(“Our religion teaches tolerance... We are told to present the Message of Islam, and if they don't accept, than so be it." )

Aladdin, (a Muslim) -- December 12, 2007

I see that you are confused with what Islam is. It is ok, you are not to blame, It is the media negatively portraying us through the television and newspapers. You are a victim of media. :)

Well, if you care to know the TRUTH, I am willing to truly help you understand. This confusion can be cleared with a few kind words of dialogue between you and I and hopefully, Allah willing, you will see what 20,000 Americans a year see before they convert to Islam, The peaceful path to God/Allah.

I am awaiting your message My Friend

Peace Be Upon You.
***********************

Jack Diamond (an Infidel):

Thanks for your comment. First, my consideration of Islam and Jihad do not come from the media but from the Qur'an, Sira and aHadith, primary sources; and from esteemed commentators such as Ibn Kathir & Suyuti; from the history of Islamic conquests; and from the lips of today's self-proclaimed jihadists and their flacks. I find it interesting that you would hold the media to blame for causing non-Muslims to misunderstand Islam when, in fact, like the US government, the media bends over backwards not to associate even genuine jihad activity with Islam. They are either just termed generic "extremists" or at best "hijackers of Islam" when forced to use the "I" word. You prefer to blame the media rather than blame Muslims committing murder and mayhem all over the world in the name of Islam. That is what is really causing these "misunderstandings" isn't it? After all, it's not the media blowing up trains and subways, nightclubs and markets, car bombing hundreds of passersby or sending out Islamikazee homicide-suicide 'martyrs' to their "weddings.” It is Muslims, after all, not the media, crashing airliners into buildings and beheading bound, helpless civilians while shouting "Allahu Akbar!"

We do see thousands of Muslims cheering and celebrating mass murder on 9/11, we do see tens of thousands in hysterics over cartoons or remarks by the Pope and real people killed as a result, but no worldwide, righteous Muslim anger over their religion being "hijacked". No, the anger is directed towards non-Muslims daring to associate Islam with any of this or simply repeating what the jihadists give as their reasons. Nor is there any serious ongoing effort to oust jihadist ideology and shari'a supremacism from being taught in the mosques and schools or by leaders of prominent Muslim organizations or to counter their argument, which comes from Qur'an and Sunnah and is used to recruit young Muslims to practice Real Islam. How can there be when all we hear are denials that such verses exist or that they mean what they seem to mean. Finally, and maybe most disturbing, is the lack of real sorrow and compassion for the victims. Your arguments would be better directed towards your co-religionists then setting me straight about Islam. If you don't believe Islamic scripture obligates warfare against unbelievers, (whose high crime is kufr) and those who are obstacles to the spread of Islam, an Islam whose goal must be governing authority over all the earth, if the TRUTH you want to help me understand is that Islam affirms pluralism and living in peace with its non-Muslim neighbors--not temporarily from weakness or a truce but permanently--if Islam affirms the equal rights of non-Muslims with Muslims, and the equal rights of women with men, I sincerely hope you will begin to educate all those Muslims out there who so badly misunderstand their religion.

Best wishes

****************
Aladdin:

Thank you for writing back. Great! J Now let's get down to some understanding. Looks like I got a person with an interesting way of thinking. Very good. Well I will try to straighten out all the misconceptions I can Allah willing.

All right let's start.

First off, what do the people have to do with the religion?

If you want to understand a religion, you go back to the scriptures they follow and not to the people following the religion. People are people and we all make mistakes, right? So that's what you did, which is great.

It seems like you told me you have a problem with the scriptures, but than turned around and started judging the people. If you have issues in scripture, point it out and we can discuss the reasoning behind each. Everything can be explained with logic and science in Islam. A little understanding goes a long way.

Also, it is illogical to have a problem with people, whose situation and true reasoning is not portrayed in the media, or what ever source you get your info, and say they are at fault. Nor did these people do anything to you personally. If the people or the cause they believe in don't appeal to you, than no problem. But don't judge without knowing the whole situation and facts and don't associate the religion negatively based on what a minority of the religion does. Sorry, I don't mean to be blunt, but I am just stating logic and facts here.

You say that the media does not portray Islam negatively, but to me, it seems all your sources are coming from the media my friend. J For example, your comment about people overseas celebrating 9/11. Later on, that proved to be a fabrication. It was a past video of some national celebration they had in Palestine, and the media used it as propaganda against Islam. They showed the photo/video on that Tuesday 9/11/01 while the buildings were still on fire. Tell me, how did they get the video so fast? I mean, to get it and edit it and play it, this takes a good couple of days. But in order for the ratings to fly on the broadcast stations, they played it passing false claims. This was refuted later, but in a news brief rather than the main news. Something done constantly by the media to encourage misleading the public on Islam.

Also, remember, 9/11's #1 SUSPECT is Osama Bin Laden. He is just a suspect, There is no proof he did the attacks, even if he claimed it or not. I am not saying that he is right or wrong, for I don't know the guy personally to pass judgment. Also my friend think about it, we are talking about a millionaire who can eat breakfast in London, lunch in Paris, and dinner in Rome in one day, but he threw all of this away in the struggle he believes in. No matter what he does, there is something you have to recognize and respect in this. Not your average Joe in the street will be willing to throw this all away for his belief. And surveys claim almost half of the US say that 9/11 was done by the government. The obvious reason they would do something like this is for Oil. This is an open secret. Lol Also he was trained by the CIA and now is public enemy #1. So was Saddam Hussein and Fidel Castro. All trained by the CIA and then, when the mission was complete, wanted out of the way by those who trained them (I.e. DEAD). When they fight back for their lives they are called terrorists.

We don't say that about Christians and Jews. Our religion teaches tolerance of these groups. We are told to present the Message of Islam, and if they don't accept, than so be it. They have their chance and were presented with the religion of Allah. Allah can't say on judgment day to the Muslims, the ones he blessed this burden with, why did we not warn the world and preach Islam? God will deal with them, but we must live with them as friends and love them. This is what the religion teaches. But whom so ever attacks you or does you wrong, you have to defend your self. If not, than the oppressor and the oppressed are at fault and Allah will give each his punishment.

Also, Jihad, is not a 'holy war' as the MEDIA misleads to believe. It is a struggle. JIHAD=STRUGGLE. These Muslims are killed and tortured and oppressed, so they fight back and struggle in Allah's cause, as we said before, the oppressor is at fault, and the oppressed who does not defend himself is at fault. Remember the Crusades, these were started by Pope Urban II. The reason was because Islam was on the rise and he felt his 'power' threatened, even though Islam did not even pose one. So he sent for a Holy War and the Muslims were killed on the battle field, until their blood were up to the knees of the Christian horses. Also on their way to fight the Muslims, they would kill Innocent Jews, Our cousins, as sport and practice for killing Muslims. What was the reasoning for all this? So in self defense, yes, the Muslims took up arms and fought back. But it was started by the Christians my friend, not Muslims. When the last Caliphate fell in the Ottoman Empire in Turkey around 1924, the Europeans said that the crusades have officially come to an end in a summit in Europe.

So you see, it is the West who has issues with the Muslims and when they defend themselves, are looked upon in a negative light and belittled and called derogatory comments such as Terrorist. Logic shows that the right thing to do would be fight back and speak up, but the abusers in power makes this looks wrong through the media. Same thing with the USA in our premature days under England, the Mother Country. When England kept putting heavier taxes on the goods, the US put up with it until it was unbearable. So what they did was fight. They were oppressed, pushed to a wall and kept being pushed, so they fought their way out. Every single soul who signed the Declaration of Independence would have been called a terrorist by the ruling power ( I.e. England) if caught. They eventually won their independence and the respect of the world. So how is this any different. Instead of yelling 'Allah Akbar', which is a greater reason to fight, they yelled, 'Freedom.’ I am not saying that the methods some Muslims take to fight is right. There are rules that they must follow and those who are killing the innocent and doing other things against Islam are being addressed and taken care of, but not publicly. For example why would a brother bring his other brother's faults out in public? What you do is take him home and talk with him and help him change. Make him get on the right track. Why would he want everybody in the neighborhood to make fun of the family and criticize them? Right? Same thing with the Muslim brothers. Logic.

Well my friend, this is getting too long. I hope I answered any misconceptions you may have had along with all questions posed. If you have any other questions or criticism you want addressed, I will answer them all, Allah willing. Thank you for you time.

I will end with

Peace be upon you.
******************************************

Jack Diamond:

I have consistently quoted Islamic scripture, scholars, and jihadi, none of whom are "from the media." As for the media, let me say first your assertions of fabricated video and conspiracies in general are demonstrably false. The spontaneous celebrations were captured on camera (as were the candlelight vigils in Iran on behalf of the victims). Some 3,000 poured into the streets of Nablus, and sweets were handed out. The Palestinian Authority had to censor further reports of celebration, for the bad image it was creating. Arafat's Cabinet Secretary said the PA could not "guarantee the life" of an Associated Press cameraman if footage he filmed was broadcast, prompting a formal protest from AP bureau chief Dan Perry. The legend that footage of Palestinians celebrating the attack was rebroadcast footage from the invasion of Kuwait a decade prior, was proven false and CNN issued a statement to that fact. "CNN did not air decade old footage of Palestinians dancing in the streets." Eason Jordan, CNN's Chief News Executive confirmed that the video used on CNN was in fact shot on Tuesday 11 Sept 2001 in East Jerusalem by a Reuters TV crew, not during the Persian Gulf conflict of 1990-91. Reuters issued a statement: "Reuters rejects as utterly baseless an allegation being circulated by e-mail and the Internet claiming that it circulated a 10-year old videotape to illustrate Palestinians celebrating in the wake of the Sept 11 tragedies."

According to the Wall Street Journal's Elisabetta Burba, Jerusalem 9/22/01: "We asked some moderate Arabs if it was the case (that only a tiny minority of Palestinians celebrated) 'Nonsense' said one, speaking for many, 'ninety percent of the Arab world believes that Americans got what they deserved." Washington Post 9/16/01: "PA is trying to suppress broadcast images and photos of Palestinians glorifying the terrorist attacks on the United States and hailing their suspected mastermind, Osama bin Laden..."About 1500 Palestinians, many supporters of the militant group Hamas, marched in a Gaza Strip refugee camp burning Israeli flags and carrying a large poster of Osama bin Laden...after the rally plainclothes Palestinian policeman questioned several journalists ...and confiscated videotape and film as well as camera equipment...earlier this week, Palestinian police stopped camera teams and photographers from covering a rally in the West Bank town of Nablus in which several thousand Palestinians celebrated the attacks on the United States."

I'm belaboring this point because it is telling. You are repeating a falsehood to prove your point and you are of a conspiratorial mindset that, in fact, has no logic to it, it is only about showing that the Muslims are always the victim, always persecuted, always oppressed. Do you know the Arab saying, "he hit me and he cried. He ran to court first and sued me." That is victimology.

Regardless of how many Muslims celebrated 9/11, more significant is the apathy with which the Muslim world responds to mass murder done in the name of Islam (and there have been thousands of examples since 9/11). Apathy and apologetics, such as you exhibit here. My point was Muslims do get angry and excited and take to the streets and riot worldwide over rumors of a desecrated Qur'an or Danish cartoons or remarks by the Pope, they riot and people are killed as a result. But where is the anger over their religion being "hijacked" and its reputation blackened? Perhaps they don't really see any hijacking going on. Perhaps they think the slaughter is justified. Are we to guess?

Qur'an teaches believers to commit violence against unbelievers--Qur'an 2:190-193; 9:29; 9:5; 47:4 and a hundred others, violence with divine sanction. These are open ended and universal commands, in no sense limited and historical in context. Nor can they be described as "self-defense" to any fair-minded observer. All traditional schools of Islamic jurisprudence teach the obligation of warfare against and subjugation of unbelievers. Bin Laden and the other jihadists justify their violence by the Qur'an and example of Muhammad. If you don't acknowledge and confront this, you do nothing to stop it. Of course, you suggest you will have a private little talk with your brother and quietly correct him, as if this is no business of a kuffar. What will you say to him, how will you use the Qur'an to dissuade him? This is not some errant misbehaving child who stole a Popsicle, your brother did not commit a social faux pas wearing wrong colored socks, this is someone who murders people and wishes to impose tyranny, on orders from on High. How do you dissuade him, scripturally? Or is your idea more akin to the Saudi reconditioning of captured terrorists: "you must not kill other Muslims, brother, and must not fight against the House of Saud. There now, you are corrected. Go back to just fighting the kuffar and infidels (we have no problem with that!)"

I am looking at your scriptures, the Qur'an and Sunnah, the example of Muhammad, just as the jihadists and Islamic supremacists do. Their reasoning is no secret, what do you have to say about it? This is where more "negative associations" with Islam come in, the average Muslim’s unwillingness to acknowledge or confront these teachings. Do you condemn these Muslims by name, challenge their interpretation of these verses, remove their clerics and literature from your mosques? Like you say, the Muslim community is a neighborhood. Muslims know each other’s business. They know who the more militant are, which clerics preach jihad (in Arabic if not in English), even who might be plotting something. That makes them responsible parties. But all one sees is the closing of ranks. Now, if you want to change infidel perceptions you might begin by ceasing to excuse and justify these acts (one minute you say they are a minority who misunderstand their religion, in the next you say they are just defending themselves and we call it "terrorism." Have some consistency). Let's put it plainly: Jihad and Shari'a are out. There is no place for them in 21st Century civilization. They are against all international law and universally recognized notions of human rights. There is no possible justification for religious war, ever. It belongs to the historical past and must stay there. Then, stop blaming everyone else for the problems of the Muslim world. Accept responsibility. Look in the mirror. Stop searching for scapegoats, conspiracies, and demons everywhere. There aren't any.

Bin Laden (who was never trained by the CIA) in his last communiqué claims sole credit (again) for 9/11. Everything about the plot, the actors, their money, the organizations, banks, charities, and countries abetting them, is known. There is no mystery here, only to you (if so many Americans believe idiocy like the "9/11was an inside job" concoction what does this say about your media theory? The media can't be doing such a good job of damning Islam if Americans have no clue to what hit them on 9/11). You are slippery about bin Laden like you are elsewhere. All these jihadist groups cite the same ayats and see themselves fighting in the same cause, globally. Do you really think jihad is about some political grievances of the moment? Or begin with America or Israel? The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928; it is the parent of Al Qaeda & Hamas, and its jihad-shari'a agenda has never altered. Why is the same jihad waged from Indonesia to India, the Philippines to Sudan? What do Dinka tribesmen have to do with your list of grievances? Yet they are killed to impose Shari'a law, killed by a Jihad. And one more time, explain it to me, your theory about 9/11. We put a trillion dollar hole in our economy and murder thousands of our own citizens so we could go and visit rat holes like Afghanistan and Iraq? Explain to me this oil bonanza we've acquired. Speaking of oil, it is the $10 trillion in profits from oil since 1973 going to Arab Muslims that has financed the Global Jihad. Now there's a conspiracy for you!)

Let someone you respect make the point:

"There are only three choices in Islam: either willing submission, or payment of the jizya thereby physical, though not spiritual submission to the authority of Islam, or the sword--for it is not right to let him live (an infidel). The matter is summed up for every person alive; either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam, or die." (Note--What does this have to do with any specific political grievances? This is permanent eternal religious war)

"Muslims and especially the learned among them, should spread Sharia law to the world, that and nothing else...(Muhammad:)"I have been commanded to battle mankind until they declare there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah...He also said, per Berida.."Call them to Islam, if they respond (convert) accept this... if they refuse to accept Islam, demand of them the jizya...if they refuse, seek the aid of Allah and fight them. Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority, corporeally if
not spiritually? Yes."

"In fact, Muslims are obligated to raid the lands of the infidels, occupy them, and exchange their systems of governance for an Islamic system, barring any practice that contradicts the Shari'a from being publicly voiced among the people as was the case at the dawn of Islam...They say that our Shari'a does not impose our particular beliefs upon others, this is a false assumption. For it is, in fact, part of our religion to impose our particular beliefs upon others."

"Offensive Jihad is an established and basic tenet of this religion. It is a religious duty rejected only by the most deluded. Divine foundations that are built upon hating the infidels, repudiating them with tongue and teeth till they embrace Islam or pay the jizya with willing submission and humility. The Prophet was "sent in the final hours with the sword so that none is worshipped but Allah alone, partnerless."

----"Moderate Islam is a Prostration to the West"
Osama bin Laden

 

I want you to notice these three choices are not exactly the ones you mention that Islam offers: "We are told to present the message of Islam, and if they don't accept, then so be it." Your kinder, gentler Islam has no basis in doctrine or history. "God will deal with them but we must live with them as friends and love them. This is what the religion teaches." I wish it were so, but that is not what Islam teaches. Do you believe Islam can be whatever Muslims wish it to be?

Muhammad gave non- Muslims three choices and they were not the choices you mention. They were the ones bin Laden mentions. His successors, the Companions, followed his example to the letter and gave the nations three choices, but not the choices you mentioned. Indeed, there would have been no Jihad, no Muslim conquests, no Islamic World, Islam would still be confined to Arabia if Islam was how you present it--offer them Islam, if they refuse leave them alone.

"Islam has approved war so that the word of God becomes supreme...this is war for the cause of God (Holy War). Muhammad therefore, sent his ambassadors to eight kings and princes in the neighborhood of the Arab peninsula to call them to embrace Islam. They rejected his call. Thus, it became incumbent on the Muslims to fight them"--

--Dr. Afifi Abdul-Fattah ("The Spirit of Islamic Religion" p 382).

Ibn Hisham "Biography of the Apostle", p134:

Muhammad sent Khalid ibn al-Walid to the tribe of the children of Haritha and told him "Call them to accept Islam before you fight with them... if they refuse, fight them" They entered Islam by force. He brought them to Muhammad: Had you not accepted Islam I would have cast your heads under your feet."

Please make a note, above, of the use of the term "holy war" for Jihad. And from 'The Book of the Islamic State' (1953) by al-Nabhani:

"The foreign policy of the Islamic state must be to carry the Islamic mission to the world by way of Holy War. This process has been established through the course of the ages...this process has never been changed at all. The Apostle Muhammad from the time he founded the State in the city of Yathrib, prepared an army and began holy war to remove the physical barriers which hinder the spread of Islam….by holy war, kingdoms and states were removed and Islam ruled the nations & peoples. The glorious Qur'an has revealed to Muslims the reasons for fighting, to carry the message of Islam to the entire world."

You see, you've made another mistake. Islamic scholars use the term "holy war" for Jihad. The history of Islamic conquest is one of massacre, pillage, enslavement and deportation. Jihad (Struggle!) destroyed the Christian Middle East, Egypt, Turkey and North Africa. Half of Christianity was lost. You do understand the Crusades were preceded by four centuries of Islamic Jihad against the Christian world (including Europe). You have it exactly backwards; it was the Christian world acting in self-defense. That Islam was "not a threat" is remarkable historical revisionism. Not only did Islam threaten to destroy the Eastern Church (just as it destroyed the Greek, Zoroastrian and Coptic civilizations) it directly invaded Western Europe and only decisive military defeats stopped it. Islam destroyed half the Hindu civilization along with some eighty million Hindus. Ten million Buddhists along the Silk Route. You do understand that none of these people threatened or were a threat to Muslims (except by existing!). How many millions of human beings have been killed by Islam simply because they were non-Muslims and wished to remain so? Finally, the Crusades lasted only 200 years, the Jihad is going on 1400 and the Caliphate fell, not because of a continuing 'Crusade', but because the Ottoman Empire aligned itself with the losing side in a world war -- that's how the cookie crumbles). The Crusades were a matter of the Church in the West responded to a cry for help from the Church in the East, that and the continual kidnappings, murders and hassling of pilgrims to the Holy Land. It is nice of you to stand up for the Jews, though. Refreshing given the level of Jew-hate being spewed out of the Middle East mosques and media (citing appropriate Qur'an and Hadith.) No one would defend Christian anti-Semitism from a thousand years ago, my friend, would you condemn Muslim anti-Semitism today? Let me ask you something, how do you think the Muslim world became the Muslim world? Preaching door to door? What were tribesmen from Arabia doing in Spain, in Persia, in Egypt, in Jerusalem, in France, in India, in North Africa? Defending themselves? Try to explain 9:29; 9:5; 8:39. They are understood by scholars and all schools of jurisprudence as mandating permanent war with unbelievers, including Jews & Christians--who are given but three choices.

You say, "Our religion teaches tolerance of other religions." Other religions might beg to differ.

Try 3:85; 5:51; 5:17; 4:197; 9:30; 98:6 for starters.

 "Take not the Jews or Christians for your friends or protectors, they are but friends and protectors to each other. He among you who turns to them for friendship is of them." (5:51)

"For the unbelievers are open enemies to you." (4:101)

"But as for those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them; boiling fluid will be poured down on their heads (22:19);

"Fight the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you" (9:123)

"I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve, smite the necks and smite of them each finger" (8:12).

"If anyone of you desires a religion other than Islam it will never be accepted of him." (3:85)

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." (9:29)

Do you like that Islam mandates death for apostasy? Do you think people should have the right to leave a religion, choose another or have none at all, without being killed? Do you think ruling by fear makes Islam peaceful and tolerant? Your religion teaches Jews & Christians are kafirs, disbelievers, corrupt, going to Hell. In Muslim lands they are to be legally discriminated against and pay a penalty tax for existing. Any rights they have are conditional, not intrinsic. Shari'a itself is a violation of all standards of universal human rights and freedoms. You use terms like "self defense" and "oppression" to justify jihad. Do you think infidels know what oppression and persecution of Muslims, what waging war against Allah consists of to Islam? Do you think they
know that disbelief itself is a crime against Islam, in itself is oppression of Muslims? Do you think they know that merely refusing your kind offer to Islam is in itself "waging war" and is considered an act of aggression justifying warfare in "self defense"? This is the tortured, contorted Islamic definition of words infidels think they understand.

Islamic scholar Aga Mahdi Puya:

"Waging war against Allah and his Prophet means hostility against his chosen representatives, or deviation from his laws by overstepping the boundaries laid down by Him…or attempts to undermine the cause of Islam and the overall interests of the Muslims."

Ibn Kathir (Tafsir on 5:33):

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah & His Apostle & strive to make mischief (fasadan)* in the land is only this, they should be murdered or crucified or their hands & feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned" [* fasad meaning corruption, creating disorder by opposing God.]”

"Fight them until there is no more fitnah (disbelief, persecution) and religion will be for Allah alone (in the whole world)." (8:39)

"Fight them until there is no more Fitnah (trial in religion) & the religion will be for Allah alone (so that there is no more 'Kufr', disbelief)"--Ibn Kathir

97% of the references to Jihad in Sahih Bukhari refer to physical fighting; 75% of the Sira concerns physical jihad. Jihad is the struggle all right, the struggle to remove all obstacles to the spread of Islam, until dar al-harb is subsumed into dar al-Islam. Not only 'qital"-combat is jihad, it is also waged by pen and tongue, by wealth and even by demographic invasion (Giuseppe Bernardini, Archbishop in Turkey recounted what a Muslim cleric said to him about Europe: "thanks to your democratic laws we will invade you. Thanks to our religious laws we will dominate you.”) Encyclopedia of Islam says: "the duty of jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained 'until the end of the world.' Peace with non- Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only." Would you care to respond?

You say, Muslims are killed, tortured and oppressed. When they fight back they are called terrorists. This kind of thinking is a reason for apprehension about the Muslim community by non-Muslims. I cannot really tell where the Salafists-Al Qaeda-Hamas-Jamaat-Muslim Brotherhood end, and you begin. You want me to admire this bin Laden, this millionaire "who can eat breakfast in London, lunch in Paris and dinner in Rome in one day, but he threw all of this away in the struggle he believes in." The austerity of a man who puts aside luxury and personal pleasure (he didn't deny himself any wives) for the higher spiritual pleasure of committing mass murder for the sake of Allah. At least there is something human about the sorry Saudi satyrs and playboys, however debauched. But there is no level of debauchery they have ever reached that could match the depravity of this satanic cave dweller and the others like him. Unlike you, I have no problem judging him.

"No matter what he does, there is something you have to recognize and respect." He's not a clown and he's not a fool, that's all I'll give you. Here's what I recognize in him, I recognize the Call to Jihad, I recognize the Verse of the Sword, I get a glimpse of the rivers of blood and the vast human misery caused by this totalitarian, genocidal Jihad over 1400 years. I recognize in Jihad the mortal enemy of civilization, the mortal enemy of the United States and it’s liberty, the mortal enemy of the entire so-called Infidel world. Comparing Islamic terrorists with the American Revolutionaries is insufferable. The Americans were not terrorists--if they had lost they would have been hanged as traitors but they were never terrorists. Terrorists deliberately target innocent civilians to further a political (or religious) cause. That is the definition. Further, Americans were not fighting to impose a religious tyranny like Islamists, they were fighting for principles of freedom. Rights of the individual, freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, all men are created equal, government of the people by the people for the people--you know, everything emphatically denied by Islamic Law. Your comparison is odious and insulting to this country. Americans fought for "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and that "governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed". They did not fight a religious war to impose theocracy nor did they take British women captive as sex slaves or "right hand possessions” nor did they install Shari'a with its apartheid for other religions and for women, and the death penalty for blasphemy and apostasy. "Allah Akbar" is the opposite of freedom.

It's nice you want to follow rules and kill the right people, not the wrong ones, the “innocent” ones. But innocence is such an elastic term in Islam, isn't it? A fatwa says no Jews in Israel are innocent therefore anyone can be legitimately killed. A fatwa says no American is innocent since they all pay taxes and elect the government. Anjem Chaudary says no non-Muslim is innocent. It’s not good enough to just state the Qur’an forbids killing innocent people. You have to spell out whom you mean and don’t mean. You say, "If the people or the cause they believe in don't appeal to you, then no problem." Guess what, it is my problem! If this "cause" is a genocidal totalitarian belief system bent on destroying Western civilization and subjugating the rest, it is my problem and it is everyone’s problem. Those who would ignore, deny or make excuses for this barbarism, for adherents of this fascistic murdering ideology, and who take a position of impartiality between jihadists and their innocent victims, are taking sides too.

Best wishes

(as yet no reply forthcoming from Aladdin)