Islam is Completely
Incompatible with Terror
The Myth:
It is against Islam to kill innocent people. Islam is completely incompatible with acts of terrorism.
The Truth:
Islam does
prohibit killing innocent people. Unfortunately, you don't qualify.
The full truth about Islam, terror and "innocence" is more complicated than apologists like to admit. It's why Muslims on both sides of the terror divide accuse the other of hijacking Islam. It is also why organizations that commit horrible atrocities in the name of Allah, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, receive a significant amount of moral and financial support from the mainstream.
In fact,
the definition of "terrorism" in Islam is ambiguous at best. And the definition of an “innocent person”
in Islam isn't something that
Muslim apologists advertise when they say that such persons aren't to be harmed.
This is because anyone who rejects Islam by refusing to convert is not considered to be innocent
according to
Islamic teaching.
Consider
that a great deal of the Quran is devoted to describing the horrible punishment
that awaits those who refuse to believe Muhammad. How then can Muslims say that
the subjects of divine wrath are innocent people?
The most protected and respected of all non-Muslims are the
dhimma, the “people of the book.” Specifically , these would be Jews
and Christians who agree to Islamic rule and pay the jizya (tribute to
Muslims). Yet, the word “dhimmi” is derived from an Arabic root
that means
“guilt” or "blame." ["...the dhimmi parent and sister words mean both
'to blame' as well as safeguards that can be extended to protect the
blameworthy" Amitav Ghosh, "In an Antique Land"].
So, if even the dhimma have a measure of guilt
attached to their status (by virtue of having rejected Allah’s full truth), how can non-Muslims who oppose Islamic rule, or refuse to pay the jizya, be
considered “innocent?”
Even within the Islamic community there is a category of
Muslims who are also said to bear guilt – greater, even, than the average
non-believer. These are the hypocrites, or “Munafiqin,” whom Muhammad
referred to in the most derogatory terms. A hypocrite is considered to be
a Muslim in name only. They are distinguished from true Muslims, according
to the 9th Sura, by an unwillingness to wage (v.9:81
, 9:86)
or fund (v.9:121) holy war.
The Quran says that true believers fight and are harsh to
unbelievers (v.9:123).
The
Muslim terrorists who frequently kill "other Muslims" in the name of Allah
do so believing that their victims are Munafiqin or kafir (unbelievers).
This is a part of Sharia known as takfir, in which a Muslim
can be declared an apostate and then executed for their role in hindering the
expansion of Islamic authority. (A true Muslim would go to
paradise anyway, in which case he or she could hardly be expected to nurse a
grudge amidst the orgy of sex and wine).
In addition to the murky definition of innocence, there is
also the problem of distinguishing terrorism from holy war. Islamic
terrorists rarely refer to themselves as terrorists but usually say that they
are holy warriors
(Mujahideen, Shahid, or Fedayeen). They consider their actions to be a form
of Jihad.
Holy war is commanded in the Quran
and Hadith. In verse
9:29, Muhammad establishes the principle that unbelievers should be fought
until they either convert to Islam or accept a state of humiliation under
Islamic subjugation. This is confirmed in the Hadith by both
Sahih Muslim and
Bukhari.
In many places, the prophet of Islam says that
Jihad is the ideal path for a Muslim, and that believers should “fight in
the way of Allah.” There are dozens of open-ended passages in the Quran
that exhort killing and fighting – far more than there are of peace and tolerance.
It is somewhat naïve to think that their inclusion in this "eternal discourse
between God and Man" was of historical value only and not intended to be
relevant to present-day believers, particularly when there is little to nothing
within the text to circumscribe the context.
The Quran's exhortation (and Muhammad's example) of establishing Islamic
rule by force, along with the ambiguity of innocence, form a monumental problem that isn't patched
over
by mere semantics. Not only is there a deep tolerance for violence in
Islam but also a sharp disagreement and lack of clarity over the conditions
that justify this violence - and whom the targets may be (verse 9:36 says
that disbelievers should be fought "collectively") .
Rhetoric about Western forces "bombing and killing"
civilian populations in Islamic countries isn't just a bogus quest for
moral equivalence. Muhammad said
that "whoever prepares a fighter" is just as responsible, which makes any
taxpaying citizen a valid target.
Many Muslims who claim to be against terrorism otherwise justify certain “insurgencies”
and "resistance" movements that have deliberately targeted
civilians. A great many entertain the allegation that there is a
broader "war against Islam," yet, few Muslims put much
effort into publicly disputing it. What better rationale do terrorists
need for Holy War than to be told that unbelievers are already waging it?
And what of the true innocents who suffer from the
bombings and shootings? Even in Muhammad’s time they were unavoidable.
The much-touted hadith in which Muhammad forbade the killing of women, for
example, also
indicates that there were such casualties in his attacks on other tribes.
If there is
any doubt that Muhammad believed that "the forbidden is sometimes necessary", it should
be put to rest by an incident in which his soldiers warned him that
a planned night raid against an enemy camp would mean that
women and children would be killed. He merely replied “they are of them,”
meaning their lives were expendible because of their men (Sahih Muslim 4322, see also Bukhari 52:256).
Islam is
not intended to co-exist as an equal with other religions.
It is to be the dominant religion, with Sharia as the supreme
law. Islamic rule is to be extended to the ends of the earth and
resistance is to be dealt with by any means necessary.
Apologists
in the West often shrug off the Quran's many verses of violence by
saying that they are relevant only in a “time of war.”
To this, Islamic terrorists would agree. They are at
war.
Additional Note:
Muslim Apologist: "Where does the Quran say to kill innocent people?"
Non-Muslim: "Where does the Quran say that people who reject Allah's Law are innocent?"
|
