unfair treatment of western media towards Islam and Muslims is not new to many people. The biased reporting, stereotype stories and hidden hate towards Muslims of the world are facts of western journalism. These champions of the free world who claim that their reporting standards are very high, they are honest and feel responsible to provide correct information to their audiences are in fact, have dual standards of reporting. They intentionally dramatize a situation in order to market their programs and increase their market share at any cost. They are not honest when a news item or a story involves a practicing Muslim or religion of Islam.
The Muslims of North America, Europe and Australia have been under a constant threat from these media organizations. These media organizations including all TV network, most of the Radio stations and all-major newspapers of North America, Europe and Australia have been controlled / influenced by special interest groups. These special interest groups through the western media are not only misleading the people of North America, Europe and Australia but also trying to build walls between Islam and the people of other faiths such as Christians and Jews.
These media organizations are purposely creating a very wrong image of Islam and Muslims. The main objective of these media organizations is to create, through their own judgments, such a horrible image of Islamic teachings that the people in the west not only consider Islam as a threat towards western cultures but also feel threatened by the Muslims. A common person who is very busy to fulfill his / her economic and social needs and does not have time to investigate the situation, heavily depends upon the media reporting. If TV, Radio and the Newspapers are not honest in their reporting then the listeners or the readers of western media will not be able to get the truth. Rather, it creates misunderstanding among the various religious and ethnic groups, which creates animosity, hate and intolerance for each other. The Muslim minority of North America, Europe and Australia has been suffering from this unfair and very biased treatment of the media for a long time.
Every time when an incident of terrorism happens anywhere in the world the Muslims living in Western World specially in North America gets terrorized by the horrors of the news media. The way newscasters on radio and TV broadcast and print media prints the news, it's always very clear that all these newscasters and reporters not only try very hard to find a Muslim name to be associated with the incident. These journalists who portray themselves as the champions of humanity and professionalism become so unprofessional and inhuman that sometime they do not realize the outcome of their hurried and rushed reporting. You may be asking what proof do I have to support my arguments? Let me give you some examples from the recent memories.
April 19, 1995, when the Murrah Federal building in downtown Oklahoma City, was bombed. The entire media organizations in USA and Canada declared the Islamic connection in the destruction of the building. The media speculated and blamed Muslims for the destruction and killings of innocent civilians. The way TV networks including CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, CBC projected and propagated Muslims as terrorists and Islam as the religion of intolerance, the majority of the people in USA and Canada believed these false reports of the media. The majority of the people not only tried to isolate Muslim minority but many Muslims became victims of this malicious propaganda. As we all know that these reports were completely false. There was no Muslim connection in this bombardment. Two fundamentalist Christians were convicted in this case. But no media organizations identified 27-year-old Timothy McVeigh and his ex-Army buddy, Terry Nichols as Christian terrorists.
July 17, 1996 the crash of TWA 800 flight off New York's Long Island in which 230 people aboard the Paris-bound Boeing 747 died was initially blamed upon Muslim organizations. The media was very irresponsible in reporting this incident. They not only provided the false information to the audiences but also forcefully tried to involve Muslims in this destruction. Later, the investigators did not find any Muslim connections to the crash. But media had done its damage and once again created bad feelings among the people of the United States for Islam and Muslims.
October 31, 1999 EgyptAir flight 990 crashed off the coast of Massachusetts. All 217 passenger died in the crash. Because of the previous lessons learned on TWA 800 flight; the media did not jump to the Muslim connection quickly. But as soon as media reporters found out from the flight voice recorder that the Captain has said some prayers before the crash, they made astonishing and very ignorant remarks about these religious supplications. They assumed that the Captain said these prayers because he was going to commit suicide and destroy the entire plane with him. This shows how knowledgeable these investigators are? And how knowledgeable these media reporters are? A Muslim makes such prayers / supplications everyday when he / she starts the journey OR when he / she is in danger of an accident. We seek God's help in these types of situations by making such supplications. No doubt, a Muslims relies on his or her judgment, training and technology but ultimately he / she relies on God as a final authority for all outcomes. These supplications do not indicate that the pilot was committing suicide. These supplications prove that he was seeking God's help. By the way, these supplications also prove that the pilot was knowledgeable about the teachings of Islam and he must have known that suicide is a major sin in Islam. But media took these supplications as an opportunity to once again misguide the people about the Islamic beliefs and project Muslims as killers.
We can quote several similar incidents where no Muslim was involved in the incident but media used its twisting techniques and told the wrong information. Media always tried to portray Islam as a religion of terror and all the Muslims as terrorists. The way talk-show programs and news are produced and presented, it seems that the media has already decided the guilty verdict regardless what would be the outcome of an investigation.
Why the media would not tell about the religious affiliation of a terrorist if he or she would not be a Muslim? But when a Muslim individual is involved in any terrorist incident, his / her name is identified later but his / her religion is identified first. When a news comes from Algeria about a killing incident, the media is very quick in using the word "Muslim Terrorists", "Muslim Extremists", "Muslim Fundamentalists", "Islamic Rebels" etc. When the similar killings take place in Zimbabwe, Congo, Rwanda, media never identifies anyone as Christians. How about Serbia? When Serbs were killing Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo, Media never said that these Serbs are killing Muslims in the name of Christianity. These Serbs are Fundamentalist Christians and Christian Terrorists. When Croats were killing Muslims in Bosnia and Croatia, no media identified them as Christian Terrorists. When in Kashmir, if a Hindu person dies, the blame goes immediately on Islamic Militants but when a Muslim dies no one identifies his / her killer as a Hindu. Does anyone know why?
Why CNN and other network TV stations identify a group of people who attack on Israel from Lebanon as Muslim extremists? Why the people who retaliate from Israeli side are not identified with their religious affiliation regardless whether they are defending Israel or attacking the enemies of Israel? If one group is identified with its religious affiliation and the other group with its country affiliation, this proves how biased and unfair these reporters are? Either both groups should be identified with their religious affiliation or both should be identified with their country affiliation.
Recently, Pope Paul II visited holy lands. During this visit, Larry King of CNN invited various distinguished Christian and Jew guests in his show "Larry King Live" to talk about religious harmony. But Larry was unable to find a single Muslim scholar for this show. I do not think that Larry does not know that the largest population of that region where Jesus (peace be upon him) was born is Muslim. Pope was not only welcomed by Christians and Jews but the majority of the people who attended his masses and gatherings were Muslims. Pope visited the most sacred places of all three religions. But Larry King invited only Christians and Jews not a Muslim? This may not be very important but it shows how Larry King / CNN think. Producing a documentary on Hajj by CNN may not be as important as involving Muslims of USA in social, economical and political process and discussions on CNN.
Remember that Islam means Peace and Muslim means a believer from whose hands and tongue the others are safe. It is not possible that a true Muslim can be a terrorist. I am not trying to say that at present times, the entire Muslim community is perfect. I am not saying that the Muslim community does not have any bad element. What I am trying to convey is a request to the entire media organization to be fair and honest in their reporting. Treat the Muslim community as you treat the Christian and Jewish communities. In case of a Christian or a Jew, you are able to separate an individual action from his / her community action, why are you unable to do the same thing with Muslims? Just like Christianity or Judaism, Islam forbids its followers to harm or kill or make hostage anyone. while the media can understand the teachings of Christianity and Judaism why they have difficulty in understanding similar teachings of Islam? Is this intentional? Why media organizations do not want to play a positive role in bringing the followers of Islam, Christianity and Judaism together? Why these media organizations treat a Christian or a Jew different than a Muslim? Why are these media organizations afraid of Islam and Muslims? The problems of extremism do exist in Muslim community just like in Christian and Jewish communities. Why the problem in Muslim community is exploited more than the Christian or Jewish communities?
The extremism in very small pockets of Muslim community is caused by;
The oppression of Muslims and their counties by the Western world in 1700, 1800 and early 1900 in the name of imperialism, colonialism and communism.
The continuation of this oppression by the West in the name of secularism and capitalism.
The following of some of the self claimed Muslim scholars who practice and preach violence in the name of Islam to benefit their own personal interests. These people have misused the concept of Jihad and they have their own interpretation of Jihad. They have ignored the interpretation of Jihad what last Messenger of Allah, Muhammad (Peace be upon him) has given to the Muslims.
Muslims Against Terrorism (M.A.T)
To help the governments and the media organizations of the Western World in order to understand Islam and Muslims beliefs, Muslims Against Terrorism (MAT) has been established with the following objectives.
To create awareness that Islam requires from its followers to be peaceful and sincere with the all humans.
To educate Muslims and non-Muslims that Islam has no place for terrorism and racism.
To educate Muslims and non-Muslims what Jihad is? And it's various aspects.
To create awareness about the teachings of Qur'an and the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) regarding the roles and responsibilities of an individual, a government and a group of Muslims in Muslim and non-Muslim countries.
To help young Muslims in their social, economical and educational affairs.
To provide Muslim perspective to media when needed.
To use the justice system against those media channels (radio, TV and newspapers etc..) which propagate false information against Islam and Muslims
To use justice system against those media channels (radio, TV and newspapers etc.) which identify a terrorist based upon his / her religion.
The Purpose of this organization is to help media and the governments to separate someone's individual action from being portrayed as a community action. A terrorist should be identified and condemned as a terrorist but a terrorist should not be identified with his / her religious affiliation. Why a terrorist who happens to be a Muslim is identified as a Muslim terrorist? How about the terrorists of other religions? Why aren't they identified and associated with their religions? US installations and citizens are under more terrorist attacks from South American terrorists than any other part of the world. Why aren't they identified as Christian terrorists? The white Supremacist groups in the Western world are fundamentalist Christians. Why their terrorist attacks on Blacks and other ethnic groups aren't reported and associated with their religion. Unless, the people who believe in justice for all are united to standup for their rights, the media will continue to create a negative image of Muslims and Islam.
M.A.T. executives and members will be happy to assist any media organization by providing them the correct information. We urge the media to be careful in their reporting and do not use the word such as "Muslim Terrorist", "Islamic Terrorist", Muslim Extremist", Islamic Extremist", "Muslim fundamentalist", "Islamic Fundamentalist", etc. Such things do not exist. If an individual who happens to be a Muslim commits a crime, his / her name should be identified not his / her religion. Like media does for other non-Muslim criminals. The worldwide members of MAT monitor media reports very closely. We also urge all the Muslims and non-Muslims to report us any media reporting which they feel was a biased reporting against Islam or any other religion.
Muslims are the most law-abiding citizens of the Western World. The crime rate among Muslims in North America is the least among all ethnic groups. The external threats to USA are more from South America and Russian Mafia then Middle East or any other Muslim country. Why media picks-up on Muslims whenever an incident of terrorism occurs or about to occur? We may not know all the answers but we are sure that this is happening because of ignorance about Islam, Muslim beliefs, and prejudice and stereotype approach towards non-western cultures.
Its never too late. Let's work together and join M.A.T or use services from M.A.T. for this noble cause of counter terrorism. May God help us in making this world a peaceful place for everyone. Amen.
Please forward this message to as many people as you can. Please print it and distribute in your area.
Following is the contact information to reach M.A.T.
Everyone knows all Muslims are not terrorists, but why is that all terrorists, mostly, are followers of Islam?
Also, why is it that Muslims have a problem everywhere, what is that makes them not get along well with the non-Muslims around them?
Why are they always whining about injustices heaped onto their community, when in fact non-Muslims have also been victims of injustice since earlier times?
And, as someone said:The problems with Muslims is that wherever they are in a minority, they talk about democartic rights, and wherever they are in a majority they fight for theocracy.. why is that?
Why are the regions with substantial Muslim populations all over the world, center of unrest.. be it Middle East, Russia, India, Europe, Philipines, Thailand, Pakistan, Africa etc.?
Moreover, why don't they want to change with the times and join the rest of humanity in making this planet a better place to live... why is it they still want to live in the past and not place emphasis on current issues like education, family planning, environment and rest of the
answer your question By this leacture.....))))))))))
)))))))
))))
)))
))
)
ISLAM AND TERRORISM
BY
DR. ZAKIR NAIK
MUSLIMS ARE FUNDAMENTALISTS AND TERRORISTS
Question:
Why are most of the Muslims fundamentalists and terrorists?
Answer:
This question is often hurled at Muslims, either directly or indirectly, during any discussion on religion or world affairs. Muslim stereotypes are perpetuated in every form of the media accompanied by gross misinformation about Islam and Muslims. In fact, such misinformation and false propaganda often leads to discrimination and acts of violence against Muslims. A case in point is the anti-Muslim campaign in the American media following the Oklahoma bomb blast, where the press was quick to declare a ‘Middle Eastern conspiracy’ behind the attack. The culprit was later identified as a soldier from the American Armed Forces.
Let us analyze this allegation of ‘fundamentalism’ and ‘terrorism’:
1. Definition of the word ‘fundamentalist’
A fundamentalist is a person who follows and adheres to the fundamentals of the doctrine or theory he is following. For a person to be a good doctor, he should know, follow, and practise the fundamentals of medicine. In other words, he should be a fundamentalist in the field of medicine. For a person to be a good mathematician, he should know, follow and practise the fundamentals of mathematics. He should be a fundamentalist in the field of mathematics. For a person to be a good scientist, he should know, follow and practise the fundamentals of science. He should be a fundamentalist in the field of science.
2. Not all ‘fundamentalists’ are the same
One cannot paint all fundamentalists with the same brush. One cannot categorize all fundamentalists as either good or bad. Such a categorization of any fund amentalist will depend upon the field or activity in which he is a fundamentalist. A fundamentalist robber or thief causes harm to society and is therefore undesirable. A fundamentalist doctor, on the other hand, benefits society and earns much respect.
3. I am proud to be a Muslim fundamentalist
I am a fundamentalist Muslim who, by the grace of Allah, knows, follows and strives to practise the fundamentals of Islam. A true Muslim does not shy away from being a fundamentalist. I am proud to be a fundamentalist Muslim because, I know that the fundamentals of Islam are beneficial to humanity and the whole world. There is not a single fundamental of Islam that causes harm or is against the interests of the human race as a whole. Many people harbour misconceptions about Islam and consider several teachings of Islam to be unfair or improper. This is due to insufficient and incorrect knowledge of Islam. If one critically analyzes the teachings of Islam with an open mind, one cannot escape the fact that Islam is full of benefits both at the individual and collective levels.
4. Dictionary meaning of the word ‘fundamentalist’
According to Webster’s dictionary ‘fundamentalism’ was a movement in American Protestanism that arose in the earlier part of the 20th century. It was a reaction to modernism, and stressed the infallibility of the Bible, not only in matters of faith and morals but also as a literal historical record. It stressed on belief in the Bible as the literal word of God. Thus fundamentalism was a word initially used for a group of Christians who believed that the Bible was the verbatim word of God without any errors and mistakes.
According to the Oxford dictionary ‘fundamentalism’ means ‘strict maintenance of ancient or fundamental doctrines of any religion, especially Islam’.
Today the moment a person uses the word fundamentalist he thinks of a Muslim who is a terrorist.
5. Every Muslim should be a terrorist
Every Muslim should be a terrorist. A terrorist is a person who causes terror. The moment a robber sees a policeman he is terrified. A policeman is a terrorist for the robber. Similarly every Muslim should be a terrorist for the antisocial elements of society, such as thieves, dacoits and rapists. Whenever such an anti-social element sees a Muslim, he should be terrified. It is true that the word ‘terrorist’ is generally used for a person who causes terror among the common people. But a true Muslim should only be a terrorist to selective people i.e. anti-social elements, and not to the common innocent people. In fact a Muslim should be a source of peace for innocent people.
6. Different labels given to the same individual for the same action, i.e. ‘terrorist’ and ‘patriot’
Before India achieved independence from British rule, some freedom fighters of India who did not subscribe to non-violence were labeled as terrorists by the British government. The same individuals have been lauded by Indians for the same activities and hailed as ‘patriots’. Thus two different labels have been given to the same people for the same set of actions. One is calling him a terrorist while the other is calling him a patriot. Those who believed that Britain had a right to rule over India called these people terrorists, while those who were of the view that Britain had no right to rule India called them patriots and freedom fighters.
It is therefore important that before a person is judged, he is given a fair hearing. Both sides of the argument should be heard, the situation should be analyzed, and the reason and the intention of the person should be taken into account, and then the person can be judged accordingly.
7. Islam means peace
Islam is derived from the word ‘salaam’ which means peace. It is a religion of peace whose fundamentals teach its followers to maintain and promote peace throughout the world.
Thus every Muslim should be a fundamentalist i.e. he should follow the fundamentals of the Religion of Peace: Islam. He should be a terrorist only towards the antisocial elements in order to promote peace and justice in the society.
WAS ISLAM SPREAD BY THE SWORD?
Question:
How can Islam be called the religion of peace when it was spread by the sword?
Answer:
It is a common complaint among some non-Muslims that Islam would not have millions of adherents all over the world, if it had not been spread by the use of force. The following points will make it clear, that far from being spread by the sword, it was the inherent force of truth, reason and logic that was responsible for the rapid spread of Islam.
1. Islam means peace.
Islam comes from the root word ‘salaam’, which means peace. It also means submitting one’s will to Allah (swt). Thus Islam is a religion of peace, which is acquired by submitting one’s will to the will of the Supreme Creator, Allah (swt).
2. Sometimes force has to be used to maintain peace.
Each and every human being in this world is not in favour of maintaining peace and harmony. There are many, who would disrupt it for their own vested interests. Sometimes force has to be used to maintain peace. It is precisely for this reason that we have the police who use force against criminals and anti-social elements to maintain peace in the country. Islam promotes peace. At the same time, Islam exhorts it followers to fight where there is oppression. The fight against oppression may, at times, require the use of force. In Islam force can only be used to promote peace and justice.
3. Opinion of historian De Lacy O’Leary.
The best reply to the misconception that Islam was spread by the sword is given by the noted historian De Lacy O’Leary in the book ’Islam at the cross road’ (Page 8):
’History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated.’
4. Muslims ruled Spain for 800 years.
Muslims ruled Spain for about 800 years. The Muslims in Spain never used the sword to force the people to convert. Later the Christian Crusaders came to Spain and wiped out the Muslims. There was not a single Muslim in Spain who could openly give the adhan, that is the call for prayers.
5. 14 million Arabs are Coptic Christians.
Muslims were the lords of Arabia for 1400 years. For a few years the British ruled, and for a few years the French ruled. Overall, the Muslims ruled Arabia for 1400 years. Yet today, there are 14 million Arabs who are Coptic Christians i.e. Christians since generations. If the Muslims had used the sword there would not have been a single Arab who would have remained a Christian.
6. More than 80% non-Muslims in India.
The Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years. If they wanted, they had the power of converting each and every non-Muslim of India to Islam. Today more than 80% of the population of India are non-Muslims. All these non-Muslim Indians are bearing witness today that Islam was not spread by the sword.
7. Indonesia and Malaysia.
Indonesia is a country that has the maximum number of Muslims in the world. The majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. May one ask, ’Which Muslim army went to Indonesia and Malaysia?’
8. East Coast of Africa.
Similarly, Islam has spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. One may again ask, if Islam was spread by the sword, ’Which Muslim army went to the East Coast of Africa?’
9. Thomas Carlyle.
The famous historian, Thomas Carlyle, in his book ’Heroes and Hero worship’, refers to this misconception about the spread of Islam: ’The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one. In one man’s head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it, there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and try to propagate with that, will do little for him. You must get your sword! On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can.’
10. No compulsion in religion.
With which sword was Islam spread? Even if Muslims had it they could not use it to spread Islam because the Qur’an says in the following verse:
’Let there be no compulsion in religion:
Truth stands out clear from error’
[Al-Qur’an 2:256]
11. Sword of the Intellect.
It is the sword of intellect. The sword that conquers the hearts and minds of people. The Qur’an says in Surah Nahl, chapter 16 verse 125:
’Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord
with wisdom and beautiful preaching;
and argue with them in ways that are
best and most gracious.’
[Al-Qur’an 16:125]
12. Increase in the world religions from 1934 to 1984.
An article in Reader’s Digest ‘Almanac’, year book 1986, gave the statistics of the increase of percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in ‘The Plain Truth’ magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, and Christianity had increased only by 47%. May one ask, which war took place in this century which converted millions of people to Islam?
13. Islam is the fastest growing religion in America and Europe.
Today the fastest growing religion in America is Islam. The fastest growing religion in Europe in Islam. Which sword is forcing people in the West to accept Islam in such large numbers?
14. Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson.
Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson rightly says, ’People who worry that nuclear weaponry will one day fall in the hands of the Arabs, fail to realize that the Islamic bomb has been dropped already, it fell the day MUHAMMED (pbuh) was born’
allah says: "They perform (their) vows, and they fear a Day Whose evil flies far and wide. And they feed, for the love of Allah, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive -- (Saying), 'We feed you For the sake of Allah alone: No reward do we desire from you, nor thanks.' (The Noble Quran, 76:7-9)"
As Muslims, we do not embrace the pedophilia, rape, terrorism and all of the other forms of evil that exist in the Bible, nor do we believe that the Prophets of Allah Almighty, peace and blessings be upon all of them, ever committed such cruel acts that are falsely attributed to them.
We're only exposing the corrupted bible and the evil that exists in it.
After you finish this article, also please visit:
Prophet Muhammad is a Murderer for KILLING the enemies? WHAT ABOUT THE BIBLE'S PROPHETS' MURDERS that were blessed by GOD?
Cutting the hands and feet of the enemies in the Bible, and hanging their live bodies on trees until they DIE.
Girls at the age of 3 were forced into sex in both the Talmud and the Bible. Also, the age consent in US and Europe was as low as 10:
The sections of this article are:
1- Pedophilia and killing of "suckling infants" in the Bible!
2- Girls at the age of 3 were forced into sex and marriage in both the Talmud and the Bible.
3- Age consent in our world today only 100 years ago to girls as young as 10.
4- Rebuttals. See my rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's response.
1- Pedophilia and killing "suckling infants" in the Bible!
Ironically, one of the Bible's 10 pillars or ten Commandments says: "Thou shalt not kill. (Exodus 20:13)." Yet, innocent children and non-virgin women were ordered to be killed by the mass, perhaps in thousands! 3-year old slave girls were also ordered to be raped by Moses.
This section is divided into 2 sub-sections:
1- Suckling infants were executed by the tens of thousands!
2- The pedophilic verses against 3-year old girls.
1- Suckling infants were executed by the tens of thousands:
1 Samuel 15:2-4
2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.
3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***.
4 And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.
A praise for dashing little children against rocks as a form of revenge:
Psalm 137:8-9
8 O daughter of Babylon, O destroyed one, O the happiness of him who repayeth to thee thy deed, That thou hast done to us.
9 O the happiness of him who doth seize, And hath dashed thy sucklings on the rock!
I find it to be absolutely ridiculous that the bible feeds us all kinds of lies and contradictions about "love your enemy", and yet, we see mass slaughter of suckling infants and innocent boys, girls, unarmed men, women (old and young), and innocent domestic farm animals by the tens of thousands! It is clear that the inconsistent man-altered, man-corrupted and morally corrupt bible is nothing but a false book, and can not be a Divine and Perfect Holy Book!
I challenge any Jew or Christian to produce ONE, JUST ONE Noble Verse from the Muslims' Noble Quran that condones killing of innocent children, women or even hostile enemy men who drop their weapons before Muslims (surrender).
See the Rights of Prisoners of War in Islam.
Further more, Allah Almighty Said in the Noble Quran:
"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our apostles with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. (The Noble Quran, 5:32)"
Yet, we see mass slaughters and even rape of 3-year old girls as seen in the verses below in the man-altered, man-fabricated and man-corrupted bible.
Based on this Noble Verse, I can safely conclude, as a Muslim, that the slaughtering stories of innocent people in the corrupted bible were nothing but man-made lies and laws that were put in the Mouth of Allah Almighty:
"Know they not Allah Knoweth what they conceal and what they reveal? And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book (i.e., the Bible), but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture. Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: 'This is from Allah,' To traffic with it for a miserable price! Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (The Noble Quran, 2:77-78)"
2- The Pedophilic Verses against 3-year old girls:
The pedophilic Biblical verses are Numbers 31:17-18 and Numbers 31:35-40. Below, you will see DETAILED HISTORY on these SPECIFIC verses from the Jewish Talmud explaining the pedophilia that took place against the 3-year old slave girls under the direct command of Moses.
While Christians are not obligated to follow the laws of the Talmud in their social lives, but the historical FACTS that exist in the Talmud about the Biblical verses Numbers 31:17-18 and Numbers 31:35-40 below, and how the "BIBLE FOLLOWERS" during those days were mostly pedophiles who literally forced sex on 3-year old girls after Moses' supposed 'Divine' order is clear indication that the Bible condones pedophilia.
Christians are not the only "Bible Followers". Jews are too!
You also need to keep in mind that Christians are not the only "Bible followers". Jews are too, and what ever they did counts for and against the Bible.
So while the pedophilic mentioned verses don't exactly specify the 3 years old minimum age limit, but they most certainly don't condemn it, and according to the Talmud's detailed elaborations on the verses, as shown below, and what actually took place during their events, the verses actually allowed it, AS MOSES HIMSELF ALLOWED IT!
Moses' Commands for pedophilia against 3-year old slave girls do count against the Bible!
As shown in the quotes below:
"....The Tannaïtic Midrash Sifre to Numbers in §157 comments on the above quoted commandment of MOSES to kill the Midianite women as well as the male children...."
"....According to the Tannaïte Rabbis, MOSES therefore had ordered the Israelites to kill all women older than three years and a day, because they were "suitable for having sexual relations." [138]...."
"Said Rabbi Joseph, "Come and take note: A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse....."
"A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse. "A girl three years old may be betrothed through an act of sexual intercourse," the words of R. Meir. And sages say, "Three years and one day old."....."
The detailed quotes, elaborations and bibliography are in the next section below.
2- Girls at the age of 3 were forced into sex in both the Talmud and the Bible:
The Quotes and Proofs for Pedophilia Please pay attention to the bolded and underlined parts below:
The following was taken from http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/g... regarding Numbers 31:17-18 in the Bible:
Numbers 31:17-18 "Now kill all the boys [innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
Children
Sometimes one has to read a passage twice to believe what has been written in the Sacred Books of Judaism: what has been decreed the way to a holy life by the "sages of blessed memory... whose words are the natural sounds of Judaism" [131]:
Said Rabbi Joseph, "Come and take note: A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse. And if a Levir has had intercourse with her, he has acquired her. And one can be liable on her account because of the law prohibiting intercourse with a married woman. And she imparts uncleanness to him who has intercourse with her when she is menstruating, to convey uncleanness to the lower as to the upper layer [of what lies beneath]. If she was married to a priest, she may eat food in the status of priestly rations. If one of those who are unfit for marriage with her had intercourse with her, he has rendered her unfit to marry into the priesthood. If any of those who are forbidden in the Torah to have intercourse with her had intercourse with her, he is put to death on her account, but she is free of responsibility [M.Nid. 5:4].
Sanhedrin 7/55B [132]
R. Nahman bar Isaac said. "They made the decree that a gentile child should be deemed unclean with the flux uncleanness [described at Lev.15], so that an Israelite child should not hang around with him and commit pederasty [as he does]."
For said R. Zira, "I had much anguish with R. Assi, and R. Assi with R. Yohanan, and R. Yohanan with R. Yannai, and R. Yannai with R. Nathan b. Amram, and R. Nathan b. Amram with Rabbi [on this matter]: 'From what age is a gentile child deemed unclean with the flux uncleanness [described at Lev.15]'? And he said to me, 'On the day on which he is born.' But when I came to R. Hiyya, he said to me, 'From the age of nine years and one day.' And when I came and laid the matter before Rabbi, he said to me, 'Discard my reply and adopt that of R. Hiyya, who declared, "From what age is a gentile child deemed unclean with the flux uncleanness [described at Lev.15]? From the age of nine years and one day."'
[37A] Since he is then suitable for having sexual relations, he also is deemed unclean with the flux uncleanness [of Lev.15]."
Said Rabina, "Therefore a gentile girl who is three years and one day old, since she is then suitable to have sexual relations, also imparts uncleanness of the flux variety."
That is self-evident!
Abodah Zarah 36B-37A [133]
The basis for these rulings is the following Mishnaic passage of Tractate Niddah (filth):
A girl three years and one day old is betrothed by intercourse. "A girl three years old may be betrothed through an act of sexual intercourse," the words of R. Meir. And sages say, "Three years and one day old."
And if a Levir has had intercourse with her, he has acquired her. And they are liable on her account because of the law prohibiting intercourse with a married woman. And she imparts uncleanness to him who has intercourse with her when she is menstruating to convey uncleanness to the lower as to the upper layer. If she was married to a priest, she eats heave offering. If one of those who are unfit for marriage has intercourse with her, he has rendered her unfit to marry into the priesthood. If one of all those who are forbidden in the Torah to have intercourse with her did so, they are put to death on her account. But she is free of responsibility.
If she is younger than that age, intercourse with her is like putting a finger in the eye.
(Mishnah Niddah 5:4) [134]
Thus, one "of the many important issues worked out in the Mishnah concerns proper conduct with women," [135] and the "entire society of Judaism – that is, the community formed by the Torah – found in the Talmud those modes of thought and inquiry, those media of order and value, that guided the formation of public affairs and private life as well." [136]
While it is reassuring to see there was at least some limit as to what the sages would declare holy and moral, this ruling had severe implications on the interpretation of other topics as well. The Tannaïtic Midrash Sifre to Numbers in §157 comments on the above quoted commandment of Moses to kill the Midianite women as well as the male children:
"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that has known a man by sleeping with him.(Num 31:17).
[This] refers to her who has slept with a man as well as her who is suitable for intercourse, even when she has not slept with a man...
But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves. From here R. Shimon b. Yohai used to say: a Proselyte girl who became a proselyte in the age of less than three years and one day, is rendered fit to marry into the priesthood." [137]
According to the Tannaïte Rabbis, Moses therefore had ordered the Israelites to kill all women older than three years and a day, because they were "suitable for having sexual relations." [138]
------------------------------...
Bibliography:
[131] Ibid., vol.XXI.A-D, Tractate Bava Mesia, Atlanta: Scholars Press 1990, p.ix-x.
[132] Ibid., vol.XXIII.B, Tractate Sanhedrin 1984, 150. See also vol.XIX.A, Tractate Qiddushin 10a-b, 1992, 33. "Menstruating" here of course refers to the ritual "flux uncleanness" described in Lev.15.
[133] Ibid., vol.XXV.A, Tractate Abodah Zarah, 1991, 168. Emphasis original.
[134] J. Neusner, The Talmud of Babylonia. A complete outline, Part IV. The Division of Holy Things. B. Number 37. 1995, 704.
[135] Neusner 1993, 41.
[136] Neusner 1995, 7.
[137] Kuhn 1959, §157, 652f. My translation. In general, proselytes are not allowed to marry into the priesthood.
[138] Ibid., §157, footnote 86, 653.
The following was sent to me by brother Johnny Bravo; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:
Numbers 31:17-18 "Now kill all the boys [innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
In the Torah (In the Book of Numbers in the Bible), after the conquest of Midian and Moab, and the great venereal plague, Moses (peace be on him) ordered that all the women "who have known a man" be killed but that "all the young girls, who have not known a man by lying with him" be kept alive for the Israelites.
Since the only females left fit for marriage and wholesome relations were prepubescent virgins, a Jewish law concerning child marriage was enacted. That law is found in the Babylonian Talmud:
"Rabbi Joseph said, 'Come and hear. A maiden aged 3 years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition.'
Mishnah: A girl of the age of 3 years and a day may be betrothed, subject to her father's approval, by sexual intercourse.
Gemara: Our Rabbis taught: 'A girl of the age of 3 years may be betrothed by sexual intercourse.' "
Is the GOD of Israel a pedophile? Quick side Note:
Numbers 31:35-40 "[From the captives of war] 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.......of which the tribute for the LORD was 32 [among them were virgin girls]."
Even though GOD Almighty's share of the 32 virgin girls is metaphoric, meaning that He didn't come down and have sex with them, but if any wants to call Prophet Muhammad a pedophile or womanizer for marrying (not forcing into sex) a young girl and marrying multiple women throughout his life, then he should not only call his Biblical Prophets as such, but also the GOD of Israel Himself!
Anyway continuing with the above Talmudic quotes, today, the Jewish law for marriage, sets the age of consent for females at 11. (Consent is only one way of marriage) I do not know if modern Jewish law still allows (in theory) betrothal by intercourse as it was practiced in ancient times.
Thirty years ago, the renowned sexologist R.E.L. Masters and Allan Edwardes said in their study of Afro-Asian sexual expression (_The Cradle of Erotica_, Julian Press, New York:1962) said, "Today, in many parts of North Africa, Arabia, and India, girls are wedded and bedded between the ages of five and nine; and no self-respecting female remains unmarried beyond the age of puberty."
I emailed a friend of mine, a former Jew who speaks Hebrew, and he further gave me more information regarding the Jewish view to marriage:
"I have just called up a seriously orthodox friend, a dealer in manuscripts with whom I do business, and a good fellow, to double check my response, and we are in perfect agreement. He runs a strictly orthodox and observant home and life, dresses in black, etc...I checked with him about it, as my own copy of the Code of Jewish Law is the shortened version, known as the "Kitzur Shulchan Aruch". The full book is the "Shulchan Aruch", which means "The Well-Set Table" (The Jews have a talent for clever book-titles).
This is the reference of brother Johnny Bravo's Talmudic quotes.
A girl must be 12 years old for marriage, but a 3-year old may be betrothed with the father's approval. As for the permissibility of marriage to a minor (katanah) by coition...*Fuggedaboudit!!* as they say in the Mafia. My friend assures me that *humanitarian treatment* is the final authority. If a man did that, that is, had intercourse with a minor for purposes of marriage,it would be considered a crime, even if the father approved. A girl that young would be considered unable to make a momentous decision like that. And even if she were older than 12, if it were done by force, as if she were a Moabite captive, they would be made to divorce once the circumstances were known.
Furthermore, and very importantly, the Jews are *required* to observe the "deen hammalchut"...the laws of the country in which they reside, before applying their own halacha, or laws. So the short answer is, yes, marriage by coition is considered legal, but not with a katanah, and never by force. Betrothal to a katanah is OK, but the bride must reach puberty before actual marriage and consummation. Also, according to my own exceedingly imperfect knowledge, nowhere in the Talmud is betrothal to a minor by intercourse *recommended*. If all this were permissible in the days of the Mishna, well, those days are gone."
3- Age consent in our world today only 100 years ago to girls as young as 10:
The following was sent to me by brother Johnny Bravo; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:
Assalam Alaiqum Brother Osama.
I thought you might find the following information of some use pertaining to the marriage of Hazrat Ayesha (RAA) with Prophet Muhammed (PBUH). I took this info from the soc.religion.islam newsgroup and it is written by various knowledgeable Muslims informing that the age of consent in the USA was 10 hardly 100 years ago and 11 in the UK, Talmud allowing 3 year olds to get married! etc. :-
"(And there is evidence that Ayesha was substantially older. That some of our ancient scholars preferred the younger age shows, in fact, that they did not consider marriage at that age to be reprehensible, otherwise they would have preferred the evidence for a later marriage and consummation.)
At the time the marriage was arranged, Muhammad had not left Makka; he was not the leader of a powerful community; indeed, his life was in danger. I raise this point because it is asserted, sometimes, that, essentially, he could have whatever he wanted. Rather, if this marriage had been an outrage to the community, it would have been *very* harmful to his cause."
Above comments by Abdulrahman Lomax.
The age of sexual consent is still quite low in many places. In Japan, people can legally have sex at age 13, and in Spain they can legally have sex at age 12. (This data comes from the Age of Consent chart, which you can see at: http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent...
The Prophet's contemporaries (both enemies and friends) clearly accepted the Prophet's marriage to `Aisha without any problem. We see the evidence for this by the lack of criticism against the marriage until modern times. However, a change in culture caused the change in our times today.
A 40-year-old man having sex with a 14-year-old woman may be a "pedophile" in the USA today, but not in China today (where the age of consent is 14), nor in the USA last century. Biology is a much better standard by which to determine these things in my view, not the arbitrariness of human culture.
***** In the USA last century, the age of consent was 10 years old. California was the first state to change the age of consent to 14, which it did in 1889. After California, other US states joined in and raised the age of consent too. (Source: http://www.ageofconsent.com/comments/num...
As for the reasons why we age of consent just seems to get higher and higher, Essentially, we need more education just to survive in today's society, and this takes much more time. This additional education we need to function in today's society seems to me to be the main cause of the increase in the age of consent in many 20th century societies. The Common Law age of consent was 10. The French penal code raised the age from 11 to 13 only a century ago. In England, it was only in 1929 (70 years ago) that the ancient Christian minimum age for the marriage of females, which was 12, was abandoned. The early rock and roll singer Jerry Lee Lewis was considerably older than his 13 cousin whom he married in all legality in Arkansas. Since then, the age there has been raised to 16. That marriage lasted for about 15 years and there was never any other "scandal" associated with Jerry Lee Lewis. The story is quite different, however, for his cousin Jimmy Swaggart (the well-known and disgraced tele-evangelist) who married a woman his own age but later publicly confessed that he was an adulterer and a whoremonger.
In the seventh century, 3 year old girls were burned to death or tortured in Europe for copulating with demons, witches and sorcerers. Strong sexual passions were attributed to the youngest children. Even Jean Bodin, one of the greatest legal authorities of his time, said that the appropriate age of consent for a female was 6. (I do not mean to suggest that 3 year olds did in fact have sexual relations with demons. It is however interesting to see that at that time it was publicly believed that child-adult relations were the fault of seductive children who sought out mature men rather than today's popular belief that it is instead pedophiliac adults who prey on innocent, unsuspecting children.)
In the US (an example of a prominent western country, since the west had the greatest effect on the world in the last couple of centuries.) They considered a seven year old female competent on making decisions regarding sex, though it was raised later on (in 1886, after attempts to raise the age of consent, Delaware was the only state to retain the common law age of seven, while twenty five states set the minimum age at a mere ten.) In older times, children were not perceived in the same sense that we perceive them, but the perception was changed gradually, which is due to a great extent to industrialization, and of course sigmund freud and others came along with their theories and supported these changes in social thinking (the word adolescent itself was introduced as recently as 1904.)
4- Rebuttals:
My rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's "Osama Abdallah's Obsession with Pedophilia in the Bible" article.
Refutation to the preposterous LIES of Jochen Katz about his Bible not containing inhumane murders but its Prophets!
Back to Women section.
X-Rated Pornography in the Bible.
The Marriage of Aisha by Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him.
Refutation to the preposterous LIES of Jochen Katz about his Bible not containing inhumane murders from its Prophets!
Prophet Muhammad is a Murderer for KILLING the enemies? WHAT ABOUT THE BIBLE'S PROPHETS' MURDERS that were blessed by GOD? Cutting the hands and feet of the enemy in the Bible.
i suggest you read more about your own religion and more about islam before you go around making assumptions.
The Muslims were Commanded, 1500 years ago, to feed the prisoners of war "for the love of Allah" and to tell them:
"We feed you for the sake of Allah (Almighty) alone: No reward do we desire from you, and no thanks."
This basically sums up the entire article, except for section #4 below regarding the war criminals' punishment!
Can Muslims torture prisoners of war?
The sections of this article are:
1- Can Muslims torture prisoners of war?
2- Did Prophet Muhammad ever abuse or kill any of his Captives or take personal revenges from them?
3- Muslims are commanded by Allah Almighty to treat their Captives with kindness and to feed them!
4- When is the captured enemy must not be considered a "Captive" or "Prisoner of War"? And how can Muslims punish them? Is Ethnic Cleansing allowed in Islam?
- So what are those times where Muslims must not accept any captive?
- Further explanations from Sheikh (Minister) Abdullah Yusuf Ali.
5- Conclusion.
1- Can Muslims torture prisoners of war?
For the Captives of war, absolutely not! But for the enemy who has treacherous designs against the Muslims, there is a punishment that he must face as shown below in the article. Those "treacherous designs" are the tricky and deceiving evil actions such as causing a war between the Muslims and other non-Muslim tribes by using tricks and deceptions. Another example is when some of the hypocrites during Prophet Muhammad's times used to falsely embrace Islam to be accepted among the Muslims, and then later try to create conflicts among Muslim men and cause them to revenge from each others, because they belonged to tribes that had bloody wars with each others before they embraced Islam. The punishment for such enemy is Noble Verses 5:33-34 as shown below in this article.
Let us look what Allah Almighty Said regarding the captives or the prisoners of wars:
"O Prophet! say to those who are captives in your hands: 'If Allah findeth any good in your hearts, He will Give you something better than what has been taken from you, and He will Forgive you: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. But if they have treacherous designs against thee, (O Messenger!), they have already been in treason against Allah, and so hath He given (thee) power over them. And Allah is He who hath (Full) knowledge and wisdom. (The Noble Quran, 8:70-71)"
The following explanation of Noble Verses 8:70-71 was taken from the commentary of Sheikh (Minister) Abdullah Yusuf Ali's (may Allah Almighty rest his soul) English translation:
"This is a consolation to the prisoners of war. In spite of their previous hostility, Allah will forgive them in His mercy if there was any good in their hearts, and confer upon them a far higher gift than anything they have ever lost. This gift in its highest sense would be the blessing of Islam, but even in a material sense, there was great good fortune awaiting them, e.g., in the case of Al-Abbas (who was among the unbelievers and was taken as a prisoner of war).
Note how comprehensive is Allah's care. He encourages and strengthens the Muslims, at the same time condemning any baser motives that may have entered their minds. He consoles the prisoners of war and promises them better things if there is any good in them at all. And He offers comfort to those who have left their homes in His Cause, and knits them into closer fellowship with those who have helped them and sympathized with them.
If the kindness shown to them is abused by the prisoners of war when they are released, it is not a matter of discouragement to those who showed the kindness. Such persons have in their treachery shown already their treason to Allah, in that they took up arms against Allah's Prophet, and sought to blot out the pure worship of Allah. The punishment of defeat, which opened the eyes of some of their comrades, evidently did not open their eyes. But Allah knows all, and in His wisdom will order all things for the best. The Believers have done their duty in showing such clemency as they could in the circumstances of war. For them "Allah sufficeth" (Noble Verse 8:62)" [2].
Note: For the captives, paying money is not always the way to freedom. It is true that they would lose their weapons and other equipment such as their carts, horses, camels, etc..., but to gain their way out of captivity doesn't always have to be through paying money.
When the Muslims won the first battle of Islam against the Pagans, the battle Badr, our Prophet peace be upon him told his captives that whoever wants to earn his freedom he must teach 10 illiterate Muslims how to read and write, and he will then be set free.
2- Did Prophet Muhammad ever abuse or kill any of his Captives or take personal revenges from them?
Absolutely not! Killing captives is forbidden in Islam, except for those who deserve it such as war criminals as clearly proven below in section #4.
Narrated Salim's father: "The Prophet sent Khalid bin Al-Walid to the tribe of Jadhima and Khalid invited them to Islam but they could not express themselves by saying, "Aslamna (i.e. we have embraced Islam)," but they started saying "Saba'na! Saba'na (i.e. we have come out of one religion to another)." Khalid kept on killing (some of) them and taking (some of) them as captives and gave every one of us his Captive. When there came the day then Khalid ordered that each man (i.e. Muslim soldier) should kill his captive, I said, "By Allah, I will not kill my captive, and none of my companions will kill his captive." When we reached the Prophet, we mentioned to him the whole story. On that, the Prophet raised both his hands and said twice, "O Allah! I am free (or innocent or not responsible for) from what Khalid has done." (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Number 628)"
"They perform (their) vows, and they fear a Day Whose evil flies far and wide. And they feed, for the love of Allah, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive -- (Saying), 'We feed you For the sake of Allah alone: No reward do we desire from you, nor thanks.' (The Noble Quran, 76:7-9)"
Listen to my AUDIO rebuttal to Christian_Prince regarding this subject.
Muslims not only can't kill their captives, but they also must feed them for the "love of Allah".
Our Prophet peace be upon him forgave the enemies of Islam. When the Muslims liberated Mecca from the Pagan Arabs, and the Pagans' army gave up, because they were widely out numbered by the Muslims, our Prophet peace be upon him said his very famous word that was taught to us in schools:
"Go, you are free."
Compare this with the Bible's real terrorism toward captives:
Numbers 31:7, 17-18 "They fought against Midian, as the LORD commanded Moses, and killed every man.......Now kill all the boys [innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
1 Samuel 15:2-4
2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.
3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ***.
4 And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.
(www.answering-christianity.co...
Please visit Prophet Muhammad never took any personal revenge. This article covers this issue.
3- Muslims are commanded by Allah Almighty to treat their Captives with kindness and to feed them!
Again, listen to my AUDIO rebuttal to Christian_Prince regarding this subject.
Let us look what Allah Almighty said in the Noble Quran:
"They perform (their) vows, and they fear a Day Whose evil flies far and wide. And they feed, for the love of Allah, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive -- (Saying), 'We feed you For the sake of Allah alone: No reward do we desire from you, nor thanks.' (The Noble Quran, 76:7-9)"
In these Noble Verses, we clearly see how Allah Almighty orders the Muslims to treat their captives with kindness and to not expect anything back in return. Muslims must do it for the love of Allah Almighty, hence they have to feed their captives in kindness and love.
Notice here how Allah Almighty is so Great, Merciful and Gracious, that even the captives are given His Love. Allah Almighty's door for Mercy and Forgiveness is always open.
Please visit The Mercy and Forgiveness of Allah Almighty.
4- When is the captured enemy must not be considered a "Captive" or "Prisoner of War"? And how can Muslims punish them? Is Ethnic Cleansing allowed in Islam?
What power did Allah Almighty give to Prophet Muhammad over the enemies who had treacherous designs against Islam; "....and so hath He given (thee) power over them.....(The Noble Quran, 8:71)"?
The captured enemy can not be considered a captive or prisoner of war if he had treacherous designs against the Muslims.
This would never apply to ordinary soldiers!
It would rather apply to people like war criminal leaders and commanders. There is a punishment that such enemy must face as shown below in Noble Verses 5:33-34. Those "treacherous designs" are the evil actions such as for instance causing a war between the Muslims and other non-Muslim tribes by using tricks and deceptions. Another example is when some of the hypocrites during Prophet Muhammad's times used to falsely embrace Islam to be accepted among the Muslims, and then later try to create conflicts among Muslim men and cause them to revenge from each others, because they belonged to tribes that had bloody wars with each others before they embraced Islam, and the tribal mentality might still remained in them. The punishment for such enemy is Noble Verses 5:33-34 as shown below in this article.
And yes, Ethnic cleansing can be applied to that person or group of treacherous people. Ethnic cleansing is not allowed in Islam for any other case! Normal people can not be Ethnically cleansed as the Yugoslav Serbs did to the Muslim Kosovars just because they differ in religion or race. Only the treacherous people or individuals or war criminal leaders can be Ethnically cleansed or exiled.
Let us look at what Allah Almighty Said in the Noble Quran:
"The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Apostle, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; Except for those who repent before they fall into your power: in that case, know that God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (The Noble Quran, 5:33-34)"
There are times when Muslims must accept no captives. This is the time when the Muslims are ordered to punish the enemy severely.
So what are those times where Muslims must not accept any captive?
When they had been betrayed by the enemy. Let us look at some incidents where Noble Verse 5:33 had been applied to the enemy:
The first incident is when the Muslims were just starting Islam in Madina. Along with the Muslims there, there were some Christians and three big Jewish tribes: Bani Al-natheer, Bani Qaynuqaa, and Bani Quraytha. When the Pagans of Mecca wanted to end Islam once and for all, they finally agreed along with several other Pagan tribes out side Mecca to attack the Muslims in Madina.
Prior to this, the Muslims had already signed a treaty of united defense of Madina with the Jews. When the Pagans of Mecca and their allies finally started marching to Madina, the Muslims became aware of it. One of our beloved Prophet's close companions, Salman Al-Farisi (may Allah Almighty be pleased with him, rest his soul and grant him Paradise), suggested that the Muslims should dig a big trench to along all of the plain areas of Madina to disable the Pagans from attacking the Muslims.
The Jews' tribes were stationed in the North side of Madina. They didn't need to dig any trench because they had such high mountains that they could easily defend by stationing their troops on top of the mountains, which would then disable the Pagans from entering Madina from the North. But the Jews will always remain Jews no matter what. They betrayed our Prophet and told the Pagans that they could attack them from the North along with the Jewish army. Allah Almighty had blessed the Muslims with a big victory after long battles and Allah Almighty's blessings of the winds that blocked the eye sights of the enemies of Islam.
After the Pagans withdrew back to Mecca, our Prophet peace be upon him executed Noble Verse 5:33 and exiled Bani Quraytha, the first Jewish tribe to betray the Muslims, from Madina. Later on, the other two Jewish tribes were exiled too.
The second incident is in the following narration about our Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, which further explains in details when the Muslims need to apply Noble Verse 5:33 to the enemy:
Narrated Abu Qilaba: "Anas said, "Some people of 'Ukl or 'Uraina tribe came to Medina and its climate did not suit them. So the Prophet ordered them to go to the herd of (Milch) camels and to drink their milk and urine (as a medicine). So they went as directed and after they became healthy, they killed the shepherd of the Prophet and drove away all the camels. The news reached the Prophet early in the morning and he sent (men) in their pursuit and they were captured and brought at noon. He then ordered to cut their hands and feet (and it was done), and their eyes were branded with heated pieces of iron, They were put in 'Al-Harra' and when they asked for water, no water was given to them." Abu Qilaba said, "Those people committed theft and murder, became infidels after embracing Islam and fought against Allah and His Apostle. (Sahih Bukhari, Ablutions (Wudu'), Volume 1, Book 4, Number 234)"
Notice in the above incidents that the enemy had betrayed the Muslims. In the first incident, the Jews betrayed the Muslims by breaking up the treaty and fighting along side with the Pagans. In the second incident, the Pagans killed the Shepherd and and stole all of the Camels after they gained the Muslims' trust by embracing Islam. These are the only times where Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him ever applied Noble Verse 5:33 to anyone.
Please visit Did Prophet Muhammad prescribe Camel Urine as Medicine? See from Medical proofs that several of our medicines today are indeed extracted from animal urines.
The point is that Muslims are not allowed to kill ordinary "Prisoners of War" as it is clearly stated in Noble Verses 8:70-71. The sever punishment for the enemy and the refusal to accept any captives is when the Muslims had been betrayed by the enemy (Noble Verse 5:33).
Note: Notice also in Noble Verse 5:34 that the door for mercy and forgiveness for the sincere enemy is open. The Muslims can not do any harm to the enemy if the enemy repents.
Further explanations from Sheikh (Minister) Abdullah Yusuf Ali:
The following explanation of Noble Verse 5:33 comes from the Noble Quran that I used, which was translated by Sheikh (Minister) Abdullah Yusuf Ali; may Allah Almighty rest his soul:
"For the double crime of treason against the State, combined with treason against Allah, as shown by overt crimes, four alternative punishments are mentioned, any one of which is to be applied according to circumstances, viz., execution (cutting off of the head), crucifixion, maiming, or exile." [3].
5- Conclusion:
Islam is a merciful religion and Allah Almighty gives the enemies of Islam the opportunity to be forgiven when they're captured in the battle field. Muslims must always treat their captives with kindness and feed them.
If the enemy was caught after they played a very dirty trick on the Muslims and caused the Muslims much damage from their evil deceptions and tricks as the Jews and some of the people of Tribe of Urania did to our Prophet and the Muslims, then Noble Verse 5:33 must be applied for their punishment.
The door for mercy and forgiveness is always open for the treacherous enemy as clearly stated in Noble Verse 5:34, but depending on the situation, if the enemy is so obviously not willing to sincerely repent even if they declare it, then Noble Verse 5:34 can not be applied to them and the punishment of Noble Verse 5:33 must be applied.
.