Friday, March 2, 2012

Taqiyya vs. Our President


Taqiyya vs. Our President

By David Meir-Levi 
In a previous essay, the present writer exposed the concept of “taqiyya” as a traditional Muslim form of deceit employed by Yasir Arafat, Mahmoud Abbas, and other leaders of the Arab terror war against Israel.  El-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood also are using taqiyya against the USA and other western countries, and with frightening success.


While the Qur’an encourages honesty between believers (Sura 40:28), deception directed at non-Muslims, generally known in Arabic as taqiyya, has full Qur’anic support.


The Qur’an (Sura 2:225, 3:28, 3:54, 9:3, 16:106, 40:28, and 66:2) establishes the religious legitimacy of breaking oaths, lying, unilaterally violating treaties, and generally scheming against non-Muslims.  Allah Himself is described as “the best of schemers” (3:54, 8:30, 10:21), and Muhammad declared, as a justification for murdering unarmed prisoners after offering them safe passage, “war is deceit” (see the Hadith collection of  Bukhari, vol. 4, book 52, nos. 268-271).


The Qur’an and later sources command the obedient Muslim to be engaged in eternal war, jihad, with the non-Muslim world until the supremacy of Islam over the entire world is complete.  More than 120 times ((2:193, 4:89-90, 8:12, 8:39, 9:5, 9:11, 9:25, 9:29, 9:39, inter alia; and see here for detailed discussion) the Qur’an calls Muslims to jihad until Islam is the only or dominant religion in the world.
Based on its bloody and gruesome history, and on the voices of its dominant figures, Islam must be understood as a religion that institutionalizes war, conquest, imperialism and subjugation as its normative behaviors.  And in its most extreme iteration, it preaches the destruction of Judaism, Christianity, the Hindu civilization, and western civilization.  This being the case, what is the value of a treaty with a country under the control of Muslim extremists who subscribe to this iteration of Islam?  The answer to that question comes from Muslim scholars themselves: “By their very nature, treaties (with non-Muslims) must be of temporary duration, for in Muslim legal theory, the normal relations between Muslim and non-Muslim territories are not peaceful, but warlike” (Majid Khadduri, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press, 1955, p. 220); and “…open-ended truces are illegitimate if Muslims have the strength to renew the war against them [non-Muslims]” (Ahmad Mahmud Karima, Al-Jihad fi’l Islam: Dirasa Fiqhiya Muqarina, p. 461, quoted byRaymond Ibrahim here, and discussed in greater depth here and here).


Such a violent and bloody history of conquest and expansionism ought to spark concern among neighbors to Muslim countries and targets of Muslim aggression.  Knowing this, some Muslim leaders employ taqiyya to promote an image of Islam as a religion of peace, and the practitioners of jihad as an aberrant few, a  minority of misunderstanders of the “true Islam” — in short, nothing about which the targets of jihad need worry.


But even as apologists for Islam declare any western leader’s concern about jihad to be an insult bordering on Islamophobia , Muslims speaking in their own languages to their own people have no hesitation about verbalizing their plans for Muslim world domination.  A popular topic for discussion on Arabic TV channels is the best strategy for conquering the West.  That strategy seems to be patience in the use of taqiyya, since the West currently has overwhelming economic, military and scientific power and cannot be defeated by traditional military strategies.


For a more graphic example, note the comments of an Australian Muslim cleric Abu Bakr, also known as Abdul Nacer Benbrika :
“I am telling you that my religion doesn’t tolerate other religions. It doesn’t tolerate (them). The only one law which needs to spread, it can be here or anywhere else, has to be Islam.”  Along the same lines, in Kuala-Lumpur (Malaysia), Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad declared that: “… Islam will soon be the domineering force in the world…the world will be in the hands of Islam over the next few years” (ITAR/TASS Russian news agency, March 5, 2006 quoted here and here based upon here).
In numerous sermons Egyptian Muslim scholar and preacher Sheikh Yusuf el-Qaradawi, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, rants about the destruction that awaits the Jews when Islam is the world’s ruling religion and the ancient “just and righteous Caliphate” is triumphant (see herehere and here for a general survey of anti-Semitism in the Muslim world, here for el-Qaradhawi’s plans for future conquest of the west,  here for reactions to el-Qaradhawi’s fatwa calling for the killing of Americans in Iraq, here for al-Qaeda and other Muslim terror group’s plans for the West, and MEMRI TV’s video of a typical Qaradhawi speech).


And similar sentiments are expressed in the mosques and among the leaders of America’s ally, Saudi Arabia.  In the most sacred mosque in Islam, Sheikh Abd al-Rahman al-Sudais, the leading imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca, uses his sermons to call for Jews to be ‘annihilated’ and to urge the overthrow of Western civilization.


In March 2009, Saudi legal expert Basem Alem publicly echoed similar sentiments:
As a member of the true religion, I have a greater right to invade [others] in order to impose a certain way of life [according to Shari'a], which history has proven to be the best and most just of all civilizations. This is the true meaning of offensive jihad. When we wage jihad, it is not in order to convert people to Islam, but in order to liberate them from the dark slavery (i.e., adherence to other religions) in which they live.”
His sentiments are no aberration.  They are based upon the Qur’anic exhortation:  “We [Muslims] renounce you [non-Muslims]. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us—till you believe in God alone” [Qur'an 60:4].


Saudi Arabia seems unabashed about its desire for Islam’s global supremacy. Until 2004, the home page of the Saudi embassy’s Islamic affairs department declared, “The Muslims are required to raise the banner of jihad in order to make the Word of Allah supreme in this world.”  For numerous examples of Saudi anti-Western words and deeds, see hereherehereand here, and Robert Spencer’s comprehensive bookThe Truth about Muhammed: founder of the world’s most intolerant religion (2006, Regnery Publishing, Inc., Washington DC.).


And this same ideology of supremacist, totalitarian, tyrannical, triumphalist jihadist Islam permeates the Muslim Brotherhood.  The Brotherhood’s plans to Islamize the USA and all of western civilization are public knowledge.  The Brotherhood’s former leader, Mamun al-Hudaybi, explained that the Brotherhood’s purpose is to establish Islamic unity and an Islamic Caliphate, which eventually would rule the world (quoted and analyzed in Barry Rubin’s  Islamic Fundamentalism in Egyptian Politics


http://www.amazon.com/Islamic-Fundamentalism-Egyptian-Politics-Barry/dp/1403960747 and discussed as well in Rubin’s The Long War for Freedom http://www.amazon.com/Long-War-Freedom-Struggle-Democracy/dp/0471739014 ).


As Rubin explains, the Muslim Brotherhood groups are as anti-American and extreme in their goals as the bin Ladinist ones, and their supremacist agenda has been further adumbrated by Mustafa Mashhur, the official leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood from 1996 to 2002, in his five-volume series The Laws of Da’wa. The last volume, Jihad is the Way, hasbeen translated by Palestinian Media Watch.  There Mashhur explains some of the fundamental concepts of the Muslim Brotherhood ideology:
- “…the Islamic Ummah [nation]… can regain its power and be liberated and assume its rightful position which was intended by Allah, as the most exalted nation among men, as the teachers of humanity…”

- “It should be known that Jihad and preparation towards Jihad are not only for the purpose of fending-off assaults and attacks of Allah’s enemies from Muslims, but are also for the purpose of realizing the great task of establishing an Islamic state and strengthening the religion and spreading it around the world…”
There can be no reconciliation between such an ideology and the western concepts of peace, freedom and democracy.


Why then does our President continue to support the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt?  Now that the elections in Egypt are coming to a close, it is clear that the Brotherhood and the Salafists (who are even more extremist than the Brotherhood) hold between them more than 70% of the seats in the Egyptian parliament.


Yet, Obama is formalizing America’s official recognition of the Brotherhood and the creation of political and economic ties.  Needless to say, the Brotherhood leadership is pleased, as reported by Egyptian press (quoted here).


Secretary of State Clinton has admitted that the Obama White House has been in contact with the Muslim Brotherhood since June of 2011, shortly after the demonstrations began in Tahrir square.  But what do these extremists say as they achieve power in Egypt thanks to democratic elections? “We must obliterate the liberalism that was introduced by Sadat and Mubarak and reinstate the rule of Islam,” per the Egyptian daily al-Masry al-Youm (quoted here).


Is Obama unaware of the intentions of the Brotherhood?  Even if he had no Arabists on his staff, no one to translate the works of Sayd Qtub or Mustafa Mashhur or Yusuf el-Qaradhawi, much has been written about them in English.  Have his advisors never read Front Page Magazine?


Obama cannot not know that his backing of the Muslim Brotherhood is nothing less than support for the regimes that seek our demise.  So one must ask the uncomfortable question: “whose side is he on?”


 http://frontpagemag.com/2012/01/19/taqiyya-vs-our-president/