

In some cases, Muslims are more moderate than non-Muslims. Take, for instance, the issue of military attacks against civilians. 78% of American Muslims oppose them compared to 58% of American Christians and 52% of American Jews.

As for the stereotype that Muslims are all anti-Israel, think again. According to a Gallup Poll, 81% of Muslim American and 78% of Jewish Americans believe that an independent Palestinian state should co-exist alongside of Israel.

Saying that Radical Islamists and Jihadists are terrorists does not make one an Islamophobe. I do it all the time and I am a committed Muslim.

Putting all Muslims in the same boat, painting them with the same brush, falsifying facts, and trying to convince people that even educated, unveiled, and accent-free Muslim women are extremists is the epitome of Islamophobia.

It is Islamophobic to assert that the Muslim world, as a whole, is currently dominated by bad ideas and bad beliefs.

It is Islamophobic to assert that millions of Muslims fail to denounce terror because they, themselves, are not moderates. They do so all the time. Muslim voices, however, are muffled out by the mainstream media.

It is Islamophobic to assert that the word “moderate,” as we understand it in the Western world, does not apply to Muslims.

It is also Islamophobic to assert that Muslims collectively oppose fundamental rights and freedoms.

Moderate Muslims do not number in the millions. There is over one billion of them. They are the critical mass.

The Muslim world is not a grey zone where you cannot distinguish between friend from foe. It is critical to distinguish between the masses of Muslim human beings from the tiny minority of sub-human terrorists.

The traditional values of Islam are perfectly compatible with the traditional values of the Western world; Judeo-Christian values and Humanitarian values.

The principles of the Prophet influenced the European Renaissance, the Napoleonic Code, the American Constitution, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Prophet Muhammad produced the first constitution in the political history of humanity. The Covenants of the Prophet were the first to enshrine modern notions of civic and human rights.

Radical Fake Islam is a deadly disease. It is a cancerous tumor that is attached to the body of Islam. It is a contagious virus that has entered the bloodstream of Islam. It does not belong to the body. It will debilitate, destroy, and kill it. It must be amputated. It must be annihilated by means of antibiotics. The sooner that the cancerous tumor is surgically removed; the sooner that the bloodborne pathogen is neutralized, the better it will be for both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow (al-Ustadh al-Duktur Ilyas Islam) is an Amerindian Muslim leader and a proud member of the Métis Nation. After embracing Islam at the age of 16, he became both a Western academic and a traditional Muslim scholar. He is the author of a large body of scholarly works, the most influential of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include www.covenantsoftheprophet.com andwww.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

Related Posts:

30 MAJOR, MUSLIM-LED, ANTI-EXTREMIST EFFORTS

May 24, 2017

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow for the Covenants Initiative

Muslims are routinely accused of failing to denounce terrorism. In reality, they are at the forefront of over 300 efforts to oppose extremism, fundamentalism, and violent fanaticism that is committed in the name of Islam by criminals who are outside of its fold.

Although it would be overwhelming to list all these initiatives, the thirty most significant ones have been selected to share with all concerned human beings. Muslims and non-Muslims are encouraged to familiarize themselves with these efforts, to inform others of them, and to support them to the best of their abilities.

  1. ISNA’s Muslim Code of Honor: http://www.isna.net/muslim-code-of-honor
  2. A Common Word Between Us and You: http://www.acommonword.com
  3. Shoulder to Shoulder: http://www.shouldertoshouldercampaign.org/
  4. Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa against Terrorism and Suicide Bombing: http://www.quranandwar.com/FATWA%20on%20Terrorism%20and%20Suicide%20Bombings.pdf
  5. Dr. Qadri’s Fatwa Against ISIS: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/isis-is-a-terrorist-state-not-an-islamic-one-tahir-ul-qadri/1/624929.html
  6. The Covenants Initiative: https://covenantsoftheprophet.wordpress.com/2013/08/11/the-covenants-initiative/
  7. The Genocide Initiative: https://www.change.org/p/all-political-players-the-genocide-initiative
  8. Shaykh Bin Bayyah’s Fatwa against ISIS: http://binbayyah.net/english/2014/09/24/fatwa-response-to-isis/
  9. The Letter to Baghdadi: http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/
  10. The Amman Message: http://ammanmessage.com/
  11. The Statement by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation: http://binbayyah.net/english/2014/09/24/fatwa-response-to-isis/
  12. The Fatwa from Al-Azhar: http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/02/04/Al-Azhar-calls-for-killing-crucifixion-of-ISIS-terrorists-.html
  13. The Statement of the International Union of Muslim Scholars: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20140705-prominent-scholars-declare-isis-caliphate-null-and-void/
  14. The Statement from the Arab League: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/636033/arab-league-confront-isis-now
  15. The Fatwa of Mufti Mehmet Gormez: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-security-turkey-religion-idUSKBN0FR16120140722
  16. The Statement of CAIR: https://www.cair.com/press-center/press-releases/12551-cair-condemns-isis-violence-and-rejects-calls-to-join-extremists-fighting-abroad.html
  17. The Statement of the Muslim Council of Great Britain: http://www.mcb.org.uk/not-in-our-name-british-muslims-condemn-the-barbarity-of-isis/
  18. The Fatwa of the Fiqh Council of North America: http://fiqhcouncil.org/node/69
  19. The Joint Sunni-Shiite Fatwa by 100 UK Imams: http://wilayah.info/en/sunni-and-shia-british-imams-denounce-isis-together-in-new-video/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Bd0Y6qWmlA
  20. Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq: http://www.heyetnet.org/en/index.php/aciklamalar/item/974-statement-no-1007-on-the-expulsion-of-iraqi-christians-from-the-city-of-mosul-by-islamic-state
  21. The Declaration Against Extremism by the Muslim Public Affairs Council: https://www.mpac.org/issues/national-security/mpac-rejects-isis-repugnant-crimes-against-humanity.php
  22. Saudi Arabia’s Council of Senior Scholars: http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKBN0HC0XL20140917?sp=true
  23. The Statements from Nahdlatul Ulama from Indonesia:
    1. http://www.worldreligionnews.com/issues/indonesias-largest-islamic-organization-denounces-isis
    2. http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/10/asia/indonesia-extremism/
    3. htps://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/27/world/asia/indonesia-islam-nahdlatul-ulama.html?_r=0
    4. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/indonesian-muslims-counter-isis_us_565c737ae4b072e9d1c26bda
  24. Shaykh Yaqubi’s Refuting ISIS: http://www.refutingisis.com/
  25. Historic Islamic Edict Fatwa on Joining ISIS/ISIL by the Islamic Supreme Council: http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.com/historic-islamic-edict-fatwa-on-joining-isis-isil/
  26. The Muslim Youth Group’s Jihad Against Extremism: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/young-british-muslims-declare-own-jihad-against-isis-and-other-terrorists-who-hijack-islam-10146534.html
  27. The Statement by Dr. John Andrew Morrow: http://www.jewishpost.com/news/American-Imam-Issues-Fatwa-Against-ISIS.html
  28. The Mass Fatwa by 100,000 Muslim Clerics from India, Bangladesh, and beyond:
    1. http://www.voanews.com/a/fatwa-endorsed-by-bangladeshi-islamic-scholars-aims-to-curb-terrorism/3384976.html
    2. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/more-than-1-lakh-bangladeshi-clerics-sign-anti-terror-fatwa/1/695764.html
  29. The Marrakesh Declaration: http://www.marrakeshdeclaration.org/marrakesh-declaration.html
  30. The Grozny Declaration: http://chechnyaconference.org/material/chechnya-conference-statement-english.pdf

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an indigenous inhabitant of Turtle Island and a member of the Michif-Otipemisiwak. He professed Islam at the age of 16. He is both a Western academic with a PhD from the University of Toronto and a recognized Muslim scholar. He has authored over thirty scholarly books, the most impactful of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

Responsibility of Pluralism in Islam

 

Introduction

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah was a Prophet. He was a Messenger of God. He was the Seal of the Prophets. This is something agreed upon by all Muslims: La ilaha illa Allah / Muhammadan Rasul Allah: there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.

Prophethood

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah was a nabi or a prophet, namely, a person sent to preach the Word of God; a person who was following in the footsteps of his prophetic predecessors. He did not preach a new religion; he preached the primordial religion, Islam, submission and surrender to the One and Only God, the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe.

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah was also a rasul or a messenger, namely, a person who was sent with a scripture, a book from God, a revelation, and a code of law. He came forth, not only with ‘aqidah or beliefs but with shari‘ah or law, a comprehensive social, political, and economic system. Islam is a complete way of life.

Unlike the prophets and messengers who preceded him and unlike the founders of other faith traditions, which focus on governing themselves, Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, also focused on how Muslims should interact with others.

If one reads the Old Testament, and one study the Halakha, one sees that that Jewish Law was concerning primarily with regulating the lives of Jewish people.

If one reads the New Testament, and studies Canon Law, one sees that Christian law was concerned primarily with regulating the lives of Christian people. There is little in the Judeo-Christian tradition regarding the rights of non-Jews and non-Christians. There is little with regards to the manner we should treat different faith communities.

For many religions, both Eastern and Western, it was pretty much: “Follow my way or I will send you on the highway to Hell.” Although the belief system and code of conduct of believers was clearly delineated, the rights of unbelievers were often reduced to the right to die. In many cases, it boiled down to “Convert the unbelievers or kill them all.”

Pluralism

Islam, however, came to the scene with an entirely novel and unique approach: pluralism. Unlike many other religions that insisted that salvation was for them and them alone, Islam insisted that salvation was within the reach of all righteous monotheists. So long as one believed in God, and one did good deeds and avoided evil deeds, one had hope in the mercy of Almighty God. As Almighty Allah, says in the Holy Qur’an:

Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve. (2:63)

As Mustafa Akyol, the author of The Islamic Jesus, has observed:

The fact that the Qur’an promised salvation to [the Sabians], along with Jews and Christians, reflects a theological liberality in early Islam that most contemporary Muslims would have a hard time to even consider. (68)

I have studied Islam for over three decades. I too was taught that only Muslims were believers and that only Muslims went to Heaven. I was taught that Christians were mushrikin or polytheists. I was taught that the People of the Book were kuffar or infidels who were destined to eternal damnation in Hell. I studied all the so-called Muslim authorities who misrepresented and misinterpreted the Qur’an to suit their intolerant purposes.

I read all the so-called “authentic” traditions that extremists use to justify denying non-Muslims basic civil and human rights. I read all the so-called authoritative commentaries of the Qur’an that present an intolerant image of Islam. I can assert, openly, and unabashedly, that the extremist, fundamentalist, exclusivist, absolutist, fascist and supremacist interpretation of Islam is false. It represents a re-invention of Islam. It is not the Islam of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs. It is not the Islam of the Prophet Muhammad. And it most certainly is not the Islam of the Qur’an and the Islam of Almighty Allah.

Political Responsibility

When the Messenger of Allah established himself in Madinah, he consulted with Jews, Muslims, and polytheists, and created a constitution, the first of its kind in the political history of humanity. Known as the Covenant of Madinah, it placed all citizens on equal footing with equal rights and obligations. The citizens of the city-state of Madinah consisted of Jews and Arab non-Muslims. They numbered in the tens of thousands. Muslims, however were a minority during the early days of Muhammad’s rule: they numbered in the hundreds. Nonetheless, the Prophet proclaimed that they were a ummah wahidah, a single community, a constitutional confederation.

The term mu’minin or believers is used almost a thousand times in the Qur’an. As Mustafa Akyol recognizes, the term “was a broad umbrella that could incorporate all monotheists” (68). In the Constitution of Madinah and in the Covenants of the Prophet, the Messenger of Allah described the People of the Book as mu’minin or believers. And this makes perfect logical sense: anyone who believes in God is a believer. When the Messenger of Allah referred to his followers, those who embraced Islam, he used the term muslimin or Muslims. The Prophet spearheaded a movement of believers and created a Confederation of Believers. The rightly-guided Caliphs used the title Amir al-Mu’minin, Leader of the Believers, not Amir al-Muslimin, Leader of the Muslims. They were the leaders of all the citizens of the Ummah.

As Mustafa Akyol explains, “The existence of different religious traditions on earth is not an aberration but, quite the contrary the very will of God” (102). As we read in the Holy Qur’an,

And we have sent down the Book to you [Muhammad] with truth, confirming and conserving the previous Books. So judge between them by what God has sent down and do not follow their whims and desires deviating from the Truth that has come to you.

We have appointed a law and a practice for every one of you. Had God willed, He would have made you a single community, but He wanted to test you regarding what has come to you. So compete with each other in doing good. And every one of you will return to God and He will inform you regarding the things about which you differed. (5:48)

This is pluralism plain and simple, a condition or system in which various groups, principles, sources of authority or religious traditions co-exist in respect and tolerance. It is pluralism as defined by Diana L. Eck: energetic engagement with diversity; active seeking of understanding across lines of difference; encounter of commitments; and the language of dialogue.

One day, when the Prophet Muhammad was in Madinah, a delegation of Christians visited him from Najran. They debated and discussed religious matters. They agreed on some issues. They disagreed on other issues. When it came time for the Christians to perform their prayers, they excused themselves to leave the mosque. The Prophet Muhammad insisted that they pray in his mosque as it was a place of prayer and a house of God. And so the Christians prayed and celebrated mass in the mosque of the Prophet. This event is meticulously documented in Muslim sources. Not only is it authentic, it is exemplary. It is the very embodiment of Islamic ethics. Compare that to the actions of ISIS.

There are two visions of Islam that confront us today: an Islam of peace, mercy, tolerance, love, equality, and justice; and an Islam of war, cruelty, intolerance, hatred, inequality, and injustice; an Islam of terrorism, bloodshed, violence, misogyny, and bigotry. Forgive me if I have enough sense of decency and humanity to side with the former, True Islam, and repudiate all those who side with the latter which is nothing less than Anti-Islam. Muslims, true Muslims, must agree to disagree, not only with non-Muslims, but with each other. Had Allah willed, He would have made us all the same. He did not decree uniformity by means of barbarity, like ISIS wants to impose, but diversity and plurality under the wings of mercy. As Almighty Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:

O humankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted. (49:13)

The Qur’an abolishes sexism. The Qur’an abolishes racism. The Qur’an abolishes absolutism. It calls upon different religious traditions to “compete with each other in righteousness” (5:48). It calls upon different religious traditions to defer their differences to the ultimate judgment of God. It is what is known as irja or “postponement;” namely, deferring religious differences to the afterlife.

The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, never converted people by force. As Almighty Allah says in the Holy Qur’an, “There is no compulsion in religion” (2:256). Consequently, the Messenger of Allah invited people to Islam. If they accepted Islam, alhamdulillah, praise be to Allah. If they preferred to keep their religion, masha’ Allah, it was the will of Allah. Perhaps they would come into Islam in the future, insha’ Allah, if it is the will of Allah. The Prophet was perfectly clear on the subject. As he wrote in the Treaty with the Kings of Himyar, cited in the Sirah of Ibn Ishaq:

If a Jew or a Christian becomes a Muslim, he is a believer with his rights and obligations. He who holds fast to his religion, Jew or Christian, is not to be turned from it. (643)

As Abu al-Fath al-Samiri, wrote in the Continuation of his chronicle,

The Prophet of Islam did not cause anyone distress throughout his life. He would present his belief before the people, accepting anyone who came to him, [yet] not compelling one who did not.

According to this 14th century Samaritan scholar, “Muhammad never mistreated any of the followers of the Law.” He also related a tradition transmitted by Samaritan elders that stated that: “Muhammad was a good and mighty person because he made a treaty of friendship with the Hebrew People.”

If the People of the Book did not wish to embrace Islam, Almighty Allah called upon them to follow their scripture firmly. As we read in the Holy Qur’an: “So let the followers of the Gospel judge according to what God has sent down in it” (5:47). This is exactly what the Messenger of Allah did. He judged Jews on basis of the Torah; Christians on the basis of the Gospel; and Muslims on the basis of the Qur’an. And that is precisely what the Rightly-Guided Caliphs did. As Imam ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, said when he assumed the Caliphate:

Question me before you lose me. Question me, for I have the knowledge of those who came earlier and those who will come later. If the cushion (on which a judge sits) was folded for me (to sit on), I could give judgements to the people of the Torah by their Torah, to the people of the Gospels by their Gospels, to the people of Psalms by their Psalms and to the people of the Furqan (i.e. Qur’an) by their Furqan, so that each one of these books will be fulfilled and will declare, “O Lord, indeed ‘Ali has given judgement according to Your decree.

Conclusions

This is Islam, true Islam, the Islam of Allah, the Islam of the Prophet, and the Islam of all true Muslims. It is a religion that soothes the soul. It is a religion that satisfies the intellect with certainty. It is a religion based on ethics and morality. It is a religion of piety and righteousness. It is a religion that provides people with rights as opposed to depriving people of rights. It is a religion of personal growth and development; a religion of social justice.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an Amerindian Muslim leader and a proud member of the Métis Nation. After embracing Islam at the age of 16, he became both a Western academic and a traditional Muslim scholar. He is the author of a large body of scholarly works, the most influential of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include covenantsoftheprophet.com and johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

If Muslims are so Moderate, Why Don’t They Speak out Against Terrorism?

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

(al-Ustadh al-Duktur Ilyas ‘Abd al-‘Alim Islam)

Why don’t Muslims speak out against terrorism? It is as much a question as it is a statement. It implies that Muslims do not denounce terrorism because they implicitly support it. This is a logical fallacy. According to the New America Foundation, white, right-wing, so-called Christian extremists have killed more than twice as many Americans on US soil than so-called Muslim Jihadists. I have never heard Caucasian, Christian, Americans speak out against white supremacist terrorism. I don’t expect them to.

Asking Muslims if they support ISIS is as idiotic as asking white Christians if they support the Crusades, the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, the Genocide of Native Americans under the name of Christ as Manifest Destiny, the Genocide of the Aboriginal inhabitants of Australia, the Spanish Inquisition, Western colonialism and imperialism, the Salem Witch Trials, segregation, Jim Crow, the lynching of over 5000 African Americans by “good God-fearing Christian,” the Biblically-justified apartheid in South Africa, the KKK and other white Christian supremacists, the Serbian Orthodox Christians who attempted to exterminate the Muslims and Catholics in the former Yugoslavia, the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda that has butchered 100,000 people in the name of Christ, or the Christian militias in the Central African Republic that are exterminating and cannibalizing Muslims. I know full-well that no true Christian would support such inhumanity.

Although some Christians are ill-intentioned, most are simply ill-informed. In fact, according to a Brookings Poll, 40% of Americans believe that most Muslims oppose ISIS; 14% think most Muslims support ISIS, and 44% believe Muslims are evenly balanced on the issue.

Support for ISIS in the Muslim World – Perceptions vs Reality
Support for ISIS in the Muslim World – Perceptions vs Reality

The fact of the matter is that Muslims speak out. Muslims scream and shout. As a minority that makes up merely 1% of the US population, it is hard for Muslims to get heard.

How many people have heard of ISNA’s Muslim Code of Honor? It denounces extremism and violence.

How many people have heard of the Fatwa against Terrorism and Suicide Bombing? Issued by Dr. Muhammad Tahir al-Qadri in 2010, it states that “Terrorism is terrorism, violence is violence and it has no place in Islamic teaching and no justification can be provided for it.” In 2014, he asserted that: “The ISIS ideology is disbelief in Islam. It is anti-Islam; against the teachings of the prophet of Islam.”

How many people have heard of the Covenants Initiative? Inspired by The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World, this international movement of Muslims is committed to protecting persecuted Jews, Christians and Muslims, and has been at the forefront of the ideological war against ISIS.

How many people have heard of Bin Bayyah’s fatwa? In September of 2014, Shaykh Abdallah Bin Bayyah, one of the most influential scholars in Sunni Islam, passed a lengthy fatwa condemning ISIS.

How many people have heard of the Letter to Baghdadi? Released in September of 2014, is a meticulously detailed refutation of ISIS. It was signed by over one hundred of Islam’s leading scholars and personally directed to the leader of the fake Islamic State.

How many people have heard of the Amman Message? Issued in November 2014, and signed by 200 Islamic scholars from over 50 countries, it calls for tolerance in the Muslim world.

How many people have heard the statement from the Organization of Islamic Cooperation? Released in 2014, it declares that the Islamic State has “nothing to do with Islam” and has committed crimes “that cannot be tolerated.”

How many people have heard of the fatwa from al-Azhar? Issued in 2014, it states that ISIS is “a danger to Islam.” 

How many people have heard of the Statement from the Arab League? Released in 2014, it denounces the “crimes against humanity” carried out by ISIS.

How many people have heard of the fatwa that was passed by Turkey’s top cleric, Mufti Mehmet Gormez? Issued in 2014, it states that ISIS is “hugely damaging” to Islam and Muslims.

How many people have heard of the condemnations made against ISIS by CAIR? Since 2014, they have repeatedly condemned ISIS as “Un-Islamic and morally repugnant.”

How many people have heard of the declaration made by the Muslim Council of Great Britain? Released in 2014, it affirms that “violence has no place in religion.”

How many people have heard of the fatwa published by the Fiqh Council of the Islamic Society of North America? Issued in 2014, and signed by 126 leading Muslim scholars, it asserts that the actions of ISIS are in no way representative of the teachings of Islam.

How many people have heard of the Joint Sunni-Shiite Fatwa issued by 100 U.K. Imams? Released in 2014, it describes ISIS as an “illegitimate” and “vicious group.”

How many people have heard of the statement issued by the Muslim Public Affairs Council? Published in 2014, it condemns ISIS and calls upon Muslim to “stand against extremism.”

How many people have heard of Nahdlatul Ulama? It is the largest Islamic organization in the world, representing 50 million Indonesian Muslims. In 2014, the NU launched a global campaign against extremism and Wahhabism.

How many people have heard of Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqubi thoughts on ISIS? In an interview conducted in 2014, he asserted that “ISIS has no nationality. Its nationality is terror, savagery, and hatred.” Furthermore, he asserted that “Baghdadi is going to hell.”

In 2015, Shaykh al-Yaqubi published a lecture titled Refuting ISIS: A Rebuttal of its Religious and Ideological Foundations? In his booklet, he states that ISIS constitutes the most serious threat that Islam has ever faced.

How many people have heard of the jihad that was declared by the Muslim Youth Group in the UK in 2015? They declared that groups like ISIS have “no link with Islam or the Muslim community.”

How many people have heard of the mass fatwa against ISIS? Issued in December of 2015, it has been signed by over 100,000 Muslim clerics from India, Bangladesh, and beyond, and endorsed by millions of Muslims.

How many people have heard of the Marrakesh Declaration? Issued in 2016, and signed by hundreds of major Muslim leaders, it expresses their collective commitment to the cause of human, civil, religious, and minority rights in Muslim countries.

Last but not least, how many people have heard of the Grozny Declaration which excommunicated the Salafi-Takfiris?  A group fatwa issued in Chechnya in 2016 by, among others, the Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar, the Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar, the highest authority in Sunni Islam, explicitly declared that “Salafi-Takfirists, Daesh (the so-called ‘Islamic State’) and similar extremist groups” were “not Muslim”.

I can assert with confidence, dismay, and despair, that 99% of non-Muslims have never heard of these efforts. And though millions of Muslims have participated in them, countless millions more have never heard of them. This ignorance is a scandal.

The Pew Research Center, the Washington Institute, ORB International, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies, and Zogby all confirm that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are opposed to ISIS.

Support for ISIS in the Muslim World)

I call upon all Muslims who oppose to ISIS, particularly those with sufficient resources to influence the mass media, to dedicate themselves to the publication of these and all other Muslim struggles against Daesh and their co-conspirators to the four corners of the earth. I also call upon our non-Muslim brothers and sisters to share this information with their family, friends, and communities. Millions upon millions have spoken out. It is up to all of us to spread the word.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an Amerindian Muslim leader and a proud member of the Métis Nation. After embracing Islam at the age of 16, he became both a Western academic and a traditional Muslim scholar. He is the author of a large body of scholarly works, the most influential of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World.

His websites include www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and www.johnandrewmorrow.com.

His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube. His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

Religion for Today – Covenants of the Prophet with Christians

BY: JOHN ANDREW MORROW   SOURCE: ISLAMICITY MAY 16, 2017 NO COMMENTS

Introduction

What good is religion if it is confined to private space? What good is religion if it fails to guide us in public life? We should not cast off our convictions, muzzle our morals, put aside our principles, and eject our ethics when we exit our homes. Almighty God, glorified and exalted be He, the Prophets, and the Messengers, peace and blessings be upon them, provided us with enduring values that are applicable at all times and all places. The Ten Commandments cannot be compromised. The Noble Eightfold Path cannot be compromised. The Golden Rule cannot be compromised. The Seven Grandfather Teachings cannot be compromised: humility, bravery, honesty, wisdom, truth, respect, and love, values that are becoming increasingly difficult for indigenous people to embody due to the soulless nature of secular society. So, woe to those who seek to bend and break universal moral values. They have no sense of the sacred.

The Qur’an and the Sunnah

The Prophet Muhammad provided us with guidance in matters of moral law, religious law, personal law, civil law, criminal law, environmental law, and international law. There are over 100 major fields of law: all of which have been addressed by the Hermit of Hira, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah.

Most Muslims read the Qur’an. And while it is wonderful to be able to read it in Arabic, Muslims should also make sure to study its meaning in a language they understand. When in doubt regarding its interpretation, Muslims consult the full-range of traditional commentaries of the Qur’an to see the full spectrum of readings. They should not rely on a single source. Most Muslims are familiar with Hadith literature. This is positive but perilous. Muslims should be extremely careful as to what they read. They should seek the guidance of traditional teachers. They should rely on reason and maintain moderation. They should focus on the spirit and not the letter.

If most Muslims read the Qur’an and some Muslims read the Hadith, few Muslims, however, have read, much less heard of, the letters, treaties, and covenants of the Prophet. The Messenger of Allah wrote (or dictated, as some prefer), hundreds upon hundreds of letters. This is a historical fact. It is indisputable. These documents are found in books of prophetic traditions, books of Qur’anic commentary, books of jurisprudence, and books of history. They form a fundamental part of our Islamic tradition and heritage. As Agapius of Hierapolis, a 10th century Christian author, acknowledged:

Their leader was a man called Muhammad, the son of ‘Abd Allah… He became their chief and king… Christians from the Arabs and others came to him and he gave them a guarantee of safety and wrote documents for them… All the people in opposition to him did likewise, I mean the Jews, the Zoroastrians, the Sabians, and others; they paid allegiance to him and took from him a guarantee of safety on the condition that they would pay him the poll-tax and the land-tax.

Ancient Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Samaritan, and Zoroastrian sources all confirm that the Prophet protected the lives, property, and places of worship of the People of the Book. Churches, monasteries, synagogues, and fire-temples, were all subject to protection.

The Letters, Treaties, and Covenants of the Prophet

If people wish to truly understand the Prophet Muhammad as a religious leader, as a diplomat, as a politician, and as a military strategist, they must absolutely study the letters, treaties, and covenants of the Prophet Muhammad and his extensive correspondence with Jews, Samaritans, Christians, and Zoroastrians.

Those who read Arabic should study Majmuʻah al-wathaʼiq al-siyasiyyah li al-ʻahd al-nabawi wa al-khilafah al-rashidah by Muhammad Hamidullah. Those who read Arabic should study Makatib al-Rasul by ‘Ali Ahmadi Minyanji. Those who read English should study Power Manifestations of the Sirah: Examining the Letters and Treaties of the Messenger of Allah by Zafar Bangash.

The most comprehensive source in the English language, however, is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. It is a work that provides an authoritative analysis of prophetic pluralism. After that, I would point readers to Islam and the People of the Book: Critical Studies on the Covenants of the Prophet, a forthcoming work that should be printed at some point in 2017.

Although I cannot possibly cite hundreds of letters from the extensive and impressive correspondence of the Prophet Muhammad, I will limit myself to reading the Master Template that he used when granting covenants of protection to the People of the Book as reconstructed and translated by Ahmed El-Wakil.

The Master Template of the Muhammadan Covenant with the Christians

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

This is a writ that Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib the Messenger of Allah has written to all Christians and to all the nations within which they reside to protect and to safeguard them because they are Allah’s trust among His Creation, so that there be evidence in their favor and for people to no longer have an excuse in front of Allah after the coming of the messengers. And Allah is All-Mighty and All-Wise.

He wrote it for the people of his creed and to all those who profess the Christian religion — in the Eastern lands and in the West, near and far, be they Arabs or non-Arabs, known or unknown — a writ which constitutes an authoritative covenant, a definitive decree and an established sunnah so that justice may prevail and for it to stand as an inviolable pact of protection.

He who observes it holds to the religion of Islam and is worthy of it. As for he who violates it and jeopardizes the covenant by opposing and transgressing what the Messenger of Allah has commanded therein, he has broken the covenant of Allah, denied His oath, and forsaken his protection thereby making himself subject to the divine curse, regardless of whether he be a Sultan or any other person among the Believers and the Muslims.

I have committed myself to granting the covenants and the pledges which have been requested of me and from all those who follow my creed among the Muslims. I give the Christians the covenant of Allah and His pledge and place them under the safeguard of His prophets, His chosen ones and His saints from among the Believers and the Muslims so that it be binding among the first and the last of them.

My protection and pledge is the most solid that Allah has taken from a prophet who has been sent or from an angel who is stationed near [the divine throne], thereby rendering mandatory the obedience, obligations and adherence to the covenant of Allah.

I protect their land with all my power, my horses, my men, my weapons, my strength and my followers among the Muslims from every region where the enemy lies, whether they be close by or far away, and regardless of whether the Muslims are at peace or at war.

I protect their surrounding areas and grant security to their churches, convents, houses of worship, the places of their monks and pilgrims, wherever they may be found, be they in the mountains or the valleys, the caves or the inhabited regions, the plains, the desert or in buildings, that I should safeguard them, their religion and creed wherever they may be found in the sea or on land, in the East or West in the same way that I protect myself, my entourage, and the people of my creed from among the Believers and the Muslims.

I place them under my protection and I give them my pledge and my security at every moment. I defend them from every harm, mischief and retribution. I am behind them, protecting them from every enemy who wishes us harm. I myself protect them by means of my helpers, my followers and the members of my creed because they are under my responsibility and my protected people whom I govern. I must therefore care for them and protect them of all harm so that it does not reach them unless it first reaches me and my Companions who with me defend the integrity of Islam.

I remove from them all mischief that people of the covenant have to bear of supplies which they give as loaned goods and as land taxes [kharaj] except what they voluntarily consent to and that they should neither be forced nor compelled in this matter.

It is not permitted to remove a bishop from his bishopric, a monk from his monastic life, a Christian from his Christianity, an ascetic from his hermitage, or a pilgrim from his pilgrimage. Nor is it permitted to destroy any part of their churches or their convents or to take parts of their buildings to construct mosques or homes for the Muslims. Whoever does such a thing will have violated the covenant of Allah, opposed His messenger and betrayed the protection granted to him by Allah.

It is not permitted to impose the jizyah or any kind of land tax [kharaj] on monks, bishops and those worshippers who by devotion wear woolen clothing or live alone in the mountains or in other regions secluded from human habitation.

The jizyah for those Christians who have not consecrated their lives to divine worship and who are neither monks nor pilgrims will either be at a rate of 4 dirhams per year or the provision of a garment to support the Muslims and to strengthen the Treasury. If the garment is too difficult for them then it will not be binding upon them unless they willingly consent.

The jizyah will not surpass more than twelve dirhams per year for landowners and proprietors of estates and large businesses at sea and at deep-sea — who exploit mines for precious stones, gold and silver — including those who are wealthy and powerful among those who have professed Christianity so long as they are inhabitants and residents of the land.

The traveler who is not a resident in the land and he who is a foreigner will not have to pay the land-tax [kharaj] or the jizyah except he who has inherited land over which the Sultan has a monetary right. He must pay the money as others do without there being any excesses and he should not be made to bear what is beyond his strength or means in the cultivation, development and harvest of the land. He should also not be taxed excessively and above the limit that has been set for landowners who are inhabitants of the land.

The people under our protection will not be obliged to go to war with the Muslims to face their enemies and to combat them. The reason for this is that they have been given our protection so that they be discharged of this obligation and it is therefore the Muslims who will be responsible for their safety and protection. The Christians will not be obliged to equip the Muslims for any of their wars against their enemies by means of weapons and horses unless they freely contribute of their own volition. Whoever does so will be the object of praise, reward, and gratitude, and his help will not be forgotten.

No one who follows the Christian creed will be forced to enter into Islam — and dispute not with them except with means that are better (Q29:46). They must be covered by the wing of mercy and all mischief and harm that could reach them, wherever they may find themselves and wherever they may be, must be repelled.

If a Christian were to commit a crime or an offense, Muslims must stand by his side, help him and support him. They must safeguard him and pay the penalty for his offense. They should encourage reconciliation between him and the victim to either help or save him.

The Muslims must not abandon the Christians and leave them without help and assistance since I have given them the covenant of Allah to ensure that they have the same rights and obligations as the Muslims. Furthermore, the Muslims have an obligation toward them with respect to the covenant, guaranteeing them the right of protection and safeguarding everything that is sacrosanct. They also have accepted that every mischief be removed from them and that they be bound to the Muslims so that they and the Muslims become partners with one another in the mutual rights and obligations that they share.

Christians must not be subject to suffer abuse in matters pertaining to marriages, except for what they themselves agree. Christian families should not be compelled to marry their girls to Muslims and they should not be subject to any maltreatment if they decline a suitor or refuse a marriage proposal. Such marriages should only take place if they desire them and with their approval and consent.

If a Muslim takes a Christian woman as a wife, he must respect her Christian beliefs. He must support her religious aspirations so that she may receive religious instruction from her [clerical] superiors and he must allow her to fulfill her religious obligations. He must not ever prevent her of this. He must also not force her to act contrary to her religion or abuse her so that she abandons it. If he does this, and forces her, then he has broken the covenant of Allah and violated the pledge [given to the Christians] by the Messenger of Allah, and in the sight of Allah he is among the liars.

The Christians hold the right to request assistance from the Muslims to help them repair their convents, monasteries or for any other matter pertaining to their religious affairs. The Muslims must help them without the aim of receiving any compensation: they should aim to restore that religion out of faithfulness to the covenant of the Messenger of Allah and as a gift and donation to them from Allah and His messenger.

In matters of war between them and their enemies, the Muslims must not employ any Christian as a messenger, guide, helper, informant, or for any other duty of war. Whoever obliges one of them to do such a thing will have committed an injustice, disobeyed the Messenger of Allah and become free of his protection. The Muslims must uphold the stipulations which Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib, the Messenger of Allah, has issued in favor of those who follow the Christian creed.

He has also placed conditions in their religion concerning their pact of protection which they must abide by as part of the covenant which they have contracted with him. Among other things, none of them are to support an enemy of war against the Muslims, either openly or covertly. They are not to shelter them in their homes from which they could await the moment to launch an attack. These enemies [of the Muslims] should never be allowed to halt in their regions, their villages, their places of worship, or in any other place belonging to their co-religionists. They must not provide any assistance to them by furnishing them with weapons, horses, men or other logistical support. They must not allow them to deposit any of their wealth or exchange any correspondences with them. They are not to host them as guests except that it should be in a monastery where they are seeking refuge and protection for their livelihoods and their religion.

The Christians must host the Muslims along with their mounts for three days and three nights when they halt among them. They must offer them wherever they may be located or stationed the same food that they consume. They are not obliged to do any more, for in fulfilling this obligation they have removed all harm and mischief that may reach the Muslims.

If one of the Muslims needs to hide in one of their homes or in one of their places of worship they must grant him hospitality, help him and stand by his side so long as the Muslim remains in hiding. They must conceal him from the enemy, not disclose his location and accommodate for all of his needs.

Whoever contravenes any of these conditions or transgresses them by altering them has freed himself of the protection of Allah and that of His messenger. The Christians possess the covenants and the pledges which I took from their priests, monks and from other Christians from among the People of the Book. It is the most solid trust that Allah and His prophet have placed on the community so that they may abide by what the Prophet himself has decreed upon them and upon all of the Muslims, to ensure their protection and as benevolence to them until the Hour arrives and the world comes to an end.  Whoever is unjust after this toward a protected person by breaking and rejecting the covenant, I will be his enemy on the Day of Judgment among all the Muslims.

Conclusions

What more could I possibly say? What on earth could I possibly add to the words of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him. I am unworthy. His wisdom leave me completely and utterly speechless. Peace be upon the Prophet of Allah. Peace be upon the Messenger of Allah. And peace be upon all the followers of righteous guidance.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is an Amerindian Muslim leader and a proud member of the Métis Nation. After embracing Islam at the age of 16, he became both a Western academic and a traditional Muslim scholar. He is the author of a large body of scholarly works, the most influential of which is The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World. His websites include http://www.covenantsoftheprophet.com and http://www.johnandrewmorrow.com. His videos and lectures can be found on The Covenants of the Prophet Channel on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqM3-puvWuKuCEJsDQDZFrA . His Facebook accounts include @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet. He can be followed on Twitter @drjamorrow.

Something Wicked this Way Comes: The Origin and Development of Takfirism

Something Wicked this Way Comes: The Origin and Development of Takfirism

SHAFAQNA – By Dr. John Andrew Morrow – Delivered in Phoenix, Arizona, on Friday, December 23rd, 2016, at the 46st Annual Muslim Students Association – Persian-Speaking Group Conference.

In the Name of Allah, the Avenger. Allah is One is Muhammad is His Messenger. Praise be to Allah, the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe, and peace be upon his Prophet, Muhammad the son of ‘Abd Allah, and upon his purified progeny.

Takfirism begins and ends with Satanism. It begins with an act of rebellion and an act of defiance against the Creator. It begins with Any khayrun minhu or “I am better than he” (38:76), the wicked words of the wicked one, the cursed one, the one who defied the Divinity out of jealousy for humanity.

Takfirism begins and ends with Satanism. It begins with a believer, Iblis, a jinn who was raised and educated by angels, and who worshipped Allah for over five thousand years. Iblis believes in Allah. He has knowledge of certainty of Allah. How can he not? Iblis believes in the Prophets of Allah. He knows that Adam is the Prophet of Allah. He knows that Abraham is the Prophet of Allah. He knows that Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad are the Messengers of Allah. Iblis believes in the Imams of Allah. He knows full well that Allah appointed Twelve Imams after Muhammad ibn Abd Allah.

But mere belief does not make one a believer. A believer can be an unbeliever. I repeat: a believer can be an unbeliever because weak faith or the saying that “I believe in God but I do not practice any religion” is the equivalent of disbelieving despite verbally expression the contrary. Belief is acceptance that something exists. But belief is also trust, faith, and confidence in something. It requires both conviction and practice. As Almighty Allah says in al-Qur’an al-Karim:

The desert Arabs say, “We believe (amanna).” Say: “You do not as yet have true faith.” Rather say: “We have only submitted our wills to Allah (aslamna)” for not yet has true faith entered your hearts. (49:14)

So, Iblis is a believer in the sense that he acknowledges the existence of God, the Prophet, the Messengers, and the Imams; however, Iblis is an unbeliever because he does not place trust in them; does not have faith in them; does not have confidence in them; and does not submit to their command. He is a kafir or one who opposes truth. He israjim, rejected, and cursed. As Almighty Allah says in al-Qur’an al-Karim:

O you who have believed, enter into Islam completely [and perfectly] and do not follow the footsteps of Satan. Indeed, he is to you a clear enemy. (2: 208)

There is more to belief than acknowledging that something is true. You need to have confidence in it. You need to place trust in it. Belief is m‘arifah or knowledge. Iman; however, is not mere belief; it is not mere faith. Iman is an expression of amanah or trust. It is to believe in God, have faith in God, trust in God, and submit to God.

A mu’min is a person who has iman; who has faith and trust in God. A Muslim is one who submits to God. It is possible to be a mu’min, a believer in God, without being a Muslim. Likewise, it is possible to be a nominal Muslim without really being a mu’min. A kafir is not necessarily an atheist. Kufr comes from the root KFR which means to conceal and to cover up. It is the denial or rejection of something that is evident. A kafir is someone who opposes the Truth. A munafiq is not simply a hypocrite. Nifaq derives from nafaq, the tunnel or burrow of a rat: the escape route. The munafiq is one who undermines Truth. A fasiq is not simply an open sinner. The word derives from fisq which means “breaking an agreement” or “to leave or go out of.” The term fasiq is not only associated with breaking the law; it is broadly associated with kufr or concealing the truth. To understand Takfirism, we need to understand this terminology.

We need to understand that the simple profession of La ilaha ila Allah / Muhammadan Rasul Allah does not suffice to make one a real mu’min or a real Muslim. We need to understand that a person can proclaim that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger while being a kafir, a fasiq, and a munafiq. In Islam, one is not saved by faith alone. In Islam, salvation is determined by belief and action; faith and deeds.

The beginning of Takfiri ideology traces back to the time of the Prophet and the disrespect shown by Hurqus ibn Zuhayr, known as Dhu al-Khuwaysirah al-Tamimi al-Najdi. When the Messenger of Allah was dividing the spoils of war, he had the audacity to say: “O Messenger of Allah! Be just!” Can you imagine the audacity? Can you conceive of a more egregiously offensive insult?

The goal or ‘irfan or suluk is al-takhalluq bi asma Allah wa al-sifat; namely, to acquire the names and attributes of Allah. The Most Beautiful Names of Allah represent a 99-step plan toward spiritual perfection. The seeker strives to adopt a divine attribute. If Allah is Merciful, the seeker strives to become merciful. If Allah is the Loving, the seeker strives to become loving. If Allah is Patient, the seeker strives to become patient. If Allah is Wise, the seeker strives to become wise. In rare instances, a seeker can acquire all the attributes of Allah; thereby becoming al-insan al-kamil or a Perfect Human Being. This is what is called acquired isma’ or infallibility. The Prophets, the Messengers, the Imams, and certain ‘awliyya’ al-salihin, like al-Khidr, for example, were blessed with innate isma’ or infallibility.

The Messenger of Allah, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah, was a perfect human being. He was ma‘sum, endowed with incorruptible innocence, immunity from sin, and moral infallibility. In other words, he embodied and manifested all the names and attributes of Allah. So, if Almighty Allah is al-‘Adil, the Most Just, I swear by the Throne of Majesty that Muhammad Rasul Allah was the most ‘adil and just of human beings to walk the face of the Earth.

To question the qualities of the Messenger of Allah and to doubt his character is an act of irtidad or apostasy. It is an act of kufr, nifaq, and fisq. It turns one from a friend of Allah into an enemy of Allah. When Hurqus ibn Zuhayr said “Be Just” or “Fear God, O, Messenger of Allah” it was Satan that spoke, in the same fashion he spoke when he said Ana khayrun minhu or “I am better than he.” Hurqus ibn Zuhayr was the founder of the Khawarij; the leader of the Kharijites, the group that killed Imam ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. He was the the founder of a group that has caused fitnah and bloodshed in the Ummah of Islam for the past 1400 years. As the Messenger of Allah responded: “Woe to you! Who will be just if I am not just?” I repeat: “Woe to you! Who will be just if I am not just?” The Prophet then foretold:

There will come a time when a group of people will leave our ranks. They will recite the Qur’an with fervor and passion but its spirit will not go beyond their throats. They will kill the Muslims and spare the idol-worshippers. They will leave our ranks in the manner of an arrow when it shoots from its bow. If I live to witness their appearance, I will kill them as the people of ‘Aad were killed. (Bukhari and Muslim)

The hadith in question has been related by numerous Companions of the Prophet with slight variants. In another version, the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, says:

There will be division and sectarianism in my nation and a people will come with beautiful words and evil deeds…   They are the worst of the creation. Blessed are those who fight them and are killed by them. They call to the Book of Allah but they have nothing to do with it. Whoever fights them is better to Allah than them. (Abu Dawud)

This was not the only encounter the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, had with the Takfiris of his time. They were the same people who came to him with sores on their foreheads from prostrating to the extreme in obsessive-compulsive fashion. Some of these people refused to eat meat. Some refused to marry. And some who were married refused to have sexual relations with their wives. The Prophet told them straight out: “Whoever turns away from my Sunnah is not from me” (Bukhari and Muslim). When the Takfiris asked the Prophet how many prayers he did, they said that “it was little.” In other words, they thought that they were better than him.

The Messenger of Allah warned Muslims against extremism and extremists. He said: “Do not be extremists” (Bukhari). He said: “Beware of extremism in your religion for it is that which destroyed the nations which came before you” (Nasai and Ibn Majah). He said: “The religious extremists are destroyed” (Muslim and Abu Dawud). And he said: “There are two groups of people from my Ummah who will not receive my intercession: oppressive rulers, and religious extremists” (Tabarani).

The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, was confronted with extremists during his lifetime, fanatics that he himself rejected and excommunicated saying that they did not belong to his Ummah or Community. As the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “The Kharijites are the dogs of Hell” (Ahmad, Ibn Majah, and al-Hakim). So, when I say that Takfirism begins and ends with Satanism, I am paraphrasing the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him. So, if you have any problems with what I am saying, you can take it up with him.

Takfirism traces back to Kharijism. However, Takfirism also traces back to Nasibism: the hatred of the Household of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon them all. The enemies of Allah, the Prophet, and Islam adopted various approaches. Some remained openly pagan and fought him physically. Others embraced Islam outwardly but not inwardly: openly antagonizing the Prophet. And yet others embraced Islam openly only to undermine it inwardly. The realized the power of religion, figured that if you cannot beat them you might as well join them, and then started to plot and conspire to usurp power. Some of these sinister characters attempted to assassinate the Prophet in Aqabah toward the end of his life. However, as soon as the Prophet Muhammad passed away, they put their plan into action, the aim of which was to pass power into the hands of the Banu Umayyah.

Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali all attempted to implement the teachings of Islam to the best of their abilities. The same, however, cannot be said of the Umayyads and the ‘Abbasids who made a mockery of God, the Prophet, and Islam, and persecuted the Family of the Prophet and their faithful followers. And while they claimed to be Muslims, many of the leaders that followed behaved like polytheistic savages and bloodthirsty pagans.

If modern-day Takfirism is rooted in Kharijism and Nasibism, it is also rooted in Salafism, known pejoratively as Wahhabism. It was the Messenger of Allah himself, peace and blessings be upon him, who foretold this modern manifestation of Takfirism. In fact, he warned his followers that the Horns of Satan would rise from the Najd (Bukhari), the very region in Arabia where the Wahhabi heresy took hold a mere two hundred years ago.

A man by the name of Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab surfaced in the Najd in the 18th century. His stated aim was to “purify Islam” by following the “pious predecessors.”   A literalist and fundamentalist, with no scholarly credentials of any kind, he declared that Sunnis, Shiites, and Sufis were all polytheists whose blood, property, and women were halal. As you can imagine, this is a very appealing ideology for criminals, murderers, thugs, thieves, misogynists, rapists, and all-round psychopaths. Although it would take hours to expound upon the theological errors of these evil-doers, it boils down to the following: Salafism is extremism in thought and action.

Takfirism can be compared to a three-headed dragon composed of Kharijism, Nasibism, and Salafism. What are the distinguishing features of Takfirism? The Takfiris are convinced that only they are Muslims. They believe that they belong to the only saved sect. They claim that Sunnis, Sufis, and Shiites are all infidels, polytheists, and innovators. The Takfiris insist that all rulers, except themselves, are illegitimate. The Takfiris also believe that is permissible to slaughter Muslims and innocent people: civilians, non-combatants, women, children, the elderly, the handicapped, the disabled, and even babies. As Ibn Kathir wrote in al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah:

If the Khawarij ever gained power, they would corrupt the entire earth, Iraq, and Syria. They would not leave alone a boy or a girl or a man or a woman, for in their view the people have become so corrupt that they cannot be reformed except by mass killing.

As Wahb ibn Munabbih states in Tarikh Dimashq:

I knew the early period of Islam. By Allah, the Kharijites never had a group except that Allah caused it to split due to their evil condition. Never did one of them proclaim his opinion except that Allah caused his neck to be struck. Never did the Muslim nation unite upon a man from the Kharijites. If Allah had allowed the opinion of the Kharijites to take root, the earth would have been corrupted, the roadways would have been cut off, the Hajj pilgrimage to the sacred house of Allah would have been cut off, and the affair of Islam would have returned to ignorance until the people would seek refuge in the mountains as they had done in the time of ignorance. If there were to arise among them ten or twenty men, there would not be a man among them except that he would claim the Caliphate for himself. With each man among them would be ten thousand others, all of them fighting each other and charging each other with unbelief until even the believer would fear for himself, his religion, his life, his family, his wealth, and he would not know where to travel or with whom he should be.

The Kharijites surfaced during the time of the Prophet. They supported Abu Bakr and ‘Umar; however, they opposed ‘Uthman. They tried to assassinate both Mu‘awiyyah and ‘Amr ibn al-As despite the fact that they themselves were Takfiris. They succeeded in murdering Imam ‘Ali. They continued to revolt and rebel for centuries during Umayyad and ‘Abbasid rule. In North Africa, they waged war against the Adarisa, the Idrisids, the great-great-grandsons of Imam al-Hasan who established the first Shiite Dynasty.

Although the Kharijites and the Nawasib were two opposing groups during the early Islamic period, the Salafi groups that surfaced over the past two centuries have combined elements from both. Takfirism is a mutant monster that combines elements from Kharijism, Nasibism, and Salafism. Many of them have also spiced up their psychosis with ideas inspired from Socialism, Nazism, and Fascism. Many of their practices remain profoundly pre-Islamic and pagan.

From the time of the Prophet to the present, the Takfiris have been, wittingly or unwittingly, at the service of the enemies of Islam. Many historians believe that the revolts that took place after the passing of the Prophet were supported by the Romans or the Persians to destabilize the nascent Muslim Ummah.

We know for a fact that the British used Wahhabi terrorists to destabilize and ultimately destroy the Ottoman Empire. We know for a fact that the British, the French, and the Germans enlisted to Takfiri terrorists to support their geo-political designs during the First and Second World Wars. We know for a fact that the Americans trained, funded, armed, and supported Takfiri terrorists in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Bosnia, and Kosovo in the 1980s and 1990s as part of their proxy war against the Russians. We know for a fact that the French supported the GIA, the Armed Islamic Group, in Algeria, to discredit the democratic election of the FIS, the Front Islamique de Salut. We know for a fact that the Americans are supporting Takfiri terrorists in Central Asia to antagonize both Russia and China. We know for a fact that the Americans have supported Takfiri terrorists in Libya to overthrow Qaddafi. We know for a fact that the Americans have been training and supporting Takfiri terrorists operating in Egypt, Iraq, and Syria to destabilize or overthrow various legal and legitimate governments.

So far from defending Islam from the infidels, Takfiri terrorists have a long history of serving as the catamites of the enemies of Islam. They are not mujahidin: they are mercenaries; death squads at the service of the Empire; pawns in the geo-political plans of the one-percenters and occultist globalists; and false flags in a spiritual and civilizational conflict with cosmic consequences.

We know who these people are. We know where they come from. And we know what their ultimate destiny will be. As the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “In the last days, there will be young people with foolish dreams” (Bukhari). This foolish dream is the Caliphate that the Takfiris seek to create; not the Khilafat Allahbut the Khilafat Shaytan. As the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

There will emerge from the east some people from my nation who will recite the Qur’an but it will not go beyond their throats. Every time a faction of them emerges it will be cut off. 

The Prophet repeated this, over and over, and on the tenth time he said:

Every time a faction of them emerges it will be cut off until the Dajjal [the False Messiah] emerges from their remnants. (Ahmad) 

The Takfiris are not preparing the advent of Christ: they are the torchbearers of the Anti-Christ. Tell the Muslims! Tell the Christians! Tell the Jews! Tell the secular liberals! Tell the world! Takfirism begins and ends with Satanism. 

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is the author of The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World and the Director of the Covenants Initiative, an international movement devoted to protecting persecuted Christians as well as Shiites, Sufis, traditional Sunnis, and Yazidis. His websites includewww.covenantsoftheprophet.com andwww.johnandrewmorrow.com. His Twitter account is @drjamorrow. He can also be followed on his various Facebook pages: @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet

Welcome Home ISIS! The Obama Administration’s Plan to Reintegrate Foreign Terrorist Fighters

By Dr. John Andrew Morrow

obama_isis_war

Allegations of US-support for pseudo-Islamist terrorists around the world often fall on deaf ears and are dismissed as the mad ramblings of conspiracy theorists.

According to numerous scholars, including Noam Chomsky, Michel Chossudovsky, and many others, the United States has a long and well-documented history of supporting mass murderers around the world, both covertly and overtly.

As many researchers have reported, the Government of the United States has supported genocidal military dictators around the globe as well as violent extremists, ranging from death-squads in Latin America to MKO terrorists in Iran as well as acts of aggression in other parts of the world.

US-support for the Mujahidin, al-Qaeda, and the early Taliban has been widely reported as has American support for the internationalist terrorists who overthrew Qaddafi and those who have exceeded all bounds in their attempt to annihilate Iraq and Syria.

Despite the clear and present danger that so-called Radical Islamist terrorists pose to the Western world, political and intelligence analysists report that the US administration has continued to use them as “useful geopolitical tools” to weaken and destabilize nation-states.

And while the United States government finally appeared to take a moral stance against ISIS by passing the Fortenberry Resolution on March 15, 2016, and holding the terrorist group responsible for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, it has no intention of actually prosecuting any returning terrorists, and never had the intention of bringing any of them to justice.

As FBI Director James Comey indicated in an interview with “60 Minutes” on October 7, 2014, American citizens who are fighting with ISIS are “entitled” to return to the US. Such a position, however, is in blatant violation of United States Code, Section 1481, which states that:

A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality– …(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if (A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or … (7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, … , or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.

What is more, current US law also states that it is a crime to provide material support to a terrorist organization which includes joining or attempting to join a terrorist group. Finally, the US Neutrality Act also makes it a crime for American citizens or residents to fight against a government with which the US is not officially at war.

Under the Obama administration, however, the law did not apply. Rather than arrest, prosecute, and punish war criminals and traitors, James Comey, the FBI Director, reported that returning ISIS terrorists were merely being “tracked.” In fact, on November 13, 2015, the FBI admitted that it was engaged in nearly 1,000 active probes involving ISIS members, sympathizers, and supporters on US soil. Typically, however, whether it is in Europe or the United States, we only learn that a person was “under surveillance” after they have committed mass murder.

Over a year earlier, on September 22, 2014, President Obama admitted that American ISIS fighters had returned to the United States. Rather than have them detained, charged, and convicted, he reported that they were being tracked closely. That is like telling parents that the State is simply keeping violent pedophilic sexual predators under surveillance rather than holding them accountable for their crimes.

On September 30, 2014, the Brookings Institute published an article by Daniel L. Byman and Jeremy Shapiro that argued that “the danger posed by returning fighters is both familiar and manageable.”

A policy briefing, titled, Returning Foreign Fighters was published by the Brooking Institute on August 15, 2015, argued in favor of reintegration of foreign fighters as opposed to criminalization.

In May of 2016, the US Department of State and US Aid published their Joint Strategy on Countering Violent Extremism which calls for the “rehabilitation and reintegration” of violent extremist radicals “back into society.”

In a study titled ISIS in the West, published by the New America Foundation in November of 2015 and updated on March 22, 2016, Peter Bergen, Courtney Schuster, and David Sterman, described the threat of returning terrorists as “low” and “likely … manageable.”

Apparently, the US administration also had its Obama-Muslims on board who supported the suicidal plan to reintegrate returning terrorists fighters.

Humera Khan, the Executive Director of Muflehun, a think tank specializing in preventing radicalization and countering violent extremism proposes four intersecting strategies to combat extremism:

preventing radicalization, intervening on behalf of individuals who have radicalized, interdicting or finding and prosecuting those who have engaged in criminal behavior, and reintegrating into society those offenders who are in prison, have served their term, or are returning from conflict zones.

While reasonable people agree with prevention and intervention, the notion of rehabilitating terrorists who are guilty of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity is morally and ethically objectionable.

It is one thing when a naïve, idealistic youth, who was brain-washed by some manipulative Salafi / Wahhabi / Takfiris, goes to Syria, sees that he has been lied to, realizes that the “Islamic” State is actually a “Satanic” State, repents, returns home, and atones. Such a youth could eventually be completely de-radicalized and prove useful in preventing the radicalization of others.

It is another thing altogether when a committed person, who is fully aware of the criminal actions of ISIS, joins them eagerly, torturing, mutilating, and murdering people, beheading babies, exterminating Christians, Shiites, Sufis, traditional Sunnis, and Kurds, as well as raping, enslaving, and trafficking women, returns to the Western world.

Despite endorsing the Fortenberry Resolution, which finds ISIS guilty of war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity, the US Government, under Obama, has had no intention of bringing ISIS terrorists to justice, either here or abroad.

Like the European governments, who feel that prosecuting returning terrorist fighters is “impractical” and “difficult,” the American administration argues that the International Human Rights Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over Syria and Iraq. Ironically, the US administration has no qualms about jurisdiction when they attack, bomb, invade, and occupy sovereign nations.

Through statements from government officials, policy recommendations from think-tanks, as well as reports from a number of sources close to the White House, it was US policy, under Obama, not to arrest and prosecute ISIS fighters returning to the United States, but to attempt to “reintegrate” them into US society, thus putting all Americans at risk. First the Cuban Exiles, next the Contras, and now this.

The same policy has been in place in Saudi Arabia for some time, where returning terrorists are “re-educated” to view this or that foreign enemy, rather than the Saudi regime itself, as the proper objects of their “jihad” against unbelievers. It has met with little success.

By embracing the “Countering Violent Extremism Strategy,” the Obama Administration betrayed an incredibly naïve view of the threat posed to the West by Takfiri terrorists. In fact, it leaves some to suspect that “reintegration” may be part of the deal the US made with certain ISIS fighters, either as a sort of retirement package or a way of putting valuable assets on ice for possible future reactivation. And the Feds may fear if they do not keep their end of that bargain, ISIS will respond with large-scale attacks inside the US.

Readers should definitely search “War College Counter-Insurgency Policies” plus “Salvadoran Death-Squads,” since it appears that the US plan for ISIS may incorporate elements of the model that was used with both the death-squads and the Contras. The BIG DIFFERENCE here is that the death-squads and the Contras did not ultimately declare war on the US, which would make ISIS the greatest foreign policy debacle in US history.

All Americans should be shocked that such policies have been proposed and even more scandalized that they have been implemented. In March of 2016, the House of Representatives declared by a unanimous vote the actions of ISIS to be genocide; this conclusion was echoed by Secretary of State John Kerry. Yet the plan appears to be not to arrest and prosecute these war criminals and ship them to Guantanamo, but to attempt to reintegrate them into society  perhaps after a short “vacation,” perhaps not.

We are still tracking down and punishing the last Nazis, now in their 90’s, and the actions of ISIS are certainly as barbaric as anything the Nazis ever dreamt up. Anyone who thinks that a young terrorist with the blood still moist and fragrant on his hands poses less of a threat to US society than some 90-year old ex-Nazi should have his or her head examined. Have the laws against treason been suspended? Apparently so.

If Obama’s White House appears to have been sanitized of sanity, the United Nations still seems to have a head on its shoulders. Contrary to the US government, that downplays the danger, the UN recently reported that foreign terrorist fighters “pose a “significant and evolving” global threat.

The US Government, under Obama, has continued to live in la-la land, urging Muslim communities to help reintegrate and rehabilitate returning ISIS combatants. If the administration had its way it would be time to welcome home ISIS to the USA!

With the election of Donald Trump, the pendulum appears to have shifted from a policy of aiding and abetting ISIS terrorists, while simultaneously pretending to fight them, to a policy of blowing the shit out of them with the support of Vladimir Putin who has suddenly shifted from being an enemy to an indispensable ally.

Nuclear War with Russia

As disappointing as Hillary Clinton’s defeat may be to half of the US population, it appears to have averted a nuclear war with Russia and China. The Obama-Clinton policy of antagonizing Russia and China was playing with nuclear fire. Hillary’s threat to impose a no-fly zone over Syria and her willingness to shoot down Russian aircrafts could have escalated into a conflict of cataclysmic proportions.

The major build-up of nuclear bombers on Diego Garcia, a US military base in the Indian Ocean, no fly zones over Montana’s nuclear silos, and the movement of refueling tankers to the Middle were also ominous signs in October of 2016.

Under-reported or entirely ignored in the United States, the Russians organized massive nuclear attack drills involving 40 million citizens in October of 2016. In the same month, Putin requested that Russian students, officials, and their loved-one return to “the Motherland.” These unprecedented actions coincided with the upgrading of the DEFCON Warning System to Level 3.

The DEFCON alert system has five different levels with level 1indicating an impeding nuclear war. To put things into perspective, the last time the alert was raised so high was on September 11, 2001. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, the US Armed Forces were ordered to DEFCON 3 while Strategic Air Command was ordered to DEFCON 2.

If most inhabitants of planet earth were oblivious to the fact that the world was on the brink of nuclear war in October of 2016, they also ignored that the risk was directly related to the potential election of Clinton. Not only did Hillary intend on following the failed foreign policy of her predecessor, she intended to assume an even more belligerent stance.

While many people were shocked at the election of Donald Trump, and many were convinced that the world would come to an end, they failed to realize that the DEFCON warning level immediately dropped down to 5, namely, “There are currently no imminent nuclear threats against the United States at this time.” In other words, the world almost came to an end: not because of Trump but rather because of Clinton.

And while it is true that the DEFCON alert system “is not affiliated with any government agency… and does not represent the alert status of any military branch,” it serves as a barometer that gages the risk of nuclear war involving the United States. Relying on publicly available information as well as contacts within government and military agencies, it provides, in my estimation, an informed analysis of current political conditions.

As President-Elect, Donald J. Trump’s first accomplishment was saving the planet from nuclear doom. His second accomplishment was his promise to stop all US-support for the terrorists operating in Syria, Iraq, and beyond. And rather than sending ISIS veterans home to the United States, we can only hope and pray that Trump’s re-set toward a reasonable foreign policy and a multipolar worldview will send Takfiri terrorists to their eternal home in Hell.

As much as I have criticized Mr. Trump for all the outrageous statements he has made and the scandalous policies he has proposed, and as much as I will continue to denounce any declarations that he makes and any actions that he takes that violate the Constitution of the United States, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva Convention, and international law, I will praise and support any positive efforts on his part.

Mr. Trump, as President, 1) promise us that American imperialism and exceptionalism will become part of the past; 2) promise us that the United States will no longer employ “Islamist” terrorists as part of overt and covert military actions against sovereign nations; 3) promise us that plans to reintegrate and rehabilitate returning terrorist fighters will be permanently halted and that the war criminals in question will be brought to justice; and, finally, 4) promise us that you will make a distinction, not between “moderate” Muslims and “extremist” Muslims but between true Muslims and false Muslims. If you fulfil these four promises, you will go a great way in reassuring the American Muslim community, discouraging Islamophobia, and lowering the spike in anti-Muslim hate crimes.

President-Elect Trump, it is time to act Presidential and be a President for all Americans, including us, the millions of Muslims who are proud to be citizens of this great nation.

Dr. John Andrew Morrow is the author of The Covenants of the Prophet Muhammad with the Christians of the World and the Director of the Covenants Initiative, an international movement devoted to protecting persecuted Christians as well as Shiites, Sufis, traditional Sunnis, and Yazidis. His websites include www.covenantsoftheprophet.com andwww.johnandrewmorrow.com. His Twitter account is @drjamorrow. He can also be followed on his various Facebook pages: @johnandrewmorrow and @covenantsoftheprophet

The original source of this article is Global Research

%d bloggers like this: