Moral Standing: the Complaint

In Hints of Compulsory U.N. Censorship, I propounded a rhetorical question concerning the moral qualifications of Islam & the U.N. to persuade the U.S.A. to accede to demands for censorship. This post begins the process of answering that question. Lets begin with an examination of Ambassador Masood Khan’s statement of 04/01/08.

Without explicitly naming Geert Wilders or his video, Ambassador Khan expresses the O.I.C.’s appreciation to the Dutch government for its unsuccessful attempt to prevent its publication and the Prime Minister’s rejection of “the interpretation given to the Quran in the documentary and equation of Islam with violence”.

He expresses their agreement with “Mr. Jorge Sampaio, Secretary-General’s High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations”, providing this outline of his statement.

  1. the insulting and defamatory film is a deliberate incitement to discrimination, violence and hatred on grounds of religion, aimed at provoking and promoting social unrest, and encourages extremist groups within European societies to discriminate and marginalize Muslims immigrants;
  2. freedom of expression does not preclude the protection of people from racist, discriminatory and xenophobic language; and
  3. We will be losers if we fail to defuse this potential crises.

Ambassador Khan follows up with his own list of accusations against Fitna.

The documentary violates letter and spirit of

  1. The UN Charter;
  2. The covenants on civil and political and economic, social and cultural rights;
  3. Articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that proscribe any advocacy of racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence; and
  4. Security Council resolution 1624 of 2005 which calls upon states to prevent targeting of different religions and cultures;

First and foremost, is Fitna. [First Ed. 03/27/08] factually false? If not, then it can not be defamatory. Is it a rude statement intended to offend? This is a good time to click the link and view the 17 minute video, which begins with display & recitation of 8:60.

  • Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of God and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom God doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of God, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly.[Abdullah Yusuf Ali]

That verse is followed by the awful image of aircraft striking the World Trade Towers, flames, smoke & falling bodies. Did not Allah say “We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve“? Did not Allah say “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.“? Did not Allah issue a commandment ordering Muslims to attack “people of the book” saying “fight those who… until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” ? How then is the association of Allah’s commandment with the act of the “magnificent nineteen” a calumny?

Wilders follows up with images of Imams calling for Jihad and rail cars torn apart by bomb blasts. We see bloodied victims as well. Next, he shows us 4:56.

Surely! Those who disbelieved in Our Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) We shall burn them in Fire. As often as their skins are roasted through, We shall change them for other skins that they may taste the punishment. Truly, Allâh is Ever Most Powerful, All­Wise.

Other than illustrating Islam’s hatred of disbelievers, I see no reason for including that verse, it deals with the next world, not this one. That image is followed immediately by an Imam quoting a genocidal hadith.

Muslim Book 041, Number 6985:
Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

We see the Imam drawing his sword, waving it in the air, shouting takbir & “Jihad for the sake of Allah”,. then we see the crowd reaction: pure anticipatory hatred.

That blood chilling scene is followed by an interview with a little girl who informs us that Jews are “apes and pigs”; she learned it from the Koran [2:65, 5:60, 7:166]. Succeeding scenes of bodies being dragged and a buss torn asunder by a bomb are followed by an Imam ranting that the Jews must be massacred. Next, we see placards carried by Muslims demonstrating their hatred, with such messages as “be prepared for the real holocaust” and “God bless Hitler”.

Next, 47:4 is displayed.

So, when you meet (in fight Jihâd in Allâh’s Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islâm), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allâh to continue in carrying out Jihâd against the disbelievers till they embrace Islâm (i.e. are saved from the punishment in the Hell-fire) or at least come under your protection], but if it had been Allâh’s Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allâh, He will never let their deeds be lost,

The token of genocide {till when you have killed and wounded many of them} is confirmed by Ibn Kathir in his tafsir. The Command to strike the Enemies’ Necks, tighten Their Bonds, and then free Them either by an Act of Grace or for a Ransom

Guiding the believers to what they should employ in their fights against the idolators, Allah says, (So, when you meet those who disbelieve (in battle), smite their necks) which means, `when you fight against them, cut them down totally with your swords.’ (until you have fully defeated them,) meaning, `you have killed and utterly destroyed them.’

That recitation is followed by images of the murder of Theo Van Gogh. Next, we hear a Saudi cleric saying that throats must be slit and young men sacrificed. So of course, there is the obligatory decapitation scene. Have we so soon forgotten Nick Berg & Danny Pearl?

The bloody image is followed by 4:89, wherein Allah commands not to befriend Kuffar & hypocrites and to kill the latter.

They wish that you reject Faith, as they have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So take not Auliyâ’ (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allâh (to Muhammad ). But if they turn back (from Islâm), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them, and take neither Auliyâ’ (protectors or friends) nor helpers from them.

We next discover a sidewalk interview in which the death penalty for apostasy is mentioned. Supremacism is openly expressed, followed by a series of news headlines. 8:39 follows.

And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allâh) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allâh Alone [in the whole of the world ]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allâh), then certainly, Allâh is All-Seer of what they do.

Next we hear a cleric saying that “Islam is a religion that wants to rule the world.”. He is followed by confirmation from the President of Iran. Other expressions of supremacism & triumphalism follow.

The video continues with Dutch demographics & politics, with more images including lapidation & hangings. What part of Fitna is not true? The Qur’an quotes are easily verified and confirmed by the most widely accepted exegeses. I have shown you one tafsir, you can search for the others at http://www.qtafsir.com.

The hadith quoted is also easily verifiable. We have seen most of the images in magazines and on the internet. The ranting & raving Imams are available in Memri’s archives.

Jorge Sampaio’s assertion of “deliberate incitement to discrimination, violence and hatred” is egregious hypocrisy. Wilders reports part of what Allah said and his obedient slaves do in obeying his word. Wilders did not incite his viewers to discrimination, violence or hatred against anyone. Fitna did not incite Kuffar to engage in anti-Muslim pogroms; nor was it intended to.

The second slur is extremely telling: “racist, discriminatory and xenophobic language” accurately describes what the Imams were saying about massacring the Jews, it does not accurately describe the video at which it was directed. Islam is not a race; it began by victimizing Arabs, but it expanded to victimize Jews, Africans and Asians. Most Muslims are descended from Asians who were give a choice: convert or die.

The hypocrisy of Ambassador Khan’s accusations is exposed through dissection of other outrageous statements he made to the UNHRC September 21,’06. [See the list of links in my previous post.] Allah commanded his slaves to make war upon the entire non-Muslim world: 8:39 commands fighting pagans until resistance ceases and only Allah is worshiped. 9:29 commands making war upon people with scriptural religions until they are subjugated and submit to extortion. Those two links are to Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir, which displays the ayeh along with confirming hadith. Abu Dawud Book 14.2526 prophesies that Jihad will continue to Judgment Day. Abu Dawud 23.3455 curses Muslims if they take up farming instead of Jihad, which it calls their “original religion”.

In consideration of insult & defamation, I leave you with a list of relevant ayat from Allah’s book. After reading these, you will understand why Islam has no moral standing on which to make its outrageous demand.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: