The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Miracles, Myths, Mistakes and MattersSee Title Page and List of Contents

See: Project Rebuttal: What the West needs to know about Islam

Refuting the gross distortion and misrepresentation of the Quran, the Prophet Muhammad and Islam, made by the critics of Islam

Read: Background to the Project

List of all Issues | Summary 1 | Summary 2 | Summary 3

June 28th, 2013

Summary 3: The struggle


29. Robert Spencer – “Islam and Islamic civilization are unique in their stand towards non-believers and that Islam is the only religion in the world that has a developed doctrine, theology and the law that mandates violence against the unbelievers.

Spencer is not able to quote any significant examples to support his malicious statement. On the other hand, history can testify to what Christianity meant to the world over the centuries. In its aftermath it has left millions of victims and exploitations of Crusades, Inquisition, more than eighty thousand “witches” of Europe, scientists of Renaissance, Incas, Mayas, Aztecs, Native Americans, Aborigines of Pacific and Australia, Slaves from Africa, apartheid in South Africa and Palestine, and so on.

Spencer flippantly asserts in conclusory language and without an iota of support from Quran, the fountain head of Islam, that Islam’s “doctrine, theology and the law that mandates violence against the unbelievers.” Nothing can be farther from the truth. This fact is clear to any person who has read the entire Quran in context. Quran prohibits violence and aggression. Various Rebuttals 23, 25, 26, 27 earlier refute false, peripheral allegations against Quran.

That, there are peaceful Muslims, there are Muslims around the world that are moderate, who live in harmony with their non-Muslim neighbors, and have no intention in waging war against them in any way. But, the fact is that they have very slim justification for their own peacefulness within their Islamic source themselves and they are only at peace with their neighbors in so far as they are either of what Islam teaches about how Muslims should behave towards unbelievers or they have explicitly rejected or consciously rejected those elements of Islam. There are in short, peaceful and moderate Muslims, but no peaceful and moderate Islam.

“God Consciousness” is mandated for a Muslim at any given time. There is no right of superiority for a Muslim over any other race for the mere fact that – “And (all) people are but a single nation…” (10:19). No Muslim can ridicule anyone, be it a non-Muslim because – “O you who believe, do not let a people laugh at (another) people, perhaps they may be better than they…(49:11). Quran even goes further, it forbids aggression based upon hate – “And do not let hatred of a people … incite you to transgress. And help one another in righteousness and piety, and do not help one another in sin and aggression, and keep your duty to Allah. Surely Allah is Severe in retribution.” (5:2).

Difference in faiths is not a basis for aggression because for a Muslim the same Allah is source spring of all religions, books and prophets – “The Messenger believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers. They all believe in Allah and His angels and His Books and His messengers. We make no distinction between any of His messengers…”(2:285). No wonder, there are no caricatures of Moses and Jesus nor Torah or Bible burnings in Muslims communities.

Even idols are to be respected – “And do not abuse those whom they call upon besides Allah, in case, exceeding the limits, they abuse Allah through ignorance.”(6:108). To cap it all, a Muslim does not monopolize the concept of God for his own faith because for him Allah is – “…the Lord of mankind, the King of mankind, the God of mankind” (114:1-3).

Quran brings the whole humanity under one God and leaves no room for anyone to be children of a lesser God. Quran thus identifies the sources of hate, which are race, religion, Books, prophets, deities and obliterates the instigating tendencies, one by one, and eliminates them altogether by inculcating God Consciousness in Muslims – “Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him.” (49:13 – Asad)

Muhammad said – “Help and not fight, assimilation and not destruction, harmony and peace and not dissension.” In his final Hajj sermon he left for the world the magna charta of world peace – ”Remember you are all brothers. All men are equal in the eye of God, and your honours, your lives and your properties are all sacred and in no case should you attack each other’s life and property. Today I trample under my feet all distinctions of caste, colour and nationality. All men are sons of Adam and Adam was of dust.” [Islam's Contribution to Peace of the World, by S.A. Haq, p.52, p.20]

A Muslim becomes a better citizen by following the Quran and Mohammad and not otherwise as ignorantly asserted by Spencer.

30. Walid Shoebat – “But, the problem is that the peaceful Muslims don’t understand the edits that comes out of jurisprudence of Islam. If you look at interpretation of these verses in Al-Azhar University, in Islamic Shariah Schools in Jerusalem, in Jordan, in Syria, in Damascus, all throughout the Middle East, the jurisprudence of Islam clearly states emphatically that verse of the sword is made null and void all the peaceful verses. And, what does the verse of the sword say, [slide projected with voice – THE NOBLE KORAN, 9:5, Then when the Sacred Months (the 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikun (- “the unbelievers” – note this is not projected in the slide but the voice adds to the slide) wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat) (-”the Islamic prayers” – note this is not projected but the voice adds to the slide), and give Zakat (- “alms” – added by the voice), then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful]

There are NO violent verses in Quran. No verse in Quran incites violence. No verse of Quran has ever been or will be abrogated. The only verses that Quran abrogates are the previous Scriptures, including Old and New Testaments, the words of Allah which had decayed at human hands. That verse 9:5 or for that matter any verse makes other verses null and void in Quran is heresy and sacrilegious. The baseless allegations of abrogation of Quranic verses has been fully addressed and refuted in Rebuttals 9c and 21 before.

Islam does not come out of any center in Middle East, Near East, Far East, Down Under or Far Flung, Neither Hither, neither Thither. In Islam there are no Vaticans or Popes. There is no central authority. Quran is for the people, not institutions. Quran is to be read and understood by an individual and not ritualistically sung by a choir. Islam has a bottom-up approach of reform for each individual. This reformation then naturally flows into a better society and enlightened institutions. This is direct opposite of other religions that needed a conversion at the top. From the kings’ courts the religions were enforced on the masses, without inculcating lasting reformation. Christianity needed Constantine, Buddhism needed Ashoka and Zoroastrianism needed Cyrus. Else, these religions had no chance of getting a foothold for the mere fact that these religions are based upon Gospels [-accounts] and have no utilitarian doctrine for wholesome uplift of humanity. Muslims are as diverse as an Inuit in Alaska to a Hispanic in Chile. The only thread that binds them is the Quran and not any center.

 – kill them when you see them, wherever you find them. This is not an allegoric kill, it’s a literal kill. It’s the the killing of Zaraqawi right in front of the camera. It’s the lynching you see in Ramallah. It’s the killing of over a million Sudanese.”

Extra judicial killings or punishments by anyone, an individual or a government, be they in Iraq, Sudan or elsewhere, they are all abominable acts that must be condemned.

In Sudan cutting the hands and feet from opposite sides. Here is the dilemma. The peaceful verse, even if the peaceful verse when it is quoted even by Bush, the verse goes as follows – who ever kills a life without just cause for doing mischief in the land then as he killed the entire earth – then you find the same verse in Judea-Biblical tradition. But most westerns never skip after that verse which makes very clear – those who do mischief in the land then cut their hands and the feet from the opposite sides and crucify them literally – and that’s what you see happened in Afghanistan, that’s what you see happened in Sudan. Huge amounts of crucifixions and beheading, and amputations and public assassinations. They really want to revive Islam as it used to be. This is why they call it Islamic Fundamentalism.”

Shoebat, glosses over the so-called “peaceful” verse that he attributes to President Bush. For the sake of the readers, said verse is fully cited as follows from the translation by Muhammad Asad with its footnotes:

5:32. Because of this did We ordain unto the children of Israel that if anyone slays a human being unless it be [in punishment] for murder or for spreading corruption on earth – it shall be as though he had slain all mankind; whereas, if anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he had saved the lives of all mankind. And, indeed, there came unto them Our apostles with all evidence of the truth: yet, behold,notwithstanding all this, many of them go on committing all manner of excesses on earth.

These are the moral standards for sanctity of life in Quran. Any “violence” that Shoebat or any of the documentary “experts” dig out of Quran has to be read in light of the above verse. The verse does not condone any reprisal against peaceful and non-aggressive “unbelievers.” Further, it should be clear to the reader that in Quran when “Allah and His Messenger” are mentioned, it means the governmental system of Islam. In verse 5:33, “those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger [i.e. government of Medina]” refers to the anti-government insurgents or criminals who undermine the Divine system of governance that Muhammad established. It would be absurd to even imagine that anyone can wage war against God.

[slide projected with voice – THE NOBLE KORAN, 5:33 – “The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter.]

Before one reads verse 5:33, it would be necessary to understand its metaphorical connotation which is none better than Bible:

Matthew 5:27-30 “27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’  But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to desire her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.  If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away! It is better to lose one of your members than to have your whole body thrown into hell.  If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away! It is better to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into hell ”

When plainly read, v 5:33, unlike Bible, uses the plural i.e. ‘hands’, ‘feet’, which by in itself is clearly indicative of a metaphor which in Arabic means “destroying one’s power”.

 [slide projected with voice – SAHIH AL-BUKHARI, vol 8, Bk 82, Hadith 795 – The Prophet cut off the hands and feet of the men belonging to the tribe of Uraina and did not cauterise (their bleeding limbs) till they died.]

Above is again a classical out of context use of a narration. These men were hosted as guests at a grazing ground about six miles from Medina where state camels were kept and they we allowed to recoup from their illness and provided free milk of the same camels. When they gained health, they stole the same camels. One of the state employees, Yassar pursued and caught up with the thieves. Then, the thieves chopped off the hands and feet of the herder and also stabbed his tongue and eyes with thorns, and killed him. The killers were then recompensed according to local tribal code.  Thereafter, the v. 5:33 was revealed. [Ref: English rendering of the footnote of Hadith no. 233 in ‘Fazl-Bari’ by Maulana Muhammad Ali,]


31. Abdullah Al-Araby, Directory, The Pen vs. Sword Publications – “There is no assurance of what is known in Christianity as salvation and insurance of being saved and guaranteeing going to heaven. However, there are certain things that can help. So, if a Muslim, for instance, died while he was practicing Jihad, he is supposed to go to paradise.”

In Islam there are no false hopes of unearned and undeserved salvation myths of Christianity, yet there are assurances of salvation from within one’s deeds. The ground rules of reward in Islam are based upon the secular principles outlined in the verses below that run congruent to reason. These rules are independent of one’s religion or creed and are solely incumbent on individual responsibility. In Islam there is no salvation on the shoulders of others:

53:38. — that no bearer of burden bears another’s burden,

53:39. and that man can have nothing but what he strives for,

53:40. and that his striving will soon be seen,

53:41. then he will be rewarded for it with the fullest reward,

Salvation in Islam is sampled by the deserving in this world before they move on to hereafter:

2:25. And give good tidings to those who believe and do deeds of righteousness, that there await them gardens from beneath which the streams flow. Every time they are given any kind of fruit from them (– the gardens) to eat, they will say, `This is the same we were given before.’ They will be given it (– the fruit) in perfect semblance (to their deeds). They shall have therein companions purified (spiritually and physically), and will abide therein for ever.

Similarly, those not on a salvation path can sample the impending disappointment in this very world by their spiritual and moral blindness:

17:72. And whoever is blind in this (world) he will be blind in the Hereafter, and further away from the path.

Quran does not let any religion have monopoly on salvation. Instead, Islam cuts through to the core of salvation, which is solely based upon individual righteousness:

2:110. And keep up prayer and give the due charity. And whatever good you send on ahead for yourselves, you will find it with Allah. Surely Allah is Seer of what you do.

2:111. And they say: None shall enter the Garden except he who is a Jew, or the Christians. These are their vain desires. Say: Bring your proof if you are truthful.

2:112. No, whoever submits himself entirely to Allah and he is the doer of good (to others), he has his reward from his Lord, and there is no fear for such nor shall they grieve.


2:62. Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good, they have their reward with their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.


5:69. Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabians and the Christians — whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good — they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve.


Mr. Al-Araby myopically states – “So, if a Muslim, for instance, died while he was practicing Jihad, he is supposed to go to paradise.” Meanings and significance of Jihad have been fully dealt with in Issue 27 before. The above verses set the standards of salvation which includes does good and doer of good (to others) by action, which is the true spirit of Jihad. Thus a Jihad for a Muslim could be fighting cancer in the research laboratory or poverty on the street.

The rebuttal of the current Issue is factually the rebuttal of Atonement. This subject was quite succinctly dealt by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in his book – “The Four Questions Answered”.


32. Walid Shoebat continues – “In Islamist thinking, the assurance of your salvation is dying as a martyr. In accordance to the verse in the Quran – Do not think that the ones who died in the cause of Allah, in Jihad, are dead but are living – So, this assures salvation.”

Once again, Mr. Shoebat contextomizes Quran. He quoted verse 2:154 totally out of context and slipped in the word “Jihad” in its translation. This is sheer dishonesty. Even so, Jihad is a non-violent word whose meaning and implications were fully explained in Issue 27 before. He misconstrues the implications of the verse and tries to implant in the reader the notion that the verse has to do with fighting.

2:153. O you who believe, seek assistance through patience and prayer; surely Allah is with the patient

2:154. And do not speak of those who are slain in Allah’s way as dead. Rather, (they are) alive, but you do not perceive. [Note: The words rendered literally as in Allah’s way or in the cause of Allah, frequently occurring in the Holy Quran, signify the cause of Truth and to carry the message of God at the point of the sword is no more than a myth]

2:155. And We shall certainly try you with something of fear and hunger and loss of property and lives and fruits. And give good news to the patient,

2:156. who, when a misfortune befalls them, say: Surely we are Allah’s, and to Him we shall return.

2:157. Those are they on whom are blessings and mercy from their Lord; and those are the followers of the right course.

Just like Mr. Al-Araby in Issue 31, Shoebat too made the same mistake when he claims about Islam “So, this assures salvation.” Their mistake is that of bringing up the topic of Salvation. Christianity unravels on this single word alone, the infamous myth – Salvation by inaction through “Atonement,” a concept repugnant to reason, that is fully refuted in Issue 31 before.


33. Robert Spencer – “This is the calculus behind modern suicide bombing. Many people will say, modern Muslim advocates will say that Islam forbids suicide. And this is plainly dishonest because all the advocates, all the defenders of suicide bombing in the Islamic world, start out by saying – ‘This is not suicide, the intention of the person is not to kill himself, the intention of the person is to kill others. And that is sanctioned because this is Islamic Jihad. And if in the process are killed themselves, that is an unavoidable consequence of their action. And they will be rewarded with the reward of martyrs in Paradise’”

Suicide, no matter what its objective, is plainly not allowed in Islam. There is no room for any discussion to justify it, be it by a misguided zealot or the so called expert of this documentary who tries to find justification for such a zealot. Factually, in Quran, the argument is directly opposite that of a suicide i.e. it emphasizes self-preservation. Dr. Zahid Aziz in his book “Islam, Peace and Tolerance” [p. 52-4] writes the following:

Suicide is a sin in Islam, and self-preservation is a duty. The committing of suicide is a very serious sin according to the clear teachings of Islam. The Holy Quran instructs:

“Do not cast yourselves to destruction by your own hands.” — 2:195

 “Do not kill yourselves.” — 4:29

In Hadith reports, committing suicide is strongly condemned by the Prophet Muhammad who said:

 “… whoever commits suicide with something, will be punished with the same thing in the hell-fire.” (3 Bukhari, book: ‘Oaths and vows’. In Muhsin Khan translation see 8:78:647.)

Nowhere Quran allows the suicide or killing of the innocent and non-combatants. It “is plainly dishonest” to ensnare Quran in such a nonsensical argument and that too while trying to find justification out of Quran for a carnage either by the perpetrator or the insinuators like Spencer himself. Self immolation if at all is only found in Bible that Spencer himself follows. Killing of self and mayhem on others for Atonement is none but Biblical. Exodus 32 – King James Version states:

25. And when Moses saw that the people were naked; (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame among their enemies)

26. Then Moses stood in the gate of the camp, and said, Who is on the LORD’s side? let him come unto me. And all the sons of Levi gathered themselves together unto him.

27. And he said unto them, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.

28. And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.

29. For Moses had said, Consecrate yourselves today to the LORD, even every man upon his son, and upon his brother; that he may bestow upon you a blessing this day.

30. And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the LORD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.


34. Serge Trifkovic – Rockford Institute for International Affairs – “Quran is quite clear about the heavenly rewards for a jihadist who falls fighting in the path of Allah. He will be granted instant access to the Paradise. And a Muslim Paradise is an extremely sensual one. It is full of ‘houris’, black eyed beauties, that will await the martyr and the gratification that follows is eminently not suitable for family audience.”

Trifkovic sensationalizes certain topics in the name of Islam – martyrdom, reward for martyrdom, houris, implied matters of flesh and the “sensual” Paradise – but all with wrong meanings, out of context usage and for all the wrong reasons that reflect his conceited “expertise.” Each of these topic is fully dealt with in the Rebuttal 34. Martyrdom and Houris are excerpted below:

What is martyrdom in Islam? – “Islam, Peace and Tolerance” [p. 50-2] by Dr. Zahid Aziz

The word for ‘martyr’ in Islamic literature is shaheed. This word in fact means ‘witness’ and is used commonly in the Holy Quran as meaning a witness to something. God is repeatedly called a shaheed, as in “Allah is witness of what you do” (3:98) and “Allah is sufficient as a witness between us and you” (10:29). The Holy Prophet Muhammad is called a “witness” upon his followers, and Muslims are called “witnesses” or bearers of witness to all mankind (2:143), i.e. bearers of truth. Every prophet, including Jesus, is referred to as a witness over his followers (4:41, 5:117). The same word is used for witnesses in contracts and civil matters (2:282, 4:135).

Similarly, the word for martyrdom is shahada, but it is used in the Quran only as meaning testimony of any kind or something that is obvious and seen, as in “do not conceal testimony” (2:283), “our testimony is truer than the testimony of these two” (5:107), and the statement which occurs several times about God that “He is the knower of the unseen and the seen (shahada)” (6:73). This word as meaning testimony is also famously applied to the act of testifying to become a Muslim, and even in English one hears the expression “making the shahada” when referring to this act. These words are applied to martyrs and martyrdom because the life and death of a martyr is a testimony to the truth of Islam. But who is a martyr? Just as jihad is not synonymous with war, a Muslim can be a shaheed without being killed in any connection with a battle.

What is a Houri? – Islamic Review [May 1930, p 79-80

The word “houri” is the mutilated form of the Arabic word “hur,” which is the common plural form of both the masculine and singular Ahwar and feminine singular Haurã. The word “hur” applies to both men and women as also to qualities and actions.

The Holy Quran does not speak of any conjugal relations being maintained in a physical sense in the life to come. Besides, wherever the various blessings of paradise or the torments of hell are spoken of, they are but physical manifestations of spiritual blessings which the doers of good enjoy in this life as well as in the next. There are gardens, trees, rivers, milk, and numerous blessings spoken of by the Quran as being found in paradise, but that all these are not things of this life can be easily understood from a tradition of the Holy Prophet, who says:

 “Allah says I have prepared for my servants what no eye has seen and no ear has heard and what the heart of man has not conceived of.”

The Holy Quran speaks in the same strain when it says: No soul knows what is hidden for it.”

For this reason the “hur” or pure ones are not the things of this life – decidedly not the beautiful women of this life. “Hur” are a heavenly blessing which the righteous women shall have along with the righteous men.

The late Al-Hajj Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din, the founder of above monthly, once had the opportunity to deliver a lecture on the philosophy of heaven and hell to an atheist gathering in England. At the conclusion of the address, someone objected to the presence of beautiful women (houris) in paradise. To this, he replied: “Is there any society in the world that is complete without women? Indeed, man’s rough edges, his wildness and barbarity can never be removed unless woman is present. So, if the presence of women is compulsory in this life for the nurturing of a society’s civilization and culture, then will they not be needed in heaven which is a place for the advancement and perfection of every aspect of civilization and culture?”

Heavenly View in Islam – anything but sensual

It is quite clear from Quran that the heavenly abode cannot be perceived in terms of human physicality as “No soul knows what refreshment of the eyes is hidden for them: a reward for what they did.” — 32:17. Still, Quran gives a simile of reward for the righteousness. This similitude closely approximates a joyous festival of blissful magnificence and tranquility of princes and princesses in a King’s courtyard. King in this instance is God himself:


56:7. And (at that time) you shall be (sorted out into) three distinct categories,
56:8. (First) those that are blessed. How (lucky) the blessed will be!
56:9. And (then) those that are wretched, how (miserable) the condition of the wretched will be!
56:10. And (third) those that are foremost (in faith). They are by all means the foremost (in the Hereafter).
56:11. It is they who have (really) achieved nearness (to their Lord).
56:12. (They shall abide) in Gardens of bliss.
56:13. A large party of them (will hail) from the early (believers [- the early companions of Muhammad PBUH, who faced most trials and tribulation and gave the most sacrifices in cause of Truth]);
56:14. While a few (of them will hail) from the later ones [i.e. door of salvation and reward are open for coming generations].
56:15. (They will be in the Garden seated) on couches inlaid (with gold and precious jewels).
56:16. (They will be) reclining thereupon (and sitting) face to face.
56:17. (Their) young sons will go round about them, who will remain as young as ever [Side note for this rebuttal – there is no physicality or frame of passing time or moral decay in heaven, hence there is no growing old and the inhabitants there – who will remain as young as ever. Christian reader in this verse might see a hint of cherubs or putti surrounding the main character depicted in Vatican paintings as – young sons [who] will go round about them],
56:18. Carrying goblets and (shining) beakers and cups (full) of pure and clean drink
56:19. They will get no headache (or giddiness) from their (drinks), nor will they be inebriated and talk nonsense [Side note for this rebuttal – the clarification in this verse removes any hint of an intoxicant drink].
56:20. And (carrying) such fruits as they choose,
56:21. And (with) flesh of birds exactly to their taste.
56:22. And (there will be present) fair houris with lovely large eyes.
56:23. (Chaste) like pearls, well-guarded and well preserved.
56:24. (Such shall be) the reward of their (good) deeds.
56:25. There they shall hear no idle-talk, no sinful speech [Side note for this rebuttal – This verse expunges any sense of “sin and sensuality” as there will be no idle-talk, no sinful speech from/by/about fair houris with lovely large eyes].
56:26. But (all that they hear on all sides will be) good and pure words (of salutation) – `Peace be, peace be.’ [- Peace, that’s what Islam means, seeks and provides]
56:27. Those that are blessed – how (lucky) the blessed will be!
56:28. They shall abide amidst (the land of thornless) Sidrah (- Lote tree, a symbol of bliss);
56:29. And (in the Garden of) clustered bananas;
56:30. And (in) extended shades;
56:31. And (near) water falling from heights;
56:32. And (amidst) abundant fruit;
56:33. (The season of) which is not limited, and (they are) never forbidden.
56:34. And (they will have) noble spouses [Side note for this rebuttalnoble spouse is one of the greatest bliss that any human can seek, at least in this world].
56:35. Verily, We have made them (women) excellent and have raised them into a special new creation;
56:36. And have made them virgins, pure and undefiled.
56:37. They are the loving ones (of their husbands), suiting to their ages and matching them in every respect.
56:38. (They are meant) for the blessed ones.

After the preview above of Surah Al-Waqiah – The Event, reader may want to read its detailed commentary by Dr. Basharat Ahmad as translated by Kalamazad Mohammed where the author in one place further distinguishes the heaven in Quran from that of Bible – The paradise of the Holy Qur’an is also completely dissimilar to the Jewish and Christian heaven into which, as they allege, Satan, disguised as a snake, had slipped and had deceived Adam and Eve causing them to commit a sin and so bringing about their expulsion from the Garden of Eden. Contrary to this, the heaven that the Holy Qur’an describes is a heaven from which Satan is totally excluded and it is a place where not only sin can never be committed but not even any talk of sin can be heard. Thus the account we find in the Bible is nothing but a story. It is for this reason that the Holy Qur’an in plainly stating I am going to place a successor in the earth (2:30), has corrected that erroneous belief of the Jews and the Christians by openly disclosing that Prophet Adam (as) was made a ruler on earth and not in heaven. In addition, it is clear that the heaven which he was given to inhabit as a gift from the Almighty was a verdant, fruit-bearing tract of land. Or, it may refer to that condition of bliss, peace and ecstasy that man enjoys prior to his commission of sin and which was described by Allah, Most High, as paradise.


35. Robert Spencer – “The Quran contains no guarantee of paradise except for those who slay or slain in the cause of Allah.”

Slide projected with voice – The Noble Koran – 9:111 Verily, Allah has purchased of the the believers their lives and their properties; for the price that theirs shall be the Paradise. They fight in Allah’s Cause, so they kill (others) and are killed. Then rejoice in the bargain which you have concluded. That is the supreme success.

Spencer and others almost always quote verses out of context, but in current issue he is intellectually dishonest. He not only uses the verse 9:111 out of context, but has actually put the verse on chopping block and removed the references to Torah and Gospel from within the verse, which are highlighted in bold below. He is quite “savvy” and obsequious, because if he quoted the whole verse, he would then be forced to smear Torah and Bible too in the same breath by the very distortions that he uses against Quran. To set the record straight, the same verse 9:111 and its context in subsequent verse in excerpted from the translation and commentary by Muhammad Ali, edited by Dr. Zahid Aziz:

9:111. Surely Allah has bought from the believers their persons and their property — theirs (in return) is the Garden. They fight in Allah’s way, so they kill and are killed. It is a promise which is binding on Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Quran.

[Footnote – The promise binding on Allah is that Allah will grant the believers His blessings, if they exert themselves with their persons and their property in His way. The Gospels give the same promise: “If you want to be perfect”, said Jesus to a wealthy man, “go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me” (Matthew, 19:21). To Peter he said: “everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and inherit eternal life” (Matthew, 19:29). Moses’ teaching contains similar promises. For instance, the promise of “a land flowing with milk and honey” is made conditional on “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength” (Deuteronomy, 6:3–5), which is the same as exerting oneself to the utmost in the way of God with one’s person and property.

It should be borne in mind that the words, they fight in Allah’s way, so they kill and are killed, are not a part of the promise, but are expressive of the condition of the Companions, and show that they were true to their promise.

The promise to spend one’s person and property may be carried out in various ways under different circumstances, and the Companions of the Holy Prophet were as true to this promise during the thirteen years at Makkah as during the ten years at Madinah.]


Rober Spencer – “In other words the guarantee of Paradise is for the people who are killed while they are killing to establish the hegemony of Allah or Islamic Law in the world.”

Spencer so casually tries to smear Islam with words such as “hegemony of Allah,” but rest assured that Quran is not dogmatic like Bible. There is no hegemony of Allah in Quran. Instead of Allah’s hegemony, Quran assures the survival of Christian faith:

Firstly, Christianity will survive till the last day, though with a caveat of their mutual hatred:

5:14. And with those who say, We are Christians, We made a covenant,  but they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of, so We stirred up enmity and hatred among them to the day of Resurrection.

 Secondly, Christians will always dominate Jews:

3:55. When Allah said: O Jesus, I will cause you to die and exalt you in My presence and clear you of those who disbelieve and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of Resurrection.

The above verses are yet another proof that as a matter of doctrine Islam can co-exist with other religions.

Spencer’s also declared – “The Quran contains no guarantee of paradise except for those who slay or slain in the cause of Allah.” This is a plain wrong statement. Many counter arguments can be unloaded from Quran, but suffice for him and his co-experts are the following verses re-posted from Rebuttal 31c. These verses should be an eye opener alike to both the preacher and the preached of the documentary. Spencer comes across immature, infantile and selfish in light of these verses whereas Quran stands out as fair, mature and word of God:

2:62. Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good, they have their reward with their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve.
5:69. Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabians and the Christians — whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good — they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve.
3:113-114. They (– the people of the Scripture) are not all alike. Among these people of the Scripture there are some upright people. They rehearse the Message of Allâh in the hours of the night and they prostrate themselves (in His worship). They believe in Allâh and the Last Day and enjoin good and forbid evil, and they vie one with another in (doing) good deeds. And it is these who are of the truly righteous.


36. Abdullah Al-Araby – “Jihad in Islam can be spiritual or physical. The spiritual Jihad is striving to be a better Muslim. But also there is a physical part of Jihad that you cannot take it away from Islam.”

Even though the above statement will be later used by the documentary to build up a case against Islam, but if taken at its face value, Al-Araby is correct in his statement to a certain extent. Just like – idea and action, noun and verb, body and soul, brain and mind, wood and fire, physical hygiene and spiritual growth, healthy food and healthy mind – where each is an inherent property of another and are inseparable – similarly, Jihad has its own components i.e. physical and spiritual. But the interesting point is that since Jihad is sum total of physical and non-physical effort, hence its rewards are both physical and non-physical. Simplistically, a student has to physically and mentally strive in his or her studies before the spiritual and material benefits come forth as rewards e.g. a doctoral degree with is material reward of salary and spiritual rewards of a social status and benefit to humanity. It is because of these secular principles, unlike Christianity, monasticism and asceticism has no room in Islam, because these apparently high moral offices in Christianity are all talk but no action. Factually, Jihad in Islam is inseparable from life of a Muslim, because the ultimate goal of a Muslim is to assume Allah’s colors which in words of Al-Abraby are “striving to be a better Muslim,” and that is a dictate of Quran:

2:138. (Assume) the attributes of Allâh! and who is fairer than Allâh in attributes? We are His worshippers ever.

By being worshippers ever of Allah, Muslims are constantly toiling on towards their Lord:

84:6. O Mankind! verily you are (by nature) toiling on towards your Lord a laborious toiling, then (through arduous service to Him) you shall surely meet Him.

Such is the goal of life in Quran which directs every man to walk with God by treading along with a message of peace – Islam.

The matter of Jihad has been explained and clarified by various authors in previous issues, namely Muhammad Ali (Issue 27), Pickthall (Issue 27) and Zahid Aziz (Issue 33). The following is another discourse about Jihad which is taken (and referenced verses inserted) from the introductory comments in Translation of Quran by Nooruddin – “JIHÂD -HOLY WAR- A MISCONCEPTION”[p. 37A-38A]

And strive your hardest to win the pleasure of Allâh, as hard a striving as is possible and as it behoves you. He has chosen you and has imposed no hardship upon you in the matter of your faith, (so follow) the creed of your father Abraham. He named you Muslims (both) before this and (again) in this (Qur’ân) (22:78).

A great misconception prevails, particularly among the Christians, propagated by their zealous missionaries, with regard to the duty of JIHÂD in Islam. Even the greatest research scholars of West have not taken pains to consult any dictionary on Arabic, or to refer to the Qur’ân to find out the meaning of the word. The word Jihâd according to the Arabic-English Lexicon of E. W. Lane and the great scholar of Islam Râghîb means: The use of or exerting of one’s utmost powers, efforts, endeavours or ability in contending with an object of disapprobation, and this is of three kinds, namely; a visible enemy, the devil and against one’s own self. All these meanings are used in the Qur’ân when a reference of JIHÂD is made. The duty of JIHÂD is far from being synonymous with that of war, and the meaning of JIHÂD, ‘the Holy war’ as supposed by the western writers is unknown equally to Arabic and the fundamental teachings of the Holy Qur’ân. Even in the Traditions of the Prophet (Hadîth), this word was never synonymous with ‘the Holy war’. The Prophet of Islam called the greater Pilgrimage to Makkah (Hajj) as JIHÂD (Bukhârî 25:4).

22:40. Those who have been driven out of their homes without any just cause. Their only fault was that they said, ‘Our Lord is Allâh.’ If Allâh had not repelled some peoples by means of others, cloisters and churches and synagogues and mosques wherein the name of Allâh is mentioned very frequently, would have been razed to the ground in large numbers. And Allâh will surely help one who helps His cause. Allâh is, indeed, All-Powerful, All-Mighty.

The permission to fight (22:40) under certain circumstances has no connection with the preaching of the religion by force and at no time did Islam permit the use of force for the purpose of preaching.

9:41. Go forth (all whether) light (- being ill-equipped) or heavy (- being well-equipped) and strive hard with your possessions and your persons in the cause of Allâh. That is better for you, if only you knew (your own gain or loss).

Again the Qur’ân says: ‘Strive hard with your possessions and your persons in the cause of Allâh’ (9:41) and:

25:52. So do not follow the disbelievers, and strive hard against them with the help of this (Qur’ân), a mighty striving.

Strive hard against them (the enemies of Islam, the nonbelievers) with the help of this (Qur’ân, which is full of arguments and reasoning) a mighty striving’ (25:52). God expects from us a JIHÂD against our souls, against our NAFS AMMÂRAH, our commanding self which is continuously inciting us towards evil.

2:114. And who can be more unjust than those who prohibit the name of Allâh from being extolled in (any of His) houses of worship and strive to ruin them. It was not proper for such, ever to enter these (places) except in fear and awe. For them is disgrace in this world, and there awaits them a severe punishment in the Hereafter.

God has not given us any permission to use any kind of force to prohibit people from going to places of worship – Churches, Synagogues and Temples – ‘where the names of God are being glorified’ (2:114).

The way this documentary distorts the meaning of Jihad is analogous to Health as to how much weights can a person lift. Whereas, the word Health has a wide spectrum of connotations with it. Health is not just physical health but it also includes mental health, spiritual health, economic health, social health and so on for a person. Thus, when one discusses health or gives advice about health, one has to take into consideration all these aspects under the rubric of health. Given this spectrum of implications of health, if some health buff only equates health to how much weights can one lift in a gym, it would be a sign of pure ignorance. Such a person will rightfully earn the title of health fanatic. To such a tunnel vision of health, a child or an older person cannot be healthy as they will not be able to lift any significant pounds. But still, a weight lifter can be accepted as healthy as long as he stays within the moral and ethical boundaries of not doping, else such a person is no more than a drug addict who presents to the world his muscles as false representation of health.

Similarly, as mentioned before by Nooruddin, Muhammad Ali, Pickthall, Zahid Aziz and others, in light of Quran, the word Jihad has implications of – The use of or exerting of one’s utmost powers, efforts, endeavours or ability in contending with an object of disapprobation, and this is of three kinds, namely; a visible enemy, the devil and against one’s own self. Similar to example of a healthy weightlifter, a war against a visible enemy is a sub-component of Jihad as long as it is in self-defense, else an aggressive war might outwardly be sold as Jihad, but it is no different than that of a weightlifter who apparently is healthy, but for all intent and purposes is a doper. The “experts” of this documentary only present to the world the doped-up Jihad as actual Jihad, which is wrong and willfully dishonest. The audience who cheer these “experts” are no more than the audience who cheer the prime-time mock fights of dopers on steroids who sell wrestling as athletics to the ignorant.


37. Walid Shoebat – “Jihad in Islam means struggle. That’s what the literal meaning of the word, struggle.

The documentary experts keep on bringing the distortions of the word – Jihad, and we will keep on providing the facts of Jihad. In earlier rebuttals Muhammad Ali (Issue 27), Pickthall (Issue 27) , Zahid Aziz (Issue 33) and Nooruddin (Issue 36) explained Jihad. Now, an article – Misconceptions about the Islamic concept of Jihad (pub. 1886)by Dr. G.W. Leitner, a British orientalist and a linguist, updated for its use of archaic words by Dr. Zahid Aziz is excerpted below:

Meanings of the word jihad 

The subject of jihad is so thoroughly misunderstood both by Western scholars and by the bulk of Muslims themselves that it will be well to point out what really constitutes jihad. In order to do so, it is necessary to analyse the word and to show when and how it was first used.

Etymologically the root is jahd, “he exerted himself”, and the infinitive that is formed from it means “utmost exertion”. Its first use amongst Arabic authors refers to that particular exertion which takes place under great difficulties, and, when applied to religious matters, it means an exertion under religious difficulties on behalf of the true religion.

It will be seen at once how a word of this kind would be subject to interpretations according to circumstances. Taking into consideration the surrounding life of an Arab, if he forces his camel or horse to take a desperate ride through the night so as to surprise the violators of his peace before the early morn, it is jihad; if he appeals to his kinsmen to shake off their lethargy and to rally round the tribal standard or to spread the opinions of the true faith, it is jihad; and if he abstains alike from worldly cares and amusements in order to find that peace which meditation alone can give in spite of an obdurate heart, it is jihad. Nor can the student‟s jihad in poring over his books, the merchant‟s jihad in amassing money, the ploughman’s jihad in winning food from an obstinate soil, be forgotten.

So that when people say that jihad means the duty of the Muslims to wage war against a non-Muslim government or country and call this jihad (although it is possible that under certain circumstances this use of the word might be legitimate), they really talk nonsense, and cast an undeserved libel on a religion with which they are not acquainted.

But what the West doesn’t understand is that the hadith, the compilation of the traditions of Prophet Muhammad of Islam is almost 100 hadiths regarding Jihad. And if you look at every single one of them, every single one of them have the sword, war or a military effort. And in the end of the expedition, Jihad expedition, he [Muhammad] said – Now I resort to the jihad within, the jihad that is within the self-struggle.

What does Shoebat expect of Muhammad when the latter spoke about a defensive war? Should Muhammad had given lectures on how to best offer oneself for crucifixion when faced with a defensive war? Any unbiased audience who lives in a real world can read very clearly even in Shoebat’s own words the preference of Muhammad to struggle within the person over the struggle of an imposed defensive war. Obviously, the struggle of person with his/her inner demons is intellectually and morally much higher struggle than an outward war in self defense. What is wrong and immoral with such a teaching? Burden is on Shoebat to explain his preaching, not on Muhammad, not on Quran and not on Hadiths in light of Quran. The partial Hadith that he refers to is addressed are requited from Leitner’s article [– Misconceptions about the Islamic concept of Jihad]:

“Your true jihad is in endeavouring to serve your parents.”

“We have returned from the small jihad” (the war with the aggressors on the Muslim faith) “to the great jihad” (the war with sin).

And as a matter of fact, I had this dialog with an Islamist one time, he says – ‘Walid, come-on, tell the West that Jihad means struggle.’ I said, ‘Yes, it does mean self-struggle, you’re right. Jihad does mean self-struggle, but so does Mein Kamph.’ Mein Kampf means My Struggle. In the same fashion, the Islamists look at Jihad.”

Shoebat, obviously you have not read “Mein Kampf” which is clear from the way you tried to rhyme in a distortion by using Hitler’s autobiography and his political ideology. This is similar to Issue 28 where you falsely score points by stating – “What part of kill don’t you [the West] understand?”

The documentary tries to inculcate in the audience a totally wrong perception of Jihad, which is far from its dictionary meanings, far removed from its implied meanings in Quran and has no example from life of Prophet Muhammad. All one can say to these pseudo-experts of the documentary is that Jihad is one of the strongest aspect of Islam. There are no apologies in rebutting and explaining the meanings, implications and purpose of Jihad as taught by Quran and practiced by Muhammad.


38. Mr. Serge Trifkovic – “It is a very dangerous element of Islamic teaching because this instant gratification through martyrdom is an attractive concept. And by the way, when the so called martyr operation is carried out by Hammas, what is announced from the minarets of mosques is not the death of so and so who carried out the attack, but the wedding of so and so to the hooris. In other words, they immediately make the implication that far from having to cry over his disappearance over the end of his physical life, his parents should be happy and celebrate and throw a party because their son is now being not only transported into heaven but greeted there with these voluptuous beauties.”

Trifkovic gives a totally wrong perception of martyrdom in Islam when he states – “It is a very dangerous element of Islamic teaching because this instant gratification from martyrdom is an attractive concept.” His argument hinges on the assumption that humans can confer the status of martyr on someone. In Islam, humans can only pray for someone to be granted the status of a martyr after his death. According to Quran this prerogative is only with God. Various aspects of martyrdom and the distortion of hooris, which are “voluptuous beauties” to Trifkovic were fully dealt with in Rebuttals 34 and 35 before. Besides possibly Trifkovic, it is doubted if anyone has actually seen a heavenly hoori to give the description of “voluptuous beauty?” Muhammad had this to say about an apparent martyr:

“The first of men (whose case) will be decided on the Day of Judgment will be a man who died as a martyr. He shall be brought (before the Judgment Seat). Allah will make him recount His blessings and he will recount them. Then will Allah say: What did you do? He will say: I fought for You until I died as a martyr. Allah will say: You have told a lie. You fought that you might be called a brave warrior. And you were called so. (Then) orders will be passed against him and he will be dragged with his face downward and cast into hell.” (Sahih Muslim, book: ‘Government’; in A.H. Siddiqui translation book 20, ch. 43, number 4688.) [Islam, Peace and Tolerance, p 51]

Suicide has no support in Quran. On the reverse, self-preservation is a duty (See Rebuttal 33). Christianity has to be credited, if not blamed for infusing non-sense in other cultures and religious thought. Christianity influenced other peoples in such a manner that the neo-cultural values and myths adopted by latter found expression as rituals and canons in the name of the prevalent religion. In the Issues discussed so far we seen such examples of stoning to death for blasphemy (Rebuttal 21, Leviticus 24:10-23), the infamous verse of sword in Bible (Rebuttal 28 – Matthews 10:34), the aggression of Holy wars – Crusades, stoning to death for adultery and now killing oneself with a reward in heaven can be attributed to none but the Bible.

The suicide bombing in Middle East stems from the Biblical tradition of Jesus that has seeped into that culture through Christianity. Jesus while predicting his own death said, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. Very truly I tell you, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. Those who love their life will lose it, while those who hate their life in this world will keep it for eternal life. Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be. My Father will honor the one who serves me.” John 12:23-26

In the light of above Bible quote, Trifkovic failed to ask the fundamental question from the to be suicide bombers about their living situation under occupation, generation after generation, in Palestine as to – do they hate their life in this world? Chances are that Trifkovic will be “surprised” to get “Yes” as an answer. To such a suicide bomber, Bible gives solace – that the bomber “will keep it [-his reward] for eternal life.” after his suicide.

When a Mullah glorifies the death of a suicide bomber, he is factually glorifying words of Bible – “They triumphed over him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; they did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death. Therefore rejoice, you heavens and you who dwell in them! But woe to the earth and the sea, because the devil has gone down to you! He is filled with fury, because he knows that his time is short.” Revelation 12:11-12


39. Walid Shoebat – “Shaheed, the word Shaheed, means witness, to witness to testify, to testify there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His messenger. And you die as a Shaheed for that cause, you are a witness, you are considered a witness and martyr, and a martyr becomes glorified. Your family will glorify you after you die.”

One of the many tactics employed by this documentary is to keep repeating an allegation, no matter how false. Sooner or later it will psychologically stick with the audience as the truth. Shaheed interpreted as a martyr is one such construct that this documentary keeps repeating and wrongly attributes it to acts of terrorism. This wrong perception of Martyrdom attributed to Islam was clarified in detail in the Issue 34 under the heading ‘Martyrdom’ based upon excerpted section from the book “Islam, Peace and Tolerance” [p. 50-2] by Dr. Zahid Aziz.

Footnote – Shoebat himself acknowledges that Shaheed means witness. Thus, it would be totally ridiculous to substitute the word ‘martyr’ for ‘witness’ in Quran e.g.

“Allah is witness of what you do” (3:98)

“Allah is sufficient as a witness between us and you” (10:29).

Walid Shoebat – “To a Muslim fundamentalist living in the Middle East I had to be initiated. I had to basically either kill my first Jew or destroy my first Zionist infrastructure. I had to prove beyond shadow of a doubt that I was worthy. And there are ample amount of students, teenagers, men, who are willing to die a suicide martyrs. Willing to put explosives. The martyr application is filled. There are many applicants. There are not enough bombs to fulfill the applicants. And to get in one of those missions indeed you must have been chosen. You must have been really good. You must have been violent enough. You must have been going out on every demonstration in the streets of Jerusalem or Bethlehem or our village. You must have shown yourself worthy of a greater operation. So when I explained what I have done and people have seen me in the community and I was worthy, [pause] I ended up in prison, I was of course recruited. And I remember Mr. Mahmud Al-Mughrabi. He was a proud, he was proud to have planted fifteen bombs. Killed many Israelis. He was being bailed out by a Jewish-Israeli lawyer. He back right in the street. So you find your bomb maker and you apply. You say, ‘look, I want to join, I want to do my first martyr operation, planting a bomb, whatever’ and you need connection. I found my connection. I rendezvous with this guy in Jerusalem in [unclear location] and he built this explosive charge with a timer in a loaf of bread and I had to smuggle it from the Temple Mount under the auspices of Al-Waqf department. Al-Waqf police is the Islamic police appointed by the government to watch over the holy sites. Them knowingly that I have explosive charges, smuggle me so that I can escape from the check points. There I carried my explosive charge from Jerusalem to Bank Leumi in Bethlehem. I was supposed to place the explosive charge at 6 pm exactly. I was supposed to have this explosive charge in my hand at 6 pm exactly. Five to six [o,clock] I saw some Arab children running around and I did not want to kill any Arabs. So, I decided to place this explosive charge on the roof, I tossed it on the roof. At 6 pm it went off and there was this big explosion. I looked behind me. I see a thick black smoke coming out of the building. And I started running. That’s the moment I first got a glimpse of the reality of killing. I thought people have died. And, I remember, I didn’t sleep for three days, constantly worried that I have killed somebody. Even terrorists have reality check that you kill or about to die. You can sense it. This is why in Israel, the way the nature of finding out a suicide bomber is to look at their eyes. They will have these glossy eyes. They are sweating profusely. They are not paying attention because in their mind they are about to go. And its, you weight the reality that now you are gonna die. Many times I have been in this situation or I had thought I was going to get killed shooting back and forth as we stone at the Israelis and they shoot back at us and things like that. I was face to face with death. When you think in your minds that you are going to die, you struggle between the requirements of your Islamic upbringing and between the reality that you value your life. And, at some point one has to outweigh the other. And, for a Muslim fundamentalist we always chose death. We always chose the suicide. My cousin died on his way to Ben-Yahuda street and he got killed. He died. I had people and relatives die fighting the Israelis. And as I look at now, I think what a waste. What a waste of life!”

Shoebat once again fabricates facts and logic for a scripted tearjerker account of his past. He cunningly chooses his words. To insinuate the audience he tacitly mentions the Temple Mount i.e. Al-Aqsa Mosque where allegedly his bomb was made. Then he makes sure that Al-Waqf police is mentioned as his accomplice in the terror plot. Like the plot of DaVinci Code, he touches every landmark in the holy land. Whom is Shoebat trying to fool or please? Equivalent of his lies in Christian world would be a Vatican staff member who manufactures a bomb for a terrorist in Sistine Chapel and then the Pontifical Swiss Guards of the Vatican slip the terrorist and his bomb into some populated part of Rome, e.g. St. Peter’s Square. His synthesized facts are laughable. Probably, of many reasons, it was this fantastic account that caught the attention of CNN. His self-awakening to Christianity based upon his past of being a “terrorist” is rubbished by the CNN investigative journalism (see Part – 1 of “Ex Terrorist Rakes’ in homeland security bucks”).

CNN was not able to locate any incidence or police report of bombing of the bank that Shoebat takes “credit” for. The video clip clearly shows that the bank is housed in a tall building. It is just impossible for someone to lob up a bomb from street level to its roof, unless it is Shoebat throwing it in his fantasies of Marvel Comics characters the Fantastic Four. There are no police records of Shoebat’s self-alleged arrests and imprisonment in Israel. Even his family members mock his fabricated “terrorist” activities. Obviously, Shoebat is more of a wannabe terrorist or a terrorist of a make belief for the gullible Western audience.

Shoebat not only unravels himself by his lies, he factually throws the whole documentary into a pseudo-intellectual gutter. Looking back at the previous issues, all his arguments similarly appear hollow and fabricated to please certain audience and pocketbooks.

17 Responses to “Summary 3: The struggle”

  1. Salaam, you're doing fablous works here. I will share this on social media and hope/pray some people take a look at it. Jazak Allah Khair.

  2. October 5th, 2014 at 6:53 am
    From Rashid Jahangiri:

  3. October 6th, 2014 at 5:46 am
    From Rashid Jahangiri:

    Reza Aslan answers Bill Maher + CNN hosts:

  4. Bill Maher was also a guest in Charlie Rose show on Sept 9th 2014 [Link]. @ 8:20 of the video he starts criticism of Muslims. @ 12:30 he is challenged to debate with a ‘moderate Muslim’ by the host which he accepts if the host can find one. My wife was watching the show. She wrote the following letter to Charlie Rose [name and location are omitted ]. The response is still awaited.


    The issues that Bill Maher touches upon in the above discourse and elsewhere are all covered and are being rebutted in the book that is being published piecemeal on this site. Please peruse the Table of Contents at: While debating any opponent one has to draw a distinction between Islam hater vs. Muslim hater.



    Dear Mr. Rose:

    My name is xxxxx Jahangiri. I am an attorney, adjunct professor of law, and a writer.  My husband and I live in xxxxxxx, xxxxxxxxx.  Both of us frequently watch your show.  Tonight I watched your show with Bill Maher in which he spoke about Islam.  You gave him a challenge – to debate a moderate Muslim, right there, on your show.  I want to reach out to you and nominate my husband, Ikram Jahangiri, MD, to debate Bill Maher on your show on the topic of Quran and moderate Islam.

    As an introduction to my husband, he is a psychiatrist who has published a book under the title "Consumer Guide to God: A Muslim Perspective." What he has said in his book will completely change the way you think about Islam. Its cover is attached to this email in a pdf format.  Ikram has read the Quran like an attorney would read a statute or a case.  Instead of giving it a linear reading, he has read it going back and forth, one verse in context of other similar ones, and so on.  As a matter of fact, this book was inspired by none other than Bill Maher's "Religulous" [Link: with Spanish close caption]. Bill Maher is mentioned in the book:

    “The idea of this book was conceived many years ago when my older son, then in second grade, challenged me to show him my God.  Attending the local Seventh Day Adventist School in Loma Linda, California, he was the only Muslim child in his class.  Apparently, this question which at the time seemed to come out of nowhere, had been kindled by some classroom discussion in the context of Christianity. Or perhaps it was inspired by the image of Jesus Christ, which might well have led my son to wonder what his Dad’s god looked like.  I had given this matter little thought, and feeling compelled to somehow satisfy my son’s curiosity I devised a response on the fly.  It was the beginning of winter and the evenings had grown chilly.  I was driving and he was sitting in the back seat.  I asked him if he was feeling cold and he said, “Yes.” “Show me your cold,” I challenged him.  “I can’t show it to you but I can feel it,” he answered.  That was how my God was, I replied. – I could feel Him but could not show Him to anyone.  This is the unseen God worshiped by Muslims the world over.   One can feel and experience Him but cannot show Him.  My son had asked an objective question to which I responded with a subjective answer. 

    Similarly, in the documentary film “Religulous,” Bill Maher asked objective and rational questions about the three major religions from ordinary people to religious leaders, including the Vatican priests.  His interviewees, most of whom seemed devoted to their respective religions, had no satisfactory answers and seemed baffled by his interrogation.  That documentary turned out to be an inspiration for writing this book.” 

    Below is an excerpt from the Preface of the same book:

    “Whether you live in East or West, this book will forever change how you think about Islam. Some may be shocked to realize that the core progressive values of the West are reflections of Qur’ânic edicts of justice, human rights, environmentalism, gender and racial equality, edicts now derogatorily known in the West as Shariah – the Islamic Law. Unfortunately, the rigid interpretation of Qur’ân has inadvertently turned its advocates into their own worst enemies as well as the enemies of others.

    Some may be offended to know that Qur’ân supports Darwin's theory of evolution and not that Adam was the first human. There is no incongruity between Qur’ân and science. The Devil is no more than the human himself; the devilish thoughts and satanic acts. Others may object that the Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists all have equal rights with Muslims to qualify for the Qur’ânic heaven. Fatwas, as popularly known, have no basis in Qur’ân. Fatwa mongers and Fatwa followers are equally ridiculed. In Qur’ân there is no physical hell or heaven, much less seventy virgins. Jihad by sword is a corrupted concept. There is no validation of Veil. Deprivation of women's freedom is a product of depraved and extremist culture, not Qur’ân. In Qur’ân there is no “Muslim God," only the “God of Mankind.” If Muslims and non-Muslims view each other through the lens of Qur’ân, they might be surprised to see none but children of a ‘no lesser god’ on the other end. This book does not tweak the Qur’ân to make it palatable to a modernist, because Qur’ân itself is more modern than many of us think. There are no apologies in this book for  Qur’ân.”

    Ikram has also written a sentence by sentence rebuttal to the documentary by Robert Spencer et al. “Islam: What the West Needs to Know,” which can be read at His third book, “Myths, Miracles, Mistakes and Matters,” has been drafted and is being released piecemeal on the internet: .

    I believe if anyone can debate Bill Maher from a Muslim perspective, it is Ikram.

    I will be mailing you Ikram’s book.


    xxxxx Jahangiri

  5. October 15th, 2014 at 6:09 am
    From Rashid Jahangiri:

    Rothschild is mentioned in this rebuttal.

    Following links give summary on life and financial empire of this person:

    Is This the Only Trillionaire Family in Modern History?

  6. January 24th, 2015 at 8:59 am
    From Rashid Jahangiri:

    Role of Arthur Balfour in creation of Jewish Homeland i.e. Israel.

    Arthur Balfour is mentioned in this rebuttal. Following is link to documentary by History Channel.

    Promises and Betrayals – Middle East – History Channel Documentary

  7. In June 1917, a few months before the Balfour declaration, a public meeting was held in London, addressed by Marmaduke Pickthall on 'Muslim Interests in Palestine'. Khwaja Kamal-ud-Din also spoke at the meeting. It was held at Caxton Hall, which was the venue of many important public meetings in Central London in those days.

    At this link you can read the full published proceedings of this meeting.

    (Unrelated humorous note: In Arabic articles the name Balfour appears looking like bilfor in Arabic letters. Once I read an English translation of such an article. The translator had rendered this in English as Bill Ford!)

  8. After reading the “'Muslim Interests in Palestine” that Dr. Zahid Aziz provided, it brings out pangs of sorrow about what happened to trajectory of Islam which had produced its best a century ago. In one article we see the great sons of Islam speaking in tandem and very accurately prophesizing the outcome of Zionism and aptly defending rights of Muslims in light of history, religion, culture, politics and realities on ground. Who were they?

    Shaikh Mushir Hosain Kidwai of Gadia, an attorney, a regular contributor to “Islamic Review” with excellent articles.

    Marmaduke Pickthall, a contemporary of Winston Churchill at Harrow, a bestselling novelist ‘Said the Fisherman – 1903’, refused the government assignment to Middle East and instead of him T.E. Lawrence was sent, convert to Islam, editor of ‘Islamic Review’, Imam of Woking Mosque,  founder of ‘Islamic Culture’ in Hyderabad Deccan and translator of Quran. He was finally laid to rest in Brookwood, where Abdullah Yusuf Ali too was later buried.

    Khwaja Kamaluddin, an attorney, personal counsel to Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, a friend of Maulana Muhammad Ali, Mualana Muhammad Ali Johar, Lord Headley, and a close peer of founders of AAIIL, prolific writer, mesmerizing orator, first Muslim missionary to UK, translator/commentator of Quran, founder of Woking Mission that attracted the best minds of the world and it was on its premises where the idea of Pakistan was seeded, founder of the best ever Muslim journal –  ‘Islamic Review (and Muslim India)’, father of Khwaja Nazir Ahmad – author of ‘Jesus in Heaven on Earth.’

    Despite the head start, with sampler personalities as above, where did we Muslims go wrong? I am sure it was because of personages like these that Bertrand Russell was convinced of Europe’s conversion to Islam within a century. Can it still happen? What do we have to do? How to do it again? These are quintessential questions that after reading the works of the said personalities come to mind. 

  9. "…Bertrand Russell was convinced of Europe’s conversion to Islam within a century."

    Did you mean Bernard Shaw?

  10. Dear Dr. Aziz, Thank you for correcting the name to George Bernard Shaw. In January 1949 issue of ‘The Islamic Review’ on page 63 there is a clarification under the section “What Our Readers Say…” with regards to a statement that is generally attributed to him (link). It is reproduced below:


    We recently wrote to the great philosopher and playwright to ask him whether a quotation attributed to him was correct. The quotation, which appeared in a certain journal, ran as follows:

    "I have always held the religion of Mohammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capability of the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. But the Europe of the present century is far advanced. It is beginning to be enamoured of the creed of Mohammed.

    "The Medieval ecclesiastics either through ignorance or bigotry painted Mohammad in the darkest colours. They were in fact trained both to hate the man Mohammad and his religion. To them Mohammad was Anti-Christ. I have studied him—the wonderful man in my opinion far from being an Anti-Christ must be called the Saviour of Humanity."

                                                George Bernard Shaw.


    We reproduce below our letter to Mr. Shaw together with the text of his reply:

    George Bernard Shaw, Esq.,

    Ayor St. Lawrence, Herts.      6th September, 1948.

    Dear Sir, I enclose herewith a copy of a quotation headed “WONDERFUL ", which has appeared in the pages of a journal circulating in the East and elsewhere. The quotation appears, you will notice, above your own name, and is of much interest to us.

    I am approaching you now to ask you:

    1. Whether the quotation is indeed genuinely yours and whether it is verbally exact?

    2. Whether you would kindly state the source from which the quotation has been taken, together with the date.

    The reason for my troubling you in this matter is that we are greatly desirous of reprinting the enclosed quotation, if genuine and with your kind permission, in the first number of the new series of The Islamic Review, which, enlarged and modernised and illustrated, we are planning to produce, starting from January, 1949. As the celebration of the Prophet Muhammad's birthday falls on this occasion in January next, the inclusion of this quotation from your writings would be exceptionally appropriate.

                                                   Yours, etc.


    Mr. Shaw's reply runs:

    These quotations are not authentic.

    I have always ranked Mahomet as one of the greatest of the Prophets, making a huge success where Jesus made a complete failure. But I have also insisted that whereas Christianity in its corruption was saved by the Reformation, only a reformed Islam can conquer the world today.

    I said: “The conversion of savages to Christianity is the conversion of Christianity to savagery.” All the great Eastern religions, noble as they are in their original inspiration and doctrine, are deeply corrupted by the idolatry and miracle mongering by which they govern the peasantry.

    7th September, 1948              G.B.S.

  11. Maulana Muhammad Ali begins his small booklet Islamization of Europe & America with the words:

    The famous English writer, G.B. Shaw, wrote in 1929 in his book Getting Married, the memorable words which have been quoted so often that "the whole of the British Empire will adopt a reformed Mohammadanism before the end of the century." (link to book, published c. 1944)

    This book is a play by Shaw written in 1908, and is available online, for example at this link. In this version, on page 151, column 1, two pages before the end, a character in the play says: "I believe the whole British Empire will adopt a reformed Mohammedanism before the end of the century."

    Of course, it is a character in the play who says this.

    I looked further into the date 1929 given by Maulana Muhammad Ali, while this was a play written and performed first in 1908. I discovered that there is an edition entitled The Doctor's Dilemma, Getting Married, published by Constable & Co. in 1929. See and (in this link scroll down the various editions to the 12th one down).

  12. April 14th, 2015 at 3:15 am
    From Rashid Jahangiri:

    Why LAM members are not invited to debates that can totally negate age old allegations by opponents of Islam, answered by LAM members over and over again in last over 100 years??

    When I watch debates on Islam in which people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Douglas Murray, Maryam Namazie, Robert Spencer etc attack Islam, and on Muslims side speaker always miss some point that is so simple and obvious to LAM members, it makes me very uneasy. I hope some day these Muslim debaters get chance to read answers published in LAM literature or at the very least in 'Project Rebuttal–Islam: What the West Needs to Know'.

    Following debate between Ayyan and Douglas, as opponent of Islam and two Muslims is one such example:

    Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Douglas Murray – Is Islam is a Religion of Peace? [2010]

  13. June 5th, 2015 at 6:54 am
    From Rashid Jahangiri:

    Gregory Davis, producer of film ‘Islam: What the West Needs to Know’ in a debate with Qasim Rashid, a Qadiani Jamaat Member.

    On Fox Radio show ‘The Vipp Jaswal Report’ aired on May 28, 2015, debate took place.

    I want to make two points:

    Firstly, I am happy to hear Qasim Rashid defending Holy Quran, Islam, and Holy Prophet Muhammad SAWS.

    Secondly, I am sad to hear Qasim Rashid LYING when he tries to present his fellow Mehmudis (those Qadianis who believe QK2 was Musleh Mahud) as “peaceful”, “lover of humanity” humans. He needs to read what Mehmudis under leadership of their Qadiani Khalifa 2 Mirza Mehmud Ahmad, in Qadian and Rabwah, and Qadiani Khalifa 3 Mirza Nasir Ahmad, in Rabwah, did to those among them who disagreed with their Qadiani Khalifa.

  14. November 24th, 2015 at 4:08 am
    From Rashid Jahangiri:

    Need to answer objections on Islam by Muslims.

    I hope Ikram or someone else finds time to answer objections on Islam raised by those who identify themselves as Muslims. Unfortunately, when Muslims due to lack of their understanding of Holy Quran injunctions raise objections on Islam they play right into the hands of those non-Muslims, who too lack understanding Holy Quran injuntions due to obvious reasons, and give credence to their misunderstading.

    In following clip Asra Nomani, a prominent Muslim objector on Islam questions, why Holy Quran allows half inheritance to daughter compared to son. She does not seem to know that daughter receives inheritance from husband too, and Islam encourages girls to marry and have children etc i.e. to strengthen families, socities and countries etc. 

    If people like Asra Nomani could be educated to the level of their satisfaction, then i am sure when they speak non-Muslim objectors will pay more attention.

    Please watch following talk of Asra Nomani with Bill Maher:

  15. The first point to note is that Islam did not say the woman's share should be reduced from full to half, it said it should be raised from the zero that she was entitled to at that time to a half of that of man.

    Also, a man is required to maintain his wife and children from his property, but the husband and children have no any such claim on the wife's property. So the sons who are getting twice the daughters' share are also required to be supporting their families from it, while the daughters are not.

    The Holy Quran also says: "And those of you who die and leave wives behind, should make a bequest in favour of their wives of maintenance for a year without turning (them) out. Then if they themselves go away, there is no blame on you for what they do of lawful deeds con­cerning themselves." (2:240)

    There is no verse requiring wives to make a bequest in favour of their husbands!

    Unfortunately this verse is regarded as "abrogated" by those who believe in the doctrine of abrogation. Maulana Muhammad Ali describes this as an "additional benefit" for the widow, over and above what she inherits under the verses of inheritance. A year's maintenance seems to be the minimum recommended. There is no reason why this period cannot be extended in the bequest for her lifetime or re-marriage, whichever is earlier.

  16. 4:34. Men are the maintainers [Arabic: Qawwâmûna] of women, with what Allah has given some of them above others and with what they spend out of their wealth. [ref: Maulana Muhammad Ali, ed. Dr. Zahid Aziz]

    The duty of Qawwâmûna mandated on men has the following spectrum spread across its root, meanings and extensions, all of which converge into the attribute of God – Al-Qayyûm, the intended role of a man, who could also be a husband under a marriage contract:

    Qâma: To stand, stand fast or firm, stand still, stand up, rise, stop, be lively (in walk), appear in broad light (truth), come back to life, rise against, superintendent, persevere in, rise for honouring, sustain, rise for prayer.

    Qaum: Nation; Tribe; Party; Some people.

    Qawâm: Livelihood; Sustenance

    Qawwâm: Sustainer; Guardian; One who manages and maintains the affairs well, who undertakes the maintenance and protection of; Maintainer.

    Usage – Qayyim al-Mar’ata: The husband; Guardian or sustainer of wife.

    Qiyâman (acc.) Source of maintenance.

    Qawwâmûna (n. inten.): Full maintainers; Guardians; Who takes full care.

    Qawwamîna (n. ints. acc.): Full maintainer.

    Qayyûm (n. inten.): Sustainer; Who makes others sustain.

    Al-Qayyûm: One of the excellent name of Allâh.

    [ref: Dictionary of The Holy Quran – Abdul Mannan Omar p. 471-473]

    In the context of Qawwâmûna, men are required to be maintainers of all the women in the family which includes their sister(s), step-sister(s), mother, step-mother(s), grandmother(s), wife/wives, daughter(s), step-daughter(s), mother(s)-in-law or any women in their extended family who do not have means of their own support. It is because of their wide obligations, men get the ‘extra’ – with what Allah has given some of them above others. It does not end by their getting that ‘extra’ but then they have to spend out of their wealth, that which was ‘extra’ to begin with. Will any women step in to assume the role of Qawwâmûna in order to get that ‘extra’ that some object to? This ‘extra’ is not a luxury, but a burden. Qawwâmûna is an essential burden of men to keep intact the fabric of the society – the family, in which ‘no woman is left behind.’

    If we do the accounting and budgeting to fulfill the role of Qawwâmûna, then the proportion that men get might still be less than what they should had been given, but the distributions in Quran are equitable. Sorry men!

    However, bequeath/wills can override the distributions.

  17. December 8th, 2015 at 5:37 am
    From Rashid Jahangiri:

    Social experiment with Bible when presented as Holy Quran

    In recent days video by Dutch men is circulating in which Bible covered with jacket presenting it as Holy Quran, and some texts highlighted are presented to people to comment. Readers comment negatively on passages until they find out text is in fact from Bible and not Holy Quran.

    The Holy Quran Experiment