The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement Blog

Project Rebuttal – Islam: What the West Needs to Know

Issue 62 [@1:04:48]: Walid Shoebat, Author, Why I Left Jihad – “When I used to be work as translator at Loop College in Chicago the fund raising for Jihad movements for the PA, PLO at that times, we would do the translations for the announcements, or the flyers that we handout or put on the walls of the college. I remember the Arabic would be basically the facts. ‘Bring you friends, we are intending to raise funds to support our Jihad brothers in Lebanon who are fighting against Israel and what ever’ and then comes the English part. In the English part will be standard ‘We will be conducting Middle Eastern cultural party. You are welcome. We will be serving lamb and baklava.’ So the West does not understand as we get together as a group, our conversations are different. As soon as the Western would come into the scene then the whole conversation changes. It becomes parable to the Western mind. When I used to go to work, lets say during the Gulf War, used to go to work for an American company, everybody will be hovering around the TV set. As soon as there is a scud missile hitting Riyadh or something like that, everybody will be distraught, unhappy when the Scud lands in the American camp. And, I will be standing there amongst the American employees [and say] ‘Its too bad…that’s too bad, I am sorry there is loss of life.’ And, out of frustration from having to keep the truth of what I really felt, I would draw down the window [of the car] on the freeway when I am going home and scream as loud as I can ‘Allah-o-Akbar’– Allah is Great. Allah-o-Akbar. Because this is the chantation you do when the enemy is killed, when you win. So, if it was a victorious day for the Iraqis, when they landed a Scud missile, then it would be Allah-o-Akbar on the freeway and no body can hear me now. And when I went to my apartment, home, rest of the apartment were also Arabs from the Middle East. We would get together in my apartment, watch the Gulf War, and we would be praising Allah every time there was some incidence where the Americans got killed. But, it wasn’t the same face that we put on when we were in American environment. In American environment you play different scenario. You acted as you were on their side. So this whole facade, that is hidden from the West of how Muslim fundamentalists want to propagate Jihad in America, can act publicly.”

Rebuttal 62: Sorry Mr. Shoebat, your past does not represent Muslims in the world and neither you are the ‘insider’ to Muslims in America. You only confessed your own mind. If anyone thinks like you is sadly mistaken. With your track record in United States, some might even say that you are even damaging to Christianity.

Truth does not remain hidden for long. Thank you Mr. Shoebat for self-exposing the rancor that you hide, before which was for Israelis, subsequently for Americans who gave you the opportunity to live in freedom and finally for the Palestinians that you are from. You fully well knew that in the first Persian Gulf war it was an Arab country that was occupied by another Arab country. It were the Arab countries that lined up against the tyrant of Baghdad. But, you chose to root for that tyrant and not for a moment you had any remorse that it was the same tyrant who killed his own people, suppressed minority Shites, gassed Kurd civilians and in due course would pay cash rewards to the suicide bombers to blow up innocent citizens in Israel, that you claim that you once did yourself (Issue 39b). By above statement, you only told the world that you are not to be trusted, irrespective of whether you are a Palestinian or an American, Muslim or a Christian. Now it is America’s turn which is being duped by you [Wikipedia]. Once again, Mr. Shoebat thank you for giving us a case study and a living example of what bigotry means in your own person. Not for a moment you realized that there were Muslim-Americans who were fighting a tyranny, but you chose a tyrant over anything which is directly against the teaching of Islam that you claim you professed then. Should it be Islam or you who should be on trial in court of public opinion and in a moral court? It is hypocrites like Mr. Shoebat that Quran identifies from their attributes:

9:67. The hypocrites, men and women, are all alike. They enjoin evil and forbid good and withhold their hands [– from charity].

Interestingly, the attribute withhold their hands is obvious from this excerpt of Jerusalem Post – “And the Walid Shoebat Foundation’s working process is less than transparent, with Shoebat’s claim that it is registered as a charity in the state of Pennsylvania being denied by the Pennsylvania State Attorney’s Office”.

By his confession above, it logically seems that Mr. Shoebat found embedded in his own instincts “Taqqiya” and it cannot be excluded that it was his this ‘deceit’ which naturally gravitated him to the Taqqiya of Paul that he finally adopted – Romans 3 (New International Version): 5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? No wonder, he is now an expert on the documentary under discussion.

References:

Skeptics challenge life stories offered by high-profile Muslim converts to Christianity – Washington Post
Walid Shoebat – Criticism and Allegations of Fraud – Wikipedia
The Palestinian ‘terrorist’ turned Zionist – Jerusalem Post
Bible – New International Version – BibleGateway.com
Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Zahid Aziz

Issue 61 [@1:04:35]: Slide projected with voice – Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 7, Bk. 67, Hadith 427 – The Prophet said “By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else that is better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.”

Rebuttal 61: Even though the above is a non-contextual excerpt of a Hadith, still it carries the sensibilities of an intelligent and honest mind, which is open to improvement of self and seeking better solutions with passage of time and availability of resources. A prophet is not a programmed robot with no human side to improve. There is no element of deceit in above words, unless it is forcibly skewed for a jaded and out of context “gold diggers” of this documentary.

The full Hadith is as follows:

Volume 7, Book 67, Number 427: Narrated Zahdam:

We were in the company of Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari and there were friendly relations between us and this tribe of Jarm. Abu Musa was presented with a dish containing chicken. Among the people there was sitting a red-faced man who did not come near the food. Abu Musa said (to him), “Come on (and eat), for I have seen Allah’s Apostle eating of it (i.e. chicken).” He said, “I have seen it eating something (dirty) and since then I have disliked it, and have taken an oath that I shall not eat it ‘ …

[Note: this was an apparent oath of the gentleman not to eat chicken based upon a fickle experience. He is thus corrected by Abu Musa by the following narrative]

…Abu Musa said, “Come on, I will tell you (or narrate to you). Once I went to Allah s Apostle with a group of Al-Ash’ariyin, and met him while he was angry, distributing some camels of Rakat. We asked for mounts but he took an oath that he would not give us any mounts, and added, ‘I have nothing to mount you on’ In the meantime some camels of booty were brought to Allah’s Apostle and he asked twice, ‘Where are Al-Ash’ariyin?” So he gave us five white camels with big humps. We stayed for a short while (after we had covered a little distance), and then I said to my companions, “Allah’s Apostle has forgotten his oath. By Allah, if we do not remind Allah’s Apostle of his oath, we will never be successful.” So we returned to the Prophet and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! We asked you for mounts, but you took an oath that you would not give us any mounts; we think that you have forgotten your oath.’ He said, ‘It is Allah Who has given you mounts. By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.’ ”

The context of above Hadith is fully explained by Muhammad Ali in his book on Hadiths – Fazl-ul-Bari under Hadith number 3133 [in urdu, p. 1238 – pdf link], where he contextualizes the events at the time of preparations for Ghazwa-e-Tabuk when the Prophet was asked but could not provide a ride for the volunteers who wanted to join the expedition that was destined for Tabuk about 800 miles north of Medina during sweltering summer heat. Initially the Prophet refused because of non-availability of beasts (camels or horses), but when they were available, he provided them to the volunteers who were seeking them. Thus the Hadith is true to its letter and spirit – “By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else better than that. then I do what is better and expiate my oath.’ Muhammad Ali draws attention to the following verses of Quran, 9:92 in particular to the context of the above Hadith:

9:90. And the defaulters [-hypocrites] from among the dwellers of the desert came that permission might be given to them, and they sat (at home) who lied to Allah and His Messenger. A painful punishment will afflict those of them who disbelieve.

9:91. No blame lies on the weak, nor on the sick, nor on those who can find nothing to spend, if they are sincere to Allah and His Messenger. There is no way (to blame) against the doers of good. And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful —

9:92. nor on those to whom, when they came to you that you should carry them, you said: I cannot find anything on which to carry you.

[Footnote] What they wanted in order to join the expedition, and what the Holy Prophet could not find for them, were beasts on which they should be carried, along with their provisions and necessaries. See also 19:27 footnote 1[appended below].

19:27 Then she came to her people with him, carrying him [-Jesus].

The conversation in v. 27–33 is alone sufficient to make it clear that this incident relates to a time when Jesus had grown up sufficiently to have been appointed a prophet and to have received Divine revelation. The Quran does not relate stories in all their details, and often omits a number of incidents which are not needed for its purpose. For instance, v. 11 relates only Zacharias’ receiving the joyful news of a son, while v. 12 asks that son to take hold of the Book with strength. Jesus could only say that he was made a prophet when he was actually entrusted with the mission of a prophet, and not before. Moreover, it is unreasonable to suppose that, as soon as Mary gave birth to the child, she took it to her people to make a show of it. The word carrying does not show that she was carrying him in her arms; it means that he was being carried on an animal. Compare 9:92, where some of the companions are spoken of as coming to the Prophet that he might carry them, and he is related as replying that he did not have that on which to carry them, i.e. animals. Compare Matthew 21:1–7 where the story is related of Jesus entering Jerusalem riding an ass, or an ass and a colt [Emphasis added].

They said: Mary, you have indeed brought a strange thing!

The reference in Mary’s bringing a strange thing may be to her having given birth to a son who claimed greater authority than the elders of Israel, with a deeper hint to the calumny against her, for which see 4:156. In his reply Jesus does not make a single reference to the circumstances of his birth. Hence the inference is quite reasonable that the question was directed against the mission of Jesus and not against the circumstances of his birth.

They [–Abu Musa and Al-Ash’ariyin mentioned in Hadith above] went back, their eyes overflowing with tears of grief that they could not find anything to spend.

9:93. The way (to blame) is only against those who ask permission of you, though they are rich. They have chosen to be with those who remained behind; and Allah has sealed their hearts, so they do not know.

The discussion so far tells us is that nothing vain should prevent an act of goodness. For example:

2:224. And do not make Allah by your oaths a hindrance to your doing good and keeping your duty and making peace between people.

[Footnote] This verse refers to the pre-Islamic Arab custom of ila’, a way of temporarily putting off the wife which was effected by an oath in Allah’s name not to have sexual relations with her. The result of this was that the husband considered himself free from all marital obligations. The first step to bring about a reform in the relations of husband and wife was that this practice was abolished. It is in reference to this that the taking of oaths against the doing of good to others is prohibited. The fulfilment of marital obligations is thus referred to as the doing of good and observance of duty and making peace between people. But the subject is generalized and the taking of all oaths to forbid oneself the doing of good or fulfilment of obligations is prohibited. See also 66:2 footnote.

And Allah is Hearing, Knowing.

2:225. Allah will not call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, but He will call you to account for what your hearts have earned.

[Footnote] By vain oaths are meant unintentional or thoughtless oaths in ordinary conversation, and by what the hearts have earned is meant an oath intentionally taken.

And Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing.

2:226. Those who swear that they will not have sexual relations with their wives should wait four months;

[Footnote] Ila’ signifies an oath by a man that he shall not approach his wife. In pre-Islamic times the Arabs used to take such oaths frequently, and as the period of suspension was not limited, the wife was compelled sometimes to pass her whole life having neither the position of a wife nor that of a divorced woman free to marry elsewhere. The Quran declares that if the husband does not reassert conjugal relations within four months, the wife shall be divorced. Cases in which husbands desert wives, having neither conjugal relations with them nor divorcing them, must be dealt with practically as amounting to Ila’, so that after four months the wife should be free if she wants a divorce.

then if they go back, Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

In another place, Quran challenges one’s vain oaths:

5:87. O you who believe, do not forbid the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, nor exceed the limits. Surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.

Muslims are told on the one hand not to follow the self-imposed restrictions of Christian monks and priests, and at the same time they are warned against depriving themselves of Divine blessings by falling into evil habits.

5:88. And eat of the lawful and good (things) that Allah has given you, and keep your duty to Allah, in Whom you believe.

5:89. Allah will not call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, but He will call you to account for the making of deliberate oaths; so its expiation

The oaths referred to are in relation to vows, etc., by which one forbids oneself what is otherwise lawful. The injunction at the end of this verse, keep your oaths, also shows that oaths cannot be violated generally, and therefore expiation is only allowed in the case of oaths by which a person deprives himself of some lawful thing or of an occasion of virtue, as in 2:226.

is the feeding of ten poor persons with the average (food) you feed your families with, or their clothing, or the freeing of a slave. But whoever does not find (means) should fast for three days. This is the expiation of your oaths when you swear. And keep your oaths. Thus does Allah make clear to you His messages that you may give thanks.

Now that the full context of Hadith has come to light which is far removed from the malice of insinuated deceit by the documentary, will the experts of the documentary have the moral courage to accept their wrong and correct themselves by stating – “By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else that is better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath”?

References:

Note: [text enclosed in square brackets above is not part of the original quoted sources]
Translation of Sahih Bukhari – Muhsin Khan
Fazlul Bari – Urdu Translation of Sahih Bukhari – Muhammad Ali,
Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Dr. Zahid Aziz.

Issue 60 [@1:04:01]: Serge Trifkovic, Foreign Affairs Editor, Chronicles Magazine – “The spokesman for Islam in the Western world knows how to play the game. They know how to present their cause that is not only regarded acceptable by the societal mainstream, but also reasonable and one might say as just. They will appeal to democratic institutions and their human rights in the full knowledge that given the power to do so they will abolish those institutions and deny those rights to others.”

Rebuttal 60: It is quite shameful of Trifkovic to question patriotism of American Muslims (Issue 59). On the contrary, Muslims dwell as good and productive citizens and have a track record to prove both their patriotism and their good citizenship:

There are 8 million American Muslims
67% of American Muslims have a Bachelor’s degree or higher,
U.S. Average income is $42,158 per year (U.S. Census 2000)
66% of American Muslim House Hold’s (HH’s) earn over $50,000 / year
26% of American Muslim HH’s earn over $100,000 / year
1 in 10 Muslim HH’s has a doctor and 1 in 9 (approx) has an engineer.
See this link for more Muslim statistics: http://www.allied-media.com/AM/

“Gallup Poll: Most Muslim-Americans Loyal to US” (NewsMax – Tuesday, 02 Aug 2011)

With the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks approaching, 93 percent of Muslim Americans say they are loyal to the United States. The view of Muslim loyalty is shared by a majority of the major religious groups in the United States, a new poll examining Muslim attitudes has found.

Contrary to the efforts of the documentary, and sorry Mr. Trifkovic, the same survey found:

The poll, conducted by a Gallup-affiliated research group, found that 80 percent of Jews believed Muslim Americans were loyal, a view shared by 59 percent of Catholics and 56 percent of Protestants. It also found that Muslim and Jewish Americans had similar views on the Mideast and al-Qaeda.

Muslim Americans are also the least likely major religious group to say there is ever a justification for individuals or small groups to attack civilians. Roughly 1 in 10 Muslim Americans say such attacks are sometimes justified. “In every other major religious group except Mormons, the proportion of people who say such attacks are sometimes justified is at least twice that.”

“Jewish Americans are also among the least likely religious groups to believe that Muslim Americans sympathize with al-Qaida. Seventy percent of Jewish Americans say they do not believe Muslim Americans feel this way. The only religious group more certain that Muslim Americans do not sympathize with al-Qaida is Muslim Americans themselves, at 92%.”

With the above survey data and the decade since 9/11, it becomes obvious and using Trifkovics’s own words – “The spokesman for anti-Islam in the Western world knows how to play the game. They know how to present their cause that is not only regarded acceptable by the societal mainstream, but also reasonable and one might say as just. They will appeal to democratic institutions and their human rights in the full knowledge that given the power to do so they will abolish those institutions and deny those rights to others.” Of note is that it only needed a decade and addition of one word “anti” and the whole statement of Trifkovic fits himself fairly and squarely. He and his peers of the documentary saw the opportunity and tried to create another Japanese-American internment for American Muslims but failed.

References:

Muslim American Market – Allied Media Corp.
Gallup Poll: Most Muslim-Americans Loyal to US – NewsMax
Japanese American internment – Wikipedia

Issue 59 [@1:03:00]: Video clip with camera panning across a group of men and women.

Background voice – America is a land of diversity and service.

Male #1 – I am an African-American. My forefathers overcame the trials of slavery.

Female #1 – I am Native-American. I am journalist, wife and mother.

Male #2 – I am of European heritage. One of my ancestors was a member of Continental Congress.

Female #2 – I am Hispanic-American. I have been Girls Scout since six years old and now I am a troop leader.
 
 
Male #1 – I served in out nation’s armed forces and as have many of my relatives.

Female #1 – My father served two tours of duty in Vietnam.

Male #2 – Another fought for freedom in Gettysburg.

Female #2 – Two of my uncles fought for our country in Korean War.
 
 
Male #1 – And, I am an American Muslim.

Female #1 – And, I am an American Muslim.

Male #2 – And, I am an American Muslim.

Female #2 – And, I am an American Muslim.
 
 
Background voice – Muslims are part of the fabric of this great country and are working to build a better America.
 
 
Comment 59: How true!

On the contrary, and for the sake of argument, can Robert Spencer, Serge Trifkovic, Bat Ye’or, Walid Shoebat, Abdullah Al-Araby or the producers of the movie claim to have any fragment of their resume matching the pristine services of the above American Muslims for their country? Answer is plain no. The only thing that will reflect from the resumes of these experts is hate, rancor and disinformation in its purest form. God save America from such expertly bigots.

Issue 58 [@1:02:28]: Slide projected – The Life of Muhammad p367 – [with voice] The Apostle said … “Who will rid me of Ibnul Ashraf?” Muhammad bin Maslama, brother of the Bani Abdul-Ashal, said, “I will deal with him for you, O Apostle of God, I will kill him”. He said, “Do so if you can.” … He said, “O Apostle of God, we shall have to tell lies.” He answered, “Say what you like, for you are free in the matter.”

Rebuttal 58: Neither Quran nor Muhammad ever lied or sanctioned a lie. A question that naturally arises is the authenticity of the source of the above quotation, rather distortion or even fabrication to be more accurate. Why did the documentary not quote the actual hadith verbatim? Because there is none. Fact is that while trying to malign Muhammad, the documentary itself has resorted to plain lies. Ibn-e-Ishaq, probably the author of above book and its quotes is a known fabricator to the extent that his contemporary, Imam Malik is on the record to call him a liar.

[Kadhdhab and Dajjal min al-dajajila. Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7. In his valuable introduction Ibn Sayyid al-Nas provides a wide-ranging survey of the controversial views on Ibn Ishaq].

Same could be said about Ibn-e-Hisham, who tried to re-create Sirat that was lost after the death of Ibn-e-Ishaq. The invalidity of such sources is admitted even by Western authors, surprisingly Robert Spencer included:

“False ascription was rife among the 8th century scholars (versus Bukhari who lived in the 9th century) and that in any case Ibn Ishaq and contemporaries were drawing on oral traditions.” ( Cook, M: Muhammad, Oxford 1983. pg. 65)

Even the famous Polemist and anti-Islam author Robert Spencer admits in his book The Truth about Muhammad , that “However, Ibn Ishaq’s life of Muhammad is so unashamedly hagiographical that its accuracy is questionable.” (Spencer, Robert: The Truth about Muhammad, Regnery Publishers, 2006 pg. 25) Despite his negative opinion regarding Ibn IssHaaq, out of the 400 footnotes of Robert Spencer’s book, 120 footnotes refer to fabricated stories from Ibn Ishaq’s book. Because Robert Spencer hates Islam so much that he is willing to present these stories as if they are true, even though he knows that their source is unreliable.

[My Optimism about Europe – a blog on DanielPipes.org]

The closest that we can approximate the above slide is with the following hadiths:

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 270: Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet said, “Who is ready to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has really hurt Allah and His Apostle?” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Do you like me to kill him?” He replied in the affirmative. So, Muhammad bin Maslama went to him (i.e. Ka’b) and said, “This person (i.e. the Prophet) has put us to task and asked us for charity.” Ka’b replied, “By Allah, you will get tired of him.” Muhammad said to him, “We have followed him, so we dislike to leave him till we see the end of his affair.” Muhammad bin Maslama went on talking to him in this way till he got the chance to kill him.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 271: Narrated Jabir:

The Prophet said, “Who is ready to kill Ka’b bin Ashraf (i.e. a Jew).” Muhammad bin Maslama replied, “Do you like me to kill him?” The Prophet replied in the affirmative. Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Then allow me to say what I like.” The Prophet replied, “I do (i.e. allow you).”

Before we take on the above hadith, the concept of phrase “Allah and His Apostle” which is also written as “Allah and His Messenger” has to be fully understood for what it stands for.

When there are commandments in Quran, they are usually juxtaposed next to “Allah and His Messenger”. For example:

4:11 Allah commands you concerning your children: for the male is the equal of the portion of two females; but if there are more than two females, two-thirds of what the deceased leaves is theirs; and if there is one, for her is the half. And as for his parents, for each of them is the sixth of what he leaves, if he has a child; but if he has no child and (only) his two parents inherit him, for his mother is the third; but if he has brothers, for his mother is the sixth, after (payment of) a bequest he may have bequeathed or a debt. Your parents and your children, you do not know which of them is the nearer to you in benefit. This is an ordinance from Allah. Surely Allah is ever Knowing, Wise.

4:12 And yours is half of what your wives leave if they have no child; but if they have a child, your share is a fourth of what they leave after (payment of) any bequest they may have bequeathed or a debt; and theirs is the fourth of what you leave if you have no child, but if you have a child, their share is the eighth of what you leave after (payment of) a bequest you may have bequeathed or a debt. And if a man or a woman, having no children, leaves property to be inherited and he (or she) has a brother or a sister, then for each of them is the sixth; but if they are more than that, they shall be sharers in the third after (payment of) a bequest that may have been bequeathed or a debt not injuring (others). This is an ordinance from Allah, and Allah is Knowing, Forbearing.

4:13. These are Allah’s limits. And whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger [i.e. Government and its Constitution], He will admit him to Gardens in which rivers flow, to abide in them. And this is the mighty achievement.

4:14. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger [i.e. Government and its Constitution] and goes beyond His limits, He will make him enter fire to abide in it, and for him is a humiliating punishment.

If would be foolish to consider reference to His Messenger as a selfish personal space or ego of Prophet Muhammad. The pairing of Allah and His Messenger simply implies the Divine Laws of Allah for mankind as implemented by His Messenger in the governance of the land and the peoples, that we saw in the government whose head was Muhammad with its capital in Medina. Since no one has “seen” the law issuer – Allah, then “His spokesperson,” the prophet of the time i.e. His Messenger is the one present amongst them to authenticate the law during his lifetime and as a recognized figure in history after his death. Simply put, for Muslims the commandments and guidelines in Quran are the constitution of the land and any reference to Allah and His Messenger implies the government bound by that constitution of Quran.

Now lets re-read the stated hadith:

The Prophet said, “Who is ready to kill Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf who has really hurt Allah and His Apostle [i.e. government of Medina]?”…

It becomes obvious that the stated reason for hadith is that Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf had really hurt the Government of Medina, not by mere words but by actions as well.

In modern terms Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf was declared an enemy combatant. It is important for the readers to know Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf . He was the elected leader of all the Jewish tribes of Medina including Banu Qainqah, Banu Nadir also written as Nazir, Banu Quraiza and other Jewish factions amongst the Arab tribes. He was also a notable poet of his time. Soon after his arrival in Medina, Muhammad established a government, signed peace treaty between his government and all the local Jewish and non-Jewish tribes/factions of mutual peace/defense/arbitration with Muhammad being the chief arbitrator. History is on the record that in early second year of establishment of Muslim government in Medina, Makkans attacked Medina, were confronted at Badr and defeated by the numerically small solely Muslim troops. Despite the treaty, soon thereafter, Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf visited Makkah and instigated them to take revenge on Muslims by another attack on Medina. The second major attack did happen the following year resulting in battle of Uhad:

“The Bani Nadir made a treaty with the Holy Prophet to stand neutral between him and his enemies. When he was victorious at Badr, they said that he was the Prophet promised in the Torah, on account of the victory, but when the Muslims suffered a loss on the day of Uhud, they (i.e., the Bani Nadir) repudiated their vow and broke the agreement. [After Badr] Ka‘b, son of Ashraf, went to Makkah with forty horsemen and made an alliance with Abu Sufyan [– the chief of Makkah].” [Footnote of verse 59:2 – Muhammad Ali]

The treachery of Ka’b is obvious from the following sources:

“He went to the Quraish weeping over their killed (at Badr) and inciting them to fight with the Prophet.” (Zurqani, vol. ii, p. 10)

(The Prophet said): “He (Ka’b) has openly assumed enmity to us and speaks evil of us and he has gone over to the polytheists (who were at war with Muslims) and has made them gather against us for fighting” (Zurqani, vol. ii, p. 11)

“And according to Kalbi, he united in a league with the Quraish before the curtains of the Ka’bah, to fight against the Muslims.” (Zurqani, vol. ii, p. 11) [Muhammad the Prophet, Ch 13]

Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf is also known to have “plotted with a group of Jews to kill the prophet” – the head of state of the Muslim government of Medina [The Assassination of Ka’b B. Ashraf, Uri Rubin, Tel Aviv – link]. This plot is supported by Zurqani:

“And he prepared a feast, and conspired with some Jews that he would invite the Prophet and when he came they should fall on him all of a sudden.” (Zurqani, vol. ii, p. 12) [Muhammad the Prophet, Ch 13]

In Makkah, Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf lamented the defeat of Makkans and victory of Muslims of Medina, instigated and inflamed revenge in his poetry, some of which is sampled below:

Badr’s mill ground out the blood of its people.

At events like Badr you should weep and cry.

The best of the people were slain round their cisterns.

Don’t think its strange that princes were left lying

How many noble handsome men,

the refuge of the homeless were slain

Liberal when the stars gave no rain

Who bore other’s burdens, ruling and taking their due forth…

I was told that al-Harith ibn Hisham

Is doing well and gathering troops

To visit Yathrib [-Medina] with armies

For only the noble, handsome man protects the loftiest reputation.

  
Drive off that fool of yours [-Muhammad] that you may be safe

From talk that has no sense! [i.e. Islam]

Do you taunt me because I shed tears [on the loss of Makkans in Badr]

For people who loved me sincerely?

As long I live I shall weep and remember

The merits of people whose glory is Mecca’s houses.

Poets of Arabia were not like the huddly-cuddly poets of West today. Poetry was embedded in its psyche and culture, both for its sensuality and rage. Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf was one of the propagandist poets, whom Maxime Rodison in her book – Muhammad – describes as “journalists of the time” and Joel Carmichael in his book – The Shaping of Arabs, A Study in Ethnic Identify – writes: “A tribal poet amongst Bedouin” was “no more a verifier, but kindler of the battle,” his poems were “thought of as the real beginnings of a real warfare.” [Muhammad and the Jews, a Re-Examination by Barakat Ahmad, 52]

The poets and poetry in Arabia had such a powerful influence to initiate and direct public debate, opinion and policies that even Quran cannot avoid mentioning them:

21:5. Indeed, say they: Confused dreams! Rather, he has forged it! Rather, he is a poet! so let him bring us a sign such as the former (prophets) were sent (with).

——
26:221. Shall I inform you upon whom the devils descend?

26:222. They descend upon every lying, sinful one —

26:223. they give ear, and most of them are liars.

26:224. And the poets — the deviators follow them.

26:225. Do you not see that they wander in every valley,

26:226. and that they say that which they do not do?

——
26:69. And We have not taught him poetry, nor is it befitting for him. This is nothing but a Reminder and a plain Quran,

26:70. to warn him who would have life, and (that) the word may prove true against the disbelievers.

——
37:35. They indeed were arrogant, when it was said to them: There is no god but Allah;

37:36. and said: Shall we give up our gods for a mad poet?

——
52:29. So remind for, by the grace of your Lord, you are no soothsayer, nor madman.

52:30. Or say they: A poet — we wait for him the evil accidents of time.

——
69:38 But no! I swear by what you see,

69:39. and what you do not see!

69:40. Surely, it is the word of an honoured Messenger,

69:41. and it is not the word of a poet. Little do you believe!

69:42. Nor the word of a soothsayer. Little are you mindful!

69:43. It is a revelation from the Lord of the worlds.

Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf not only broke the treaty with Muslims of neutrality if not mutual defense (note – not of offense) of Medina by non-participation of his nor his tribes that he represented, in battle of Badr against the attack of Makkans on Medina. Instead, while there was an existing state of war between Medina and Makkah after Badr, he instigated another attack on Medina, not by mere words but by published poetic material that was just not send by a proxy but by his own mouth and him being present in the midst of the enemy of Medina when he traveled to Makkah, where he made personal contact with Makkan leadership under Abu Sufyan and symbolically tugging at the curtains of Holy Kaaba in his laments. With this role of Ka’b in mind, the reader must take a brief pause and draw parallels of the above times with those of ours.

For the sake of argument, replace Badr with 9/11 [New York] and 7/11 [London] in Kab’s poetry and then allude those poetic verses to a community leader who is also a journalist poet living in the West, who takes a trip to the lands of Al-Qaeda and instigates the anti-West forces for another attack on the Western targets, both in his writing and public speeches, and makes counsel with their leadership. His poems openly ridicule and instigate murder of a Western president. What will be the response of the producers of this documentary or the government of that country? If nothing else, that person will at least end up in Guantanamo and water boarded till eternity or imprisoned for life if not hanged or targeted with a Hellfire missile from a drone strike.

Whether the rest of the above hadith – 4:52:270 – is accurate and what are its factual details, it cannot be ascertained from its content as there are many he-said/she-said in it. This is especially true of early Islamic history which is admitted by Watt in his book – Muhammad in Medina – p. 180 where he writes that there is “a scarcity of information about the internal politics of Medina.” No where in the stated hadith does the Prophet instructs the method of fight with Ka’b. Ka’b had to be fought, either singularly or with whole of his tribe for above stated reasons. It was almost as if he was taken out in equivalent terms by a navy seal operation where no one else was caught in the cross fire or collateral damage. At least in the said hadith, the rest of the Banu Nadir (aka Nazir) is spared the unnecessary anguish for treachery of one. In the next hadith – 4:52:271 – “Then allow me to say what I like.” The Prophet replied, “I do (i.e. allow you)”, nowhere is an intent to lie or sanctioning of a lie.

The fundamental rules of treason and treachery against the sitting government and its head have not changed even until modern times, else the whole purpose of people paying taxes and rights of citizenship are nullified by act of a few. It is an all too common a joke in Emergency Rooms where psychotic or maniac patients are interviewed more by FBI than their psychiatrists once they threaten the president in their delusional conversation, no matter how lightly or unrealistically.

Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf is factually a sampler of a mind set that we find in Banu Nadir, the tribe he belonged to. While Ka’b was instigator of Battle of Uhad fought on March 19, 625, his tribe subsequently was the main instigator of the next battle, the Battle of the Trench aka The Battle of Confederates, fought on March 31, 627:

Early in 627, the Jews of Banu Nadir met with the Arab Quraysh of Makkah. Huyayy ibn Akhtab, along with other leaders from Khaybar, traveled to swear allegiance with Safwan at Makkah.

The bulk of the Confederate armies were gathered by the pagan Quraysh of Makkah, led by Abu Sufyan, who fielded 4,000 foot soldiers, 300 horsemen, and 1,000-1,500 men on camels.[11]

The Banu Nadir began rousing the nomads of Najd. The Nadir enlisted the Banu Ghatafan by paying them half of their harvest. This contingent, the second largest, added a strength of about 2,000 men and 300 horsemen led by Unaina bin Hasan Fazari. The Bani Assad also agreed to join, led by Tuleha Asadi. From the Banu Sulaym, the Nadir secured 700 men, though this force would likely have been much larger had not some of its leaders been sympathetic towards Islam. The Bani Amir, who had a pact with Muhammad, refused to join. [Wikipedia]

This treacherous behavior of Banu Nadir (-Nazir) resulted ultimately in their banishment which is mentioned in Quran under the Chapter 59:

Al-Hashr – The Banishment: This chapter deals with the banishment of a Jewish tribe, called Bani Nadir, from Madinah. They had made a treaty with the Holy Prophet to remain neutral between him and his enemies from Makkah, but later broke this treaty and made an alliance with them. The chapter deals with their banishment and shows that the hypocrites, after giving them promises of help, failed to fulfil them…[Introduction section – Muhammad Ali, ed Zahid Aziz]

As to how far Ka’b went in his personal attacks against Muslim women as well can be deduced by the following verses that he composed thus insulting Lubaba – Umm al-Fadl bint al-Harith. Of note is that Lubaba is the second woman to embrace Islam after her friend Khadija (Prophet’s wife), and twenty years before her husband Abbas (Prophet’s uncle) became a Muslim. It is she who came to the defense of Abu-Rafi, Abbas’s freed Muslim slave, who was overjoyed by news of victory of Badr and was hence being tortured by Abu-Lahab (Prophet’s uncle and brother of Abbas). She split open Abu-Lahab’s scalp with a strike, who died a week later of unrelated causes. [Wikipedia] Ka’b wrote:

Are you off without stopping in the valley
and leaving Umm Fadl in Mecca?

Out would come what she bought from the pedlar,
her bottles, henna and hair-dye.

What lies between elbow and ankle is in motion
when she tries to stand up and does not.

Like Umm Hakim when she was with us,
the bond between us strong and unbreakable.

She is the one Amirite [-her tribe] who bewitches my heart,
and if she wished, she could cure my sickness.

The glory of women and of a people is their father,
a people held in honour, true to their oath.

Never did I see the sun rise at night till I saw her
display herself to us in the darkness of the night!

[Muhammad and the Jews, a Re-Examination by Barakat Ahmad, p. 54]

However, as to the freedom of speech and its tolerance, the following is what is expected of the citizens in a government of “Allah and His Messenger”:

25:63. Those alone are the true servants of the Most Gracious (God) who walk upon the earth in all humility, (but in a dignified manner), and when the ignorant address them, they (do not wrangle but) observe a peaceful attitude.[Nooruddin]

Note, the above verse nullifies slander as a cause of action against Ka’b. It was Ka’b scheming, plotting, instigating and inflaming the battle of Uhad that was the legal basis of action against him. Alas! Al Araby has one set of morals for himself and his West, and another for Muhammad, a hallmark symptom of bigotry that this documentary reeks of and its experts suffer from.

References:

Note: [text enclosed in square brackets above is not part of the original quoted sources]

Truth about Biography (Life of Muhammad) written by Ibn Ishaq

Merriam Webster – Dictionary

My Optimism about Europe – a blog on DanielPipes.org

Translation of Sahih Bukhari – Muhsin Khan

The Assasination of Ka’b B. Al-Ashraf – by Uri Rubin, Tel Aviv

Muhammad the Prophet – Ch 13, False Allegation of Atrocities by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) – Muhammad Ali.

Battle of the Trench – Wikipedia

Lubaba bint al-Harith – Wikipedia

Muhammad and the Jews: A Re-Examination – Barakat Ahmad

Unless indicated otherwise, all verses and corresponding footnotes above are from the translation and commentary of Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Dr. Zahid Aziz.

Holy Quran – Nooruddin

Issue 57 [@1:01:49]: Abdullah Al-Araby – There are certain provisions for lying. So, a Muslim can lie for the cause of Islam, can lie to keep peace in family. So, he can lie to his wife. A Muslim can lie to his fellow Muslims to keep peace in the society. Muhammad ordered himself ordered people to lie. When people that he ordered to go and kill somebody, they [mumbled word] “we cannot kill them unless we lie to that person.” He said, “okay, fine, lie.”

Rebuttal 57: Al-Araby needs to be corrected that in Islam – “There are NO provisions for lying. So, a Muslim canNOT lie for the cause of Islam, canNOT lie to keep peace in family. So, he canNOT lie to his wife. A Muslim canNOT lie to his fellow Muslims to keep peace in the society.”

Mr. Al-Araby you missed the forest for the trees. In your view of Islam it seems that as a religion it is male centric and women are on its periphery, which is obvious from your statement that “he can lie to his wife.” You mistook Islam for your own Christianity. Since Al-Araby is talking about husband and wife, then discussing sexual relationships should not be out of context. See for yourselves how a husband in Bible can get away with a lie to his wife (Deuteronomy 22 – New International Version):

13 If a man takes a wife and, after sleeping with her , dislikes her

14 and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, “I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,”

15 then the young woman’s father and mother shall bring to the town elders at the gate proof that she was a virgin.

16 Her father will say to the elders, “I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her.

17 Now he has slandered her and said, ‘I did not find your daughter to be a virgin.’ But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.” Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town,

18 and the elders shall take the man and punish him.

19 They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the young woman’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives.

20 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the young woman’s virginity can be found,

21 she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done an outrageous thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.

The above passages bring to front the anti-woman laws of Bible. These verses mandate that only virgins can marry else they could be stoned to death. Even virgins have to preserve their proof of virginity, but how? The modern forensics tell us beyond doubt that there is no reliable and accurate biological proof of virginity of a woman. Obviously in Bible, the burden is ridiculously heavy on the accused to disprove the slanderer, whereas in Quran it is exactly the opposite and Just for the accused.

Proof for alleged sexual perversity of a woman has a high evidential bar in Quran of four witnesses, if they could be produced to begin with:

4:15. As to those of your women who commit sexual perversity, call in four of you to wit-ness against them, and if they bear witness then confine them to their houses, until death overtakes them or Allâh makes for them a way out.[Nooruddin]

As for scandalmongers, if they cannot prove their allegation, their retribution is severe:

24:4. Strike eighty times on the bodies of those who calumniate chaste women and who do not support (their accusation) with four witnesses, and never accept their testimony (because) it is they who are the disobedient (and break the law);

24:5. Except those who repent after this and make amends, they will find Allâh Great Protector, Ever Merciful.[Nooruddin]

The errors of flesh have recourse in repentance:

4:17. Verily, Allâh undertakes to accept the repentance of only those who do evil through lack of knowledge, then repent soon after. Such are the person towards whom Allâh turns with mercy. And Allâh is All-Knowing, All-Wise.[Nooruddin]

For a married couple with no witness, the recourse of alleged sexual perversity during the marriage has the following remedy before a living God:

24:6. And those who charge their wives of adultery and have no witnesses (to support their charge) except their own selves, let each (husband) bear testimony (repeating it) four times over calling Allâh to witness that he is surely of those who speak the truth in (the matter of) charging his wife (of adultery).

24:7. And the fifth (time he should say on oath) that Allâh’s wrath be upon him if he be of the liars.

24:8. But it shall avert the punishment from her (- the wife) if she calling Allâh to witness testifies four times over that he is of the liars (in bringing this charge against her).

24:9. And the fifth (time she should say on oath) that the wrath of Allâh be upon her if he (- her husband) has spoken the truth (about her).

24:10. But for Allâh’s grace and His mercy (which rests) upon you and (but for the fact) that Allâh is Oft-Returning (with compassion), All-Wise (you would have come to grief). [Nooruddin]

By the above discussion it is quite obvious that Bible abets lying of a husband, whereas Quran prevents it from happening to begin with.

The following verses speak for themselves where the alleged provisions to lie as leveled by Al-Araby are uprooted in Quran irrespective of a potential secondary gain to one’s spouse, family, society or Islam:

4:135. O you who believe, be maintainers of justice, bearers of witness for Allah, even if it is against your own selves or (your) parents or near relatives — whether he is rich or poor, Allah has a better right over them both. So do not follow (your) low desires, that you deviate. And if you distort (the truth) or turn away (from it), surely Allah is ever Aware of what you do.

6:152-53. And do not approach the property of the orphan except in the best manner, until he attains his maturity. And give full measure and weight with equity — We do not impose on any soul a duty beyond its ability. And when you speak, be just, even (against) a relative. And fulfil

Allah’s covenant. This He enjoins on you that you may be mindful; and (know) that this is My path, the right one, so follow it, and do not follow (other) ways, for they will lead you away from His way. This He enjoins on you that you may keep your duty.

[Footnote] Islam requires a person to be so upright as not to be led away by the ties of relationship. Truth is not to be sacrificed to any interest but every interest must be sacrificed to truth.

11:18-21. And who is more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah? These will be brought before their Lord, and the witnesses will say: These are they who lied against their Lord. Now surely the curse of Allah is on the wrongdoers, who hinder (people) from the path of Allah and desire to make it crooked. And they are disbelievers in the Hereafter. These will not escape in the earth, nor do they have guardians besides Allah. The punishment will be doubled for them. They could not bear to hear, and they did not see. These are they who have lost their souls, and what they forged is gone from them. Truly in the Hereafter they are the greatest losers.

In above verses it is unambiguously clear that in Islam one cannot lie on a witness stand to maybe save the life of a family member, then how in the world Islam allows a Muslim to lie in other matters? Fact is that in Islam, being truthful is an unburdening experience because of the Divine Law – We do not impose on any soul a duty beyond its ability.

Al-Araby’s allegation of Prophet Muhammad sanctioning a lie is refuted in the next Issue 58.

References:

Unless indicated otherwise, all verses and corresponding footnotes above are from the translation and commentary of Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Dr. Zahid Aziz.

Bible – New International Version – BibleGateway.com

Holy Quran – Nooruddin

Issue 56 [@1:01:36]: Robert Spencer – When one is under pressure, one may lie in order to protect the religion. This is taught in the Quran, Chapter 3:28, Chapter 16:106.

Rebuttal 56:Nowhere Quran teaches one to lie. Unlike Christianity (see Issues 53, 55), Islam does not need crutches of lies to be protected. Once again, the documentary shied away from quoting the text of the enumerated verses. Why? Because, the said verses do not support how Spencer wants to insinuate the audience, rather the same very verses are opposite of his lies. No verse in Quran teaches one to lie. Period! This rebuttal will not shy away from quoting the said verses which are quoted below:

Alleged permission to take non-Muslims as friends only to guard themselves (3:28):

3:28. The believers should not take the disbelievers as allies rather than believers.

[Footnote] The Muslims, being in a state of war with the disbelievers, were forbidden to look to their enemies to guard their interests or for help of any kind. The clear statement made in 60:8–9 settles the point beyond all doubt: “Allah does not forbid you, with regard to those who do not fight you for religion, nor drive you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly. … Allah forbids you only with regard to those who fight you for religion, and drive you forth from your homes and help (others) in your expulsion, that you make friends of them”.

And whoever does this [by his careless manner*] has no connection with Allah — except that you guard yourselves against them [from their evil*],

[Footnote] The meaning is: Do not look to them for guarding your interests, rather guard yourselves against them.

guarding carefully…

Alleged circumstances that compel a Muslim to lie (16:106):

16:106. Whoever disbelieves in Allah after his belief — not he who is compelled while his heart is content with faith, but he who opens (his) breast for disbelief — they incur Allah’s displeasure, and for them is a grievous punishment.

[Footnote] Only very rare instances are met with in the early history of Islam in which converts even under compulsion ever recanted.

Fundamentally, this movie could not differentiate between lying of Mr. Shoebat (Issue 39b) who has done so to kiss unto and dupe his new coreligionists of this documentary while raking in money for himself (see Part – 1, Part – 2 of Anderson Cooper 360 – CNN, a report about Shoebat – “Ex Terrorist Rakes’ in homeland security bucks” ) and the Spanish citizens, who were victims of Inquisition at the hands of Church when some of the Jews and Muslims recanted their faiths under threat of torture and losing their lives. Essentially, Spanish Inquisition is one of the many examples of forced conversions into Christianity.

No Muslim, living in the present day West can make the claim that s/he is compelled to recant his/her faith. Issue that Spencer alludes to in verse 16:106 is moot, unless Spencer wants to invoke Spanish Inquisition in United States that might then revive circumstances of 16:106 for a possible discussion when some Muslims in the West might have to recant under threat of force.

Spencer is someone whose falsehood is supported by his own Scripture “…for we have made a lie our refuge and falsehood our hiding place.” (Isaiah 28:15 – New International Version)

If one does a search on the internet, there are rampant half-truth quotes by the likes of Spencer who refer to other verses as well alleging deceit. Not surprisingly, when those verses are also quoted in their full context the subject matter comes to light which only proves beyond doubt that there is no sanctioning of lie or deceit in Quran:

In Quran we find a reference where a believer, prophet Aaron, under threat of persecution suppressed his opposition to disbelief of his peers, but NOWHERE WE FIND QURAN SACTIONING A LIE OR A DECEIT IN THE CAUSE OF ISLAM, be it that of Moses or Muhammad:

7:148. And Moses’ people made of their ornaments a calf after him — a (lifeless) body, having a lowing sound. Could they not see that it did not speak to them, nor guided them in the way? They took it (for worship) and they were unjust.

7:149. And when they repented and saw that they had gone astray, they said: If our Lord have not mercy on us and forgive us, we shall certainly be losers.

[Footnote] The Israelites’ repentance, though mentioned first, was subsequent to Moses’ return (2:54). The order here connects the repentance with the sin.

7:150. And when Moses returned to his people, angry, grieved, he said: Evil is what you have done after me! Did you hasten on the judgment of your Lord? And he threw down the tablets and seized his brother by the head, dragging him towards him. (Aaron) said: Son of my mother, the people reckoned me weak and had almost killed me. So do not make the enemies to rejoice over me and do not count me among the unjust people.

7:151. (Moses) said: My Lord, forgive me and my brother, and admit us to Your mercy, and You are the most Merciful of those who show mercy.

[Footnote] Aaron’s excuse and Moses’ acceptance of it show clearly that Aaron was quite innocent, having had a share neither in making the calf nor in worshipping it. The Bible account, which makes a righteous prophet of God guilty of the most heinous crime, must be rejected as untrue. That forgiveness was not sought for any fault in connection with calf-worship is clear from the fact that Moses joins himself with Aaron in the prayer given in this verse. Forgiveness here, as frequently elsewhere in the Quran, is equivalent to the Divine protection which everyone should seek against the shortcomings of human nature.

7:152. Those who took the calf (for a god) — wrath from their Lord, and disgrace in this world’s life, will surely come upon them. And thus do We recompense those who invent lies.

7:153. And those who do evil deeds, then repent after that and believe — your Lord

after that is surely Forgiving, Merciful.

7:154/ And when Moses’ anger calmed down, he took up the tablets; and in the writing thereof was guidance and mercy for those who fear their Lord.

In another instance, a Muslim and follower of Moses openly professes and advocates the core of his belief to Pharaoh, but apparently not disclosing his label of being a Muslim. AGAIN, THIS IS NOT SACTIONING OF A LIE IN QURAN:

40:21. Have they never travelled in the land that they could see how (evil) was the end of their predecessors? They were mightier than these in power and in respect of leaving stronger marks (- monuments etc.) in the land. But Allâh took them to task (and destroyed them) for their sins and they had no saviour from (the punishment of) Allâh.

40:22. That was because their Messengers (of God) came to them with evident proofs but they refused to believe (in them). So Allâh seized them (with destruction). Powerful is He and Stern His retribution.

40:23. And indeed We had already sent Moses with Our Messages and a clear authority,

40:24. Towards Pharaoh, Hâmân and Korah, yet they said, `(This man is) a sorcerer, a great liar.’

40:25. So when he brought them the truth from Us they said, `Go on slaying the sons of those who have believed and joined with him, and go on sparing their womenfolk to make them immodest.‘ But futile are the schemes of the disbelievers (and ever bound to fail).

40:26. And Pharaoh said, `Leave me alone; I will kill Moses. Let him call on his Lord. I fear lest he should change your faith or cause disorder to spread in the land.’

40:27. (On the other hand) Moses said, (to his people,) `I seek refuge in (Him Who is) my Lord and your Lord from every arrogant (person) who does not believe in the Day of Reckoning.’

40:28. And a man who was a believer and belonged to the people of Pharaoh (and) kept his faith hidden said, `Are you bent upon killing a man simply because he says, “Allâh alone is my Lord,” while he has already brought you clear proofs from your Lord? If he is a liar he will suffer (the sad consequences of) his lie, and if he is truthful then some of the things he threatens you with are sure to befall you. Indeed, Allâh does not guide (to success) the person who exceeds the bounds and is a great liar.

40:29. `O my people! yours is the sovereignty today and you dominate over the country. But who will help us and save us from the punishment of Allâh if it visits us?’ Pharaoh said, `I only point out to you that which I see and understand myself, and I guide you only to the path of rectitude.’

40:30. And he who had infact believed (in the faith brought by Moses) said, `O my people! I fear lest you should encounter the like of the day (of disaster) which befell (other) parties of people (of the past);

40:31. `(And I fear lest you should meet) the like of fate which followed the ways of the people of Noah and `âd and (the people of) Thamûd and those who came after them. And Allâh does not want His servants to go wrong.

40:32. `My people! I fear lest you should have to suffer on the day of calling one another (for help in frightful distress);

40:33. `A day when you will retreat turning your backs. No defender shall you have against (the punishment of) Allâh. Yet none can guide him (to success) whom Allâh forsakes and adjudges to be astray.

40:34. `And Joseph did come to you before (this) with clear proofs but you continued to be in doubt about that which he brought to you, till when he died, you said, “Allâh will never raise a Messenger after him”. That is how Allâh forsakes and adjudges him as having gone astray who is a transgressor and doubter.

35. `Those who dispute concerning the Messages of Allâh without any proof and authority having come to them (from Allâh to support them). This (attitude of theirs) is extremely abhorring to Allâh and to those who believe. That is how it is! Allâh sets a seal upon the heart of every arrogant (and) haughty person.’

40:36. And Pharaoh said, `O Hâmân! build for me a lofty tower that I may find access to the means –

40:37. `The means (of access) to the heavens, so that I may have a look at the God of Moses. Indeed, I consider him to be a liar.’ And in this way his own evil conduct was made fair- seeming to Pharaoh and so he was prevented from following the (right) path. Yet all the schemes of Pharaoh resulted only in ruin.

40:38. And he who had believed (in Moses from the people of Pharaoh) said, `O my people! follow me and I will guide you in the way of rectitude.

40:39. `O my people! the life of this world is but a provision (of a passing nature), and the Hereafter alone is the permanent home.

40:40. `Those who do evil will be recompensed in proportion thereto (- to their evil deeds). But the men and women who believe and (at the same time) do righteous deeds, it is they who will enter Paradise where they will be provided for without measure.

40:41. `O my people! how (strange) it is with me that I call you to salvation whereas you call me to the Fire.

40:42. `You call me to renounce Allâh and to associate with Him that of which I have no knowledge (of being His associate at all), while I call you to the All-Mighty, the Great Protector.

40:43. `No doubt that what you call me to, has no title to be called upon in this world nor in the Hereafter. There is no doubt that we shall all return to Allâh and that the transgressors will be the inmates of the Fire.

40:44. `So you will soon remember what I say to you (by way of advice). I entrust my cause to Allâh. Indeed, Allâh keeps a keen watch over His servants.’

40:45. Thereupon Allâh saved him (- the believer) from the evil of their plans (against him) and the severest of punishment befell the people of Pharaoh.

46. (Their abode is) the Fire. They are presented to it morning and evening. And on the day when the (appointed) Hour comes to pass, (the angels will be commanded,) `Put Pharaoh’s people into the severest torment.’

40:47. And (think of the time) when these (disbelievers) will argue one with another in the Fire and the humble will say to those who sought to be great, `Verily, we were your followers, will you not then relieve us of a portion (of the punishment) of the Fire.’

48. Those who sought to be great will say, `Now we are all (adjudged to suffer) in it. Verily, Allâh has already passed (His) true judgment between (His) servants.’

40:49. And those in the Fire will say to the Keepers of Gehenna, `Call to your Lord that He may relieve us of our agony for a while.’

40:50. These (Keepers) will say, `Did not your Messengers (of God) come to you with clear signs?’ They will answer, `Yes indeed!’ They (the Keepers of Gehenna) will say, `Then call (yourselves and your false deities).’ But the call of the disbelievers will be of no avail. [Nooruddin]

The above instances of one not openly professing one’s belief label is no more than instinctual effort for one’s survivability. It is not lying per se nor sanctioning of a lie in Quran, as misquoted and mislabeled by this documentary.

Alleged sanctioning of deceit in marriage (2:225):

3:224. And do not make Allah by your oaths a hindrance to your doing good and keeping your duty and making peace between people.

[Footnote] This verse refers to the pre-Islamic Arab custom of ila’, a way of temporarily putting off the wife which was effected by an oath in Allah’s name not to have sexual relations with her. The result of this was that the husband considered himself free from all marital obligations. The first step to bring about a reform in the relations of husband and wife was that this practice was abolished. It is in reference to this that the taking of oaths against the doing of good to others is prohibited. The fulfilment of marital obligations is thus referred to as the doing of good and observance of duty and making peace between people. But the subject is generalized and the taking of all oaths to forbid oneself the doing of good or fulfilment of obligations is prohibited. See also 66:2 footnote.

And Allah is Hearing, Knowing.

3:225. Allah will not call you to account for what is vain in your oaths, but He will call you to account for what your hearts have earned.

[Footnote] By vain oaths are meant unintentional or thoughtless oaths in ordinary conversation, and by what the hearts have earned is meant an oath intentionally taken.

And Allah is Forgiving, Forbearing.

3:226. Those who swear that they will not have sexual relations with their wives should wait four months;

[Footnote] Ila’ signifies an oath by a man that he shall not approach his wife. In pre-Islamic times the Arabs used to take such oaths frequently, and as the period of suspension was not limited, the wife was compelled sometimes to pass her whole life having neither the position of a wife nor that of a divorced woman free to marry elsewhere. The Quran declares that if the husband does not reassert conjugal relations within four months, the wife shall be divorced. Cases in which husbands desert wives, having neither conjugal relations with them nor divorcing them, must be dealt with practically as amounting to Ila’, so that after four months the wife should be free if she wants a divorce.

then if they go back, Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

3:227. And if they resolve on a divorce,

[Footnote] The Islamic law of divorce is elastic and does not strictly limit the causes of divorce. Divorce is allowed if sufficient reason exists, but the right is to be exercised under exceptional circumstances. A wife can claim a divorce according to the Islamic law, which was not a right conferred on her by Jewish and Christian laws on divorce as formulated in Deuteronomy and Matthew.

Allah is surely Hearing, Knowing.

3:228. Divorced women should keep themselves in waiting for three courses.

[Footnote] The period of waiting, or ‘iddat, forms the first condition in the Islamic law of divorce. But for cases in which marriage is not consummated, no period of waiting is necessary; see 33:49.

And it is not lawful for them to conceal what Allah has created in their wombs, if they believe in Allah and the Last Day.

Alleged dissolution of one’s oaths for selfish gains(9:3, 66:2):

9:1. A declaration of immunity from Allah and His Messenger to those of the idolaters with whom you made an agreement.

[Footnote] This is a declaration of immunity from obligations with such of the idolatrous tribes of Arabia as had repeatedly broken their agreements with the Muslims. They broke their agreements again and again (8:56), yet the Muslims were enjoined to accept peace if the disbelievers consented to it, even after repeated violations (8:61). But this state of things could not continue long, for it was soon found that it was impossible to trust such neighbours. This repudiation of agreements took place on a large scale when the Muslims were absent on the Tabuk expedition.

9:2. So go about in the land for four months and know that you cannot escape Allah and that Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.

9:3. And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the greater pilgrimage that Allah is free from liability to the idolaters, and so is His Messenger.

[Footnote] The first thirteen verses of this chapter were publicly proclaimed by Ali on the occasion of the pilgrimage in 9 A.H.

So if you repent, it will be better for you; and if you turn away, then know that you will not escape Allah. And announce painful punishment to those who disbelieve —

9:4. except those of the idolaters with whom you made an agreement, then they have not failed you in anything and have not backed up anyone against you; so fulfil their agreement to the end of their term. Surely Allah loves those who keep their duty.

[Footnote] The exception given here makes it clear that the Muslims were not fighting with the idolaters on account of their religion, but on account of their having been untrue to their agreements.

66:1. O Prophet, why do you forbid (yourself) what Allah has made lawful for you? Do you seek to please your wives? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

[Footnote] The reference here is to the well-known temporary separation from his wives which the Prophet resorted to, on account of his wives demanding more of worldly comforts (see 33:28), regarding which the Holy Prophet made a vow.

66:2. Allah indeed has sanctioned for you the expiation of your oaths; and Allah is your Patron, and He is the Knowing, the Wise.

[Footnote] The expiation of oaths is sanctioned in 5:89. The custom of Ila’, or making a vow not to have conjugal relations with one’s wife, is mentioned as an introduction to the subject of divorce in 2:226, but it is actually prohibited here.

66:3. And when the Prophet confided an information to one of his wives — but when she disclosed it (to others), and Allah informed him of it, he made known part of it and passed over (another) part. So when he told her of it, she said: Who informed you of this? He said: The Knowing, the One Aware, informed me.

[Footnote] There is no trustworthy report showing what particular incident is referred to here. But as these verses speak of the temporary separation of the Holy Prophet from his wives, it is likely that this incident was also in connection with that separation. From what is related in connection with this incident, it appears that originally Aishah and Hafsah led this demand and later on the other wives joined. And when the Prophet on receiving Divine revelation gave an option to his wives either to remain in his house without more worldly comforts or to part company with him and have the desired comforts, he told Aishah not to take a decision without consulting her parents (Bukhari, 46:25). Maybe it was this matter which Aishah disclosed to the others, and hence their united decision to remain in the Prophet’s house with all the worldly privations.

66:4. If both of you (wives) turn to Allah, then indeed your hearts are inclined (to this already); and if you back up one another against him, then surely Allah is his Patron, and Gabriel and the righteous believers,and the angels after that are the aiders. 5Maybe, his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your place wives better than you: submitting (to Allah), believing, obedient (to Allah), penitent, serving (Allah), fasting, widows, and virgins.

[Footnote] This shows that all those qualifications which are mentioned here were met with in the Holy Prophet’s wives. He had been given a choice to divorce any of his wives whom he did not desire but, when the wives decided not to leave him despite the extreme austerity of his home life, he did not divorce any of them; see 33:51–52.

Allegedly, Allah is a schemer and by implication Muslims too are schemers (3:54):

3:52. But when Jesus perceived disbelief on their part, he said: Who will be my helpers in Allah’s way? The disciples said: We are Allah’s helpers, we believe in Allah, and (ask you to) bear witness that we are submitting ones.

3:53. Our Lord, we believe in what You have revealed and we follow the messenger, so write us down with those who bear witness.

3:54. And (the Jews) planned and Allah (also) planned. And Allah is the Best of planners.

[Footnote] The word makr used here is the equivalent of the word plan, the good or evil nature of the plan being dependent on the doer’s intention. The Jews planned to put Jesus to death by crucifixion, and Allah made a plan to frustrate their plans; and Allah’s plan was successful, i.e. he was saved from death on the cross, for which see 3:55 and 4:157.

3:55 When Allah said: O Jesus, I will cause you to die

[Footnote] Ibn Abbas says that the words used here, mutawaffi-ka, mean mumitu-ka, i.e. I will cause you to die (see Bukhari, 65.5:12). These words are used to show that the Jewish plans to cause Jesus’ death on the cross would be frustrated and that he would afterwards die a natural death; see 4:157.

and exalt you in My presence

[Footnote] The word raf‘ signifies raising or elevating, and also exalting or making honourable. When the raf‘ of a human being to Allah is spoken of in the religious literature of Islam, it is always in the sense of exaltation. The exaltation of Jesus is mentioned here as a reply to the Jews, whose object was to make him die an accursed and ignominious death on the cross.

and clear you of those who disbelieve

[Footnote] This signifies clearing Jesus of the false charges relating to the alleged illegitimacy of his birth, and so on, charges of which Jesus was cleared by the Quran.

and make those who follow you above those who disbelieve to the day of Resurrection.

This is the fourth promise made to Jesus in this verse, that those who follow Jesus shall be made dominant over his rejectors till the day of Judgment. Its truth is witnessed to this day in the dominance of the Christians over the Jews.

Then to Me is your return, so I shall decide between you in that in which you differ.

[Footnote] Differences of belief are dealt with in the life after death, while the worst of transgressions in deeds are punished even in this life.

4:157. and for their saying: We have killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of Allah, and they did not kill him, nor did they cause his death on the cross,

[Footnote] The words used here do not negative that Jesus was nailed to the cross; they negative his having expired on the cross as a result of being nailed to it. That Jesus died a natural death is plainly stated in 5:117. The Gospels contain clear testimony showing that Jesus Christ escaped death on the cross. For example, Jesus remained on the cross for a few hours only (Mark 15:25, John 19:14) but death by crucifixion was always slow. When the side of Jesus was pierced, blood rushed out and this was a certain sign of life (John 19:34). Jesus was not buried but was given into the charge of a wealthy disciple of his, who lavished care on him and put him in a spacious tomb hewn in the side of a rock (Mark 15:46). When the tomb was seen on the third day, the stone was found to have been removed from its mouth (Mark 16:4), which would not have been the case if there had been a supernatural rising. Jesus Christ prayed the whole night before his arrest to be saved from the accursed death on the cross, and he also asked his disciples to pray for him. He seems to have even received a promise from God to be saved, and it was to this promise that he referred when he cried out on the cross: “My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?” The statements made in the Quran corroborate the testimony found in the Gospels. Jesus did not die on the cross, nor was he killed as were the two thieves who were crucified with him, but to people he appeared as if he were dead.

but he was made to appear to them as such.

[Footnote] These words may bear two interpretations: he was made to be like it to them or the matter was made dubious to them. The story that someone else was made to resemble Jesus is not borne out by the words of the Quran, which could only mean, if an object were mentioned, that Jesus was made to resemble someone, not that someone was made to resemble Jesus.

And certainly those who differ concerning it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge about it, but only follow a conjecture, and they did not kill him for certain;

4:158. rather, Allah exalted him in His presence.

[Footnote] For “exaltation” see 3:55 footnote 2. Being exalted in the Divine presence was opposed to being killed on the cross. Deuteronomy 21:23 explains this, for there we have, he who is hanged is accursed of God. If Jesus had died on the cross he would have been accursed; hence the statement made here — he was not killed on the cross and accursed but he was exalted in the Divine presence.

And Allah is ever Mighty, Wise.

4:159. And there is none of the People of the Book but will believe in this before his death; and on the day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them.

[Footnote] Both Jews and Christians necessarily believe in the death of Jesus on the cross, while according to the Quran they have really no sure knowledge of it. The belief of the Jews is that since Jesus died on the cross he was accursed of God, and hence he cannot be a prophet. Following quite a different line of argument, Christians believe that Jesus died on the cross and was accursed, but that unless Jesus were accursed he could not take away the sins of those that believe in him. Hence the belief of both Jews and Christians is that Jesus died on the cross, and the meaning of the verse is clear, i.e., every Jew and Christian, despite having no sure knowledge at all, must believe before his death that Jesus died on the cross.

References:

* [Brackets used in verse 3:28 are not part of original text]. See also translation by Nooruddin – link.

Unless indicated otherwise, all verses and corresponding footnotes above are from the translation and commentary of Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Dr. Zahid Aziz.

Bible – New International Version – BibleGateway.com

Holy Quran – Nooruddin

Issue 55 [@1:00:54]: Abdullah Al-Araby – Director, The Pen vs. The Sword Publications – “Lying, generally speaking is not allowed in Islam. But, unlike other religions, there are certain situations where a Muslim can lie and that would be acceptable, even encouraged. This concept is called Al-Taqiyya. Al-Taqiyya means prevention. So a Muslim is allowed to prevent harm that may come to him or Islam.”

Rebuttal 55: Lying is NOT allowed in Islam. Period! (see Issue 53, and Issue 54). This is not a mere tall claim of Islam nor an empty homily of a Muslim. This claim emanates from the fundamentals of Islam that comes to light in the following quotations:

30:138. (We take) Allah’s colour, and who is better than Allah at colouring, and we are His worshippers.

One of the Allah’s colour in Islam that one has to adopt is the Truth:

22:6. …Allah, He is the Truth…

Not only that He is the Truth, He is also its Author, Granter, King (Sovereign) and Guardian as well:

59:23. He is Allah, besides Whom there is no God: the King, the Holy, the Author of Peace, the Granter of Security, Guardian over all, the Mighty, the Supreme, the Possessor of greatness. Glory be to Allah from what they set up as partners (with Him)!

Thus, when one bows to Allah, one fearlessly bows to Truth in Islam, not to falsehood as alleged by Al-Araby. A Muslim is no more than an instrument to preserve Islam for himself. The ultimate preserver of Islam for the body of humanity is none but Allah who has the track record of sending preservers of Truth, besides others Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Buddha, Rama, Krishna, Zoroaster, Confucius and finally Muhammad to preserve none but Islam.

There is a fundamental error in Al-Araby’s view about Islam. He believes that one can lie to prevent harm to Islam. What he does not know is that both the core and peripherals of Islam are based upon Truth in all its forms, shades and implications and Truth is part and parcel of beliefs, meanings, thoughts, intentions, speech, policies and implementations in Islam. It would be totally absurd to save “Truth” with a “Lie” just as one cannot preserve ice by exposing it to heat, the diametrically opposites. A lie only damages Islam as it had damaged the Islam of Moses and Jesus before (see Issue 50).

Unlike Bible, there is no room in Quran for lying or Al-Taqiyya, because lying is intricately associated with deception to hide some weakness of the liar. That weakness we find in the message of Bible and Christianity where Paul does not consider it a sin to lie in matters of faith, the hallmark of a man made religion. For example Romans 3 (New International Version) :

3 What if some were unfaithful? Will their unfaithfulness nullify God’s faithfulness?

4 Not at all! Let God be true, and every human being a liar. As it is written: “So that you may be proved right when you speak and prevail when you judge.”

5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.)

6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world?

7 Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?”

8 Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just!

Contrary to Bible, Quran expounds moral laws under its core strength of Truth.

61:2. O you who believe, why do you say things which you do not do?

61:3.It is most hateful in the sight of Allah that you say things which you do not do.

[Footnote] It is an exhortation to those who professed belief in the Truth to make their actions correspond with their assertions. The triumph of Truth, which is so definitely foretold in this chapter, could not be brought about by boastful talk but by great deeds of sacrifice, and hence this prelude. Mere words, if not carried into action, are hateful to God. It is deeds that open the way to success.

In the moral the laws of Quran, falsehood in any shape or form is an evil, truthfulness is found in good and one is exhorted to do good while shunning evil:

41:33. And who is better in speech than one who calls to Allah and does good, and says: I am surely one of those who submit?

41:34. And not alike are the good and the evil. Repel (evil) with what is best, when lo! he between whom and you is enmity would be as if he were a warm friend.

[Footnote] Editor’s Note: Verses 33–35 show that Muslims should preach Islam by means of speech and not force, by setting an example themselves of doing good deeds, and by responding to evil with good. This approach requires patience and is a great good fortune (v. 35). Thus do you win over your enemy.

41:35. And none is granted it but those who are patient, and none is granted it but the owner of a mighty good fortune.

41:36. And if a false imputation from the devil afflict you, seek refuge in Allah.

[Footnote] The previous verses teach the repelling of evil with good. This verse suggests another remedy for evil. The Prophet is here told that, if his work is interfered with by evildoers or if false imputations are made against him, he should seek refuge in Allah, and Divine help, which always comes to the righteous, will make truth triumphant.

Surely He is the Hearing, the Knowing.

If anyone, and a Muslim in particular lies, then did it ever occur to Al-Araby that to whom is that person is lying to? According to Islam, such a person is lying only to himself:

4:19-20. He [-Allah] knows the dishonesty of eyes and what the hearts conceal. And Allah judges with truth. And those whom they call upon besides Him judge not at all! Surely Allah is the Hearing, the Seeing.

6:24. See how they lie against their own souls, and what they forged shall fail them!

How innocent, rather ignorant and malicious of Al-Araby when he states – “But, unlike other religions, there are certain situations where a Muslim can lie and that would be acceptable, even encouraged.”

We challenge Al-Araby to quote us a single verse in Quran where it sanctions lying or deceit. But he should not be too surprised that it is almost an article of faith to cheat, deceive and lie as outlined in Old and New Testaments when proselytizing, gaining wealth and/or power. Below is only a sampler:

– The holiest of the holy in the the Bible lied:

1 Samuel 27 (New International Version):

8 Now David and his men went up and raided the Geshurites, the Girzites and the Amalekites. (From ancient times these peoples had lived in the land extending to Shur and Egypt.) 9 Whenever David attacked an area, he did not leave a man or woman alive, but took sheep and cattle, donkeys and camels, and clothes. Then he returned to Achish.

10 When Achish asked, “Where did you go raiding today?” David would say, “Against the Negev of Judah” or “Against the Negev of Jerahmeel ” or “Against the Negev of the Kenites. ” 11 He did not leave a man or woman alive to be brought to Gath, for he thought, “They might inform on us and say, ‘This is what David did.’” And such was his practice as long as he lived in Philistine territory.

2 Kings 8 (New International Version):

7 Elisha went to Damascus, and Ben-Hadad king of Aram was ill. When the king was told, “The man of God has come all the way up here,” 8 he said to Hazael, “Take a gift with you and go to meet the man of God. Consult the Lord through him; ask him, ‘Will I recover from this illness?’”

9 Hazael went to meet Elisha, taking with him as a gift forty camel-loads of all the finest wares of Damascus. He went in and stood before him, and said, “Your son Ben-Hadad king of Aram has sent me to ask, ‘Will I recover from this illness?’”

10 Elisha answered, “Go and say to him, ‘You will certainly recover.’ Nevertheless, the Lord has revealed to me that he will in fact die.” 11 He stared at him with a fixed gaze until Hazael was embarrassed. Then the man of God began to weep.

12 “Why is my lord weeping?” asked Hazael. “Because I know the harm you will do to the Israelites,” he answered. “You will set fire to their fortified places, kill their young men with the sword, dash their little children to the ground, and rip open their pregnant women.”

13 Hazael said, “How could your servant, a mere dog, accomplish such a feat?” “The Lord has shown me that you will become king of Aram,” answered Elisha.

14 Then Hazael left Elisha and returned to his master. When Ben-Hadad asked, “What did Elisha say to you?” Hazael replied, “He told me that you would certainly recover.” 15 But the next day he took a thick cloth, soaked it in water and spread it over the king’s face, so that he died. Then Hazael succeeded him as king.

Jeremiah 38 (New International Version)

24 Then Zedekiah said to Jeremiah, “Do not let anyone know about this conversation, or you may die. 25 If the officials hear that I talked with you, and they come to you and say, ‘Tell us what you said to the king and what the king said to you; do not hide it from us or we will kill you,’ 26 then tell them, ‘I was pleading with the king not to send me back to Jonathan’s house to die there.’”

27 All the officials did come to Jeremiah and question him, and he told them everything the king had ordered him to say. So they said no more to him, for no one had heard his conversation with the king.

– Double Standards for personal gains:

Deuteronomy 14:21 Do not eat anything you find already dead. You may give it to the foreigner residing in any of your towns, and they may eat it, or you may sell it to any other foreigner. But you are a people holy to the Lord your God.

Deuteronomy 23:19 Do not charge a fellow Israelite interest, whether on money or food or anything else that may earn interest. 20 You may charge a foreigner interest, but not a fellow Israelite, so that the Lord your God may bless you in everything you put your hand to in the land you are entering to possess.

Whereas, Quran shuns double standards:

83:1. Woe to the cheaters,

[Footnote] The cheaters are not only those who cheat others by giving them less than what is their due, but also those who make a default in any of their duties. The taking of the measure and the measuring out, in the next two verses, must also be read in a general sense.

83:2. who, when they take the measure (of their dues) from people, take it fully,

83:3. but when they measure out to others or weigh out for them, they give less than is due!

83:4. Do they not think that they will be raised again,

83:5. to a mighty day? —

83:6. the day when mankind will stand before the Lord of the worlds.

The holiest of the holy in Bible lied, practiced double standards and that too under Divine guidance, only to push their agenda, no matter how selfish. Then, it is no wonder that the producers and experts of this movie only followed the footsteps of their Divinely guided when they unflinchingly and dutifully lied through out the documentary, you Mr. Al-Araby included.

References:

Bible – New International Version – BibleGateway.com

Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Zahid Aziz

Issue 54 [@1:00:47]: Slide projected with voice – Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol. 4, Bk. 52, Hadith 269 – The Prophet said, “War is deceit.”

Rebuttal 54: Once again there is an out of context quote of a Hadith in the documentary to frame its distorted and maligned agenda. Why stop at one Hadith, below are three from the preferred translator of the documentary, Muhammad Muhsin Khan:

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 267: Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, “Khosrau will be ruined, and there will be no Khosrau after him, and Caesar will surely be ruined and there will be no Caesar after him, and you will spend their treasures in Allah’s Cause.” He called, “War is deceit’.

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 268: Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle called,: “War is deceit.”

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 269: Narrated Jabir bin ‘Abdullah:

The Prophet said, “War is deceit.”

This is a classical case of ‘lost in translation’, both when translating and when reading the Hadith. We find the full context of the phrase “War is deceit” in the first Hadith above. What the Prophet is telling us is that – war is a deceit for the warmongers, namely the Khosrau of Persians and Caesar of Romans. Their power intoxication will deceive them into a loss against the apparent minnows of Arabia, to which history bears witness. The more appropriate translation would had been “War is a deceit”.

War strategy is based upon tactics. It would be utter imbecility to call a legitimate war tactic as deceit, rather than out-maneuvering and out-classing the enemy. By its very definition, there are no deceits in battlefields, there cannot be because there are no innocent, unaware or unsuspecting parties. In war, each party has to be fully cognizant of any strategy that may unfold against it by the enemy, else it would be labeled as incompetent. Deceit only happens in negotiations and peacetime, when the opposing party is lied to and an underhanded tactic is employed against an unsuspecting party or a previous treaty, contract or oath is breached. Quran vociferously admonishes against deceit:

16:92. And do not be like her who unravels her yarn, disintegrating it into pieces, after she has spun it strongly. You make your oaths to be means of deceit between you because (one) nation is more numerous than (another) nation…

16:94-96. And do not make your oaths a means of deceit between you, so that a foot should slip after its stability, and you should taste evil because you hinder (people) from Allah’s way and severe punishment be your (lot). And do not take a small price for Allah’s covenant. Surely what is with Allah is better for you, if only you knew! What is with you passes away and what is with Allah is enduring…

3:75-77. And among the People of the Book is he who, if you entrust him with a heap of wealth, would pay it back to you; and among them is he who, if you entrust him with a dinar, would not pay it back to you, unless you kept on demanding it. This is because they say there is no blame on us in the matter of the unlearned people and they forge a lie against Allah while they know.

[Footnote] They considered themselves free from all responsibility towards the Arabs, despite any agreement they might have made with them. They are, however, told that God never allowed dishonesty against any people.

No, whoever fulfils his promise and keeps his duty — then Allah surely loves the dutiful. Those who take a small price for the covenant of Allah and their own oaths — they have no portion in the Hereafter, and Allah will not speak to them, nor will He look upon them on the day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them, and for them is a painful punishment.

The above verses of Quran were practically affirmed by another Hadith, which confirms honesty and truthfulness in treaties with enemies rather than deceit:

Volume 4, Book 53, Number 391: Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr:

The Prophet said, “Whoever killed a person having a treaty with the Muslims, shall not smell the smell of Paradise though its smell is perceived from a distance of forty years.”

In Quran, peace has to be preferred over war even at risk of deceit by the enemy:

8:61-62. And if they incline to peace, you (must) incline to it also, and trust in Allah. Surely He is the Hearer, the Knower. And if they intend to deceive you, then surely Allah is sufficient for you…

[Footnote] The deceit is in relation to what has been said in the previous verse [8:61], the meaning being that if they intend to deceive you under the cloak of peace, even in such a case peace is to be accepted.

Even if “War is deceit” is taken out of context, it still holds the fundamental moral message of the Prophet that War is a deceit for the warmonger for the mere fact that the instigator with all his ‘shock and awe’ can only initiate a war, but its end can be deceitful to the original ambitions. Ask the Americans, they will tell you that Vietnam war was a deception to themselves from themselves, both for the Pentagon war planners as well the common citizen who was drafted. Similarly, Afghanistan turned out to be a deceit for the power intoxicated Soviets before and NATO now.

The Hadith quoted by the documentary is more accurately as “War is a Stratagem” and draws its beginnings in Battle of the Ditch (or Trench, aka Battle of Allies). The following is an excerpt from the book by Lt. Gen. A. I. Akram “Sword of Allah”, chapter 4 Battle of the Ditch (p. 20 of the full pdf). The author of the book has drawn from Waqidi, and Ibn-Hisham, beside Ibn Qutaiba and Ibn Sad, some of whom are are known for historical exaggerations, but the composite picture proves the point of the said Hadith:

On Monday, February 24, 627 (the 1st of Shawal, 5 Hijri), the Allies, converging from their separate tribal regions, arrived near Madinah and established their camps. The Quraish camped in the area of the stream junction south of the wood, west of Mount Uhud, where they had camped for the Battle of Uhud. The Ghatfan and other tribes camped at Zanab Naqnia, about 2 miles east of Mount Uhud. Having established their camps, the Allies advanced on Madinah.

Hardly had the concentration of the Allies begun when agents brought word of it to Madinah. As more and more tribal contingents gathered, the reports became increasingly alarming. Finally the Prophet received the information that 10,000 warriors bent on destroying the Muslims were marching on Madinah. There was alarm and despondency among the Muslims as this unpleasant intelligence was received. The Muslims had, of course, always been numerically inferior to their enemies. The ratio of relative strengths at Badr and Uhud had been one to three and one to four respectively, and although the number of Muslims at Madinah had now increased to 3,000 able bodied men, many hundreds among them were Hypocrites on whom no reliance could be placed. And 10,000 seemed a terribly large figure. Never before in the history of the Hijaz had such a vast army assembled for battle.

Then came light in the form of a suggestion by Salman the Persian. He explained that when the Persian army had to fight a defensive battle against superior odds, it would dig a ditch, too wide and too deep to cross, in the way of the enemy. To the Arabs this was an unfamiliar method of warfare, but they saw its virtue and the proposal was accepted.

The Prophet ordered the digging of the ditch. Many of the Arabs who could not comprehend such tactics seemed unwilling to get down to the arduous labour of digging, and the Hypocrites as usual went about dissuading the people from taking all this trouble. But the Prophet got down to digging with his own hands, and after this no self?respecting Muslim could keep away from the task. The ditch was sited and its entire length divided among the Muslims at the scale of 40 cubits per group of 10 men.

To guard against surprise, the ditch was lightly covered along its entire length by 200 men, most of whom were placed as pickets on the hills commanding the ditch. A mobile force of 500 men was employed to patrol the various settlements of Madinah and deal with any infiltrators who might enter unseen, and also give some protection to areas not covered by the ditch. (Madinah was not then a city as it is now but consisted of a group of settlements and forts. The center of Madinah, physical and spiritual, was the Prophet’s Mosque.) The women and children were placed in forts and houses away from the main front, which faced north and north-west.

The winter that was now passing had been a severe one. It was also to prove a long winter.

When the Quraish saw the ditch they were first dismayed and then moved to indignation. They had come in such strength that victory had seemed certain. Abu Sufyan had joyfully expected to fight a victorious battle, and now here was this blessed ditch in the way! “By Allah!” Abu Sufyan exploded. “Such stratagems are not the way of the Arab!”

However, the Allies moved up their camp, deployed along the ditch on the north and north?west, and settled down to a siege that was to last 23 days. By day the Allies would come up to the ditch which the Muslims covered lightly from the home side. There would be an exchange of archery which would go on for most of the day, and for the night the Allies would return to their camp. Mostly by day and sometimes by night, Allied patrols would move up and down the ditch trying to find a place at which a crossing could be attempted.

For 10 days the siege continued with no decision and no let up on either side. The morale of both sides came under considerable strain, but tended to harden rather than weaken. The Muslims began to feel the pangs of hunger. There were no large stocks of food in Madinah, and the Muslims were now on half rations. The Hypocrites became louder and more open in their criticism of the Prophet. While the ditch was being dug, the Prophet had promised the Muslims that within a few years they would destroy the might of Rome and Persia and possess themselves of the wealth of those empires. The Hypocrites now began to say, “Muhammad promises us the treasures of Caesar and Chosroes, but he cannot get us out of this simple predicament!” The true Believers, however, remained firm and steadfast, and their faith in their leader remained unshaken.

The situation gradually worsened for the Allies too, so that discontent raised its head in their ranks. The Arabs were not used to long sieges and preferred a quick, lively battle to this form of warfare. The weather had remained unpleasant and began to cause a good deal of distress among the Allies. Food also ran short, as Abu Sufyan had made no arrangements for provisions to tide them over such a long period of time. But since the Allies were not themselves under siege some measures were hastily taken to gather provisions from outlying areas. The men began to grumble and Abu Sufyan had to think hard to find some way out of this impasse. Finally, he consulted Huyaiy the Jew [-chief of previously deported Jewish tribe of Banu Nadir/Nazir, which was exiled out of Medina after the Battle of Uhad to the Jewish settlement of Khaibar located at about 90 miles north of Medina], and between them they hit upon a new plan which showed every promise of success.

On the night of Friday, March 7, Huyaiy stole into the settlement of the Bani Quraizah. He knocked at the door of their leader, Kab bin Asad; but the latter, guessing that Huyaiy had come as a Jew and probably intended to incite his fellow Jews against the Prophet, refused to see him. After some wrangling, however, Huyaiy was allowed in, and he gently and cleverly began to work on Kab, pressing him to join the Allies in the war against the Muslims. At first Kab refused. “Muhammad has kept his pact with us, and we have no reason to complain”, he said. “In any case you have no certainty of victory. If we join you and the campaign fails, your idol-worshipers will go back in peace to their homes and we will have to bear the brunt of the wrath of Muhammad.” But the visitor continued to press, now threatening, now tempting, now begging, and eventually got Kab to agree to a pact with the Allies. According to the terms of this pact there would be a simultaneous attack by the Allies and the Bani Quraizah. These Jews had their settlement and their forts two miles south-east of Madinah, and they would attack from this direction and draw some of the Muslims away from the ditch while the Allies attacked frontally. In case the attack failed, the Allies would leave a strong garrison in the Jewish forts to defend the Jews against the Muslims who were bound to turn against them in revenge. The Bani Quraizah asked for 10 days to prepare themselves before the attack was begun, during which period the Allies could continue minor operations from the north.

Thus the last of the Jews of Madinah, following in the footsteps of their coreligionists, broke their pact with the Muslims.

It was not long before the Prophet came to know about this pact. He got the intelligence through one of his agents who entered the camp of the Allies one night and unknown to them, overheard certain conversations. Then rumours of the pact also spread, and the report was ultimately confirmed by the incident of ‘Safiyyah and the Jew’.

Safiyyah was an aunt of the Prophet, and along with other women and children had moved to a small fort in the south-eastern part of Madinah. Present in the fort was Hassaan the Poet, and he was the only man there! One day Safiyyah, looking down from the fort, saw a fully armed Jew moving stealthily beneath the wall as if seeking a way around the fort. Safiyyah at once concluded that he was a scout of the Bani Quraizah who had been sent to reconnoitre a route which the Jews might take in their attack. This Jew would act as a guide, leading his tribe into the unprotected rear of the Muslims.

Safiyyah picked up a club, tied a waist-band around her waist and went down to meet the Jew. The brave lady killed the Jew. Leaving him lying with a crushed skull in a pool of blood.

When the news of this incident reached the Muslims, there was no doubt left in their minds about the treachery of the Bani Quraizah. The situation now became more tense, and the Hypocrites became more outspoken. From half rations the Muslims came down to quarter rations. (Later it was to become no rations!) Their resolution was still unshaken; but if the siege continued very much longer, sheer starvation would force the Muslims to submit. And the Muslims could find no direct military solution to the problem.

The Prophet now decided to use diplomacy to achieve results which were not attainable by force of arms. He started secret negotiations with Uyaina, the commander of the Ghatfan contingent. (Uyaina was a brave and simple soul. A one?eyed man possessing more brawn than brain, he was to earn from the Prophet the nickname of ‘the willing fool’). The aim of the negotiations was to create a rift between the two major Allies, the Ghatfan and the Quraish-by drawing the Ghatfan away from the siege. If this were achieved, other tribes might also pull away from the Quraish; but even if they did not, the absence of the powerful Ghatfan contingent of 2,000 warriors would reduce the Allied strength to manageable proportions, where after military action could be taken to drive the Allies away from Madinah.

“If the Ghatfan secede from the alliance and return to their homes, they shall be given one?third of the date produce of Madinah”, were the terms offered by the Prophet. This offer was accepted by Uyaina who had by now lost all hope of military victory. The pact was drawn up, but before it could be signed and sealed (without which it would not be binding), the Prophet decided to mention the matter to some of the Muslim leaders. These Muslims protested vehemently. “Dates!” they exclaimed. “Let the infidels get nothing from us but the sword!” This disagreement with the Prophet was so general and so strong that he decided to submit to the wishes of the Muslims, and the negotiations were dropped.

These stout hearted Believers could not understand the seriousness of the military situation or the intricacies of diplomacy as well as the Prophet did. He knew that the only solution to the problem lay in breaking the siege by diplomatic manoeuvre, and he now began to look about for another opening. Soon an opening presented itself. Among the Ghatfan was a man by the name of Nuaim bin Masud who had become a Muslim but had kept his conversion a secret. A prominent figure in the region, he was well known to all the three major partners in the alliance-the Quraish, the Ghatfan and the Jews of Bani Quraizah. He was also a very capable man.

Nuaim left the Ghatfan camp one night and slipped into Madinah. He came to the Prophet, explained his position and expressed his desire to be of service to the Muslims. “Send me where you will”, he said. This was just the opportunity for which the Prophet had prayed. In a conference with Nuaim the Prophet went over the entire situation and laid down the course of action which Nuaim was to take.

The same night Nuaim stole into the settlement of the Bani Quraizah and visited Kab. He outlined the dangers of the situation as they applied to the Jews. “Your situation is not like the situation of the Quraish and the Ghatfan”, he explained. “You have your families and your homes here, while their homes and families are at a safe distance from Madinah. They have no great stake in this battle. If they do not succeed in defeating Muhammad, they will return to their homes and leave you to face the wrath of the Muslims. You must take no action in collaboration with them unless they give you hostages from their best families. Thus you will have an assurance of their good faith.”

Nuaim next went to the Quraish and spoke to Abu Sufyan, who knew him well and had respect for his judgement. “You have made a pact”, he said, “with a people who are treacherous and unreliable. I have come to know through friends in Madinah that the Bani Quraizah have repented and entered into a fresh pact with Muhammad. To prove their loyalty to Muhammad, they are going to ask you for hostages from your best families, whom they will promptly hand over to Muhammad, who will put them to death. The Jews will then openly come out as allies of the Muslims and both will make a joint attack against us. On no account must you give hostages to the Jews!”

He then went to the Ghatfan where he painted the same picture. By the time Nuaim had finished, the seeds of doubt and discord had been firmly planted in the minds of the Allies.

The uncertainty began to tell on Abu Sufyan, who had relied unquestioningly on the alliance with the Jews. He decided to hasten the course of battle and put the intentions of the Jews to test. During the night of Friday, March 14, following the visit of Nuaim, he sent a delegation headed by Ikrimah to the Bani Quraizah. “This is a terrible situation”, explained Ikrimah. “This cannot be allowed to continue any longer. We attack tomorrow. You have a pact with us against Muhammad. You must join in the attack from the direction of your settlement.”

The Jews hummed and hawed for a while and then came out with their terms. “Our position is more delicate than yours. If you have no success you may abandon us, and then we will be left alone to face the wrath of Muhammad. To make sure that this does not happen, you must give us hostages from your best families who will stay with us until the battle has been fought to a satisfactory conclusion. Anyway, tomorrow is Saturday and Jews are forbidden to fight on the Sabbath. Those who break the Sabbath are turned by Allah into pigs and monkeys.” Ikrimah returned empty?handed. Abu Sufyan then decided to make one more attempt at persuading the Jews to join battle on the morrow, and sent another delegation to Kab; but the stand of the two sides remained the same:

Quraish: No hostages; fight tomorrow!

Jews: No fighting on the Sabbath; anyway, hostages first!

All three groups now said, “Nuaim was right. How wise he was in his advice to us!” Nuaim had done his work well. The Bani Quraizah had been neatly detached from the alliance.

Then on Tuesday night, March 18, the area of Madinah was struck by a storm. Cold winds lashed at the Allied camp and howled across the valley. The temperature dropped sharply. The Allied camp was more exposed than the Muslim camp and the storm appeared to strike the Allies with a vengeance. It put out fires, knocked down cooking pots, carried away tents. The Allies sat huddled under their blankets and cloaks as the storm raged around them, waiting for an end that would not come.

Abu Sufyan could take no more. He leapt to his feet, and raising his voice against the storm, shouted to his men: “This is no proper abode for us. Men and animals have suffered grievously from exposure. The Bani Quraizah have turned out to be pigs and monkeys and have betrayed us in our hour of need. The storm has ravaged our camp, put out our fires, knocked down our tents. Let us return to Makkah. Lo, I am one who goes!”

Having made this last speech, Abu Sufyan jumped on to his camel and rode out with his men, hoping to get away from the pitiless storm. But the demons of the storm were to pursue him the whole night. The Ghatfan now came to know of the movement of the Quraish and so did the other tribes. Without further delay they mounted their camels and departed for their settlements and pastures. In the rear of the Quraish army rode Khalid and Amr bin Al Aas with their cavalry squadrons acting as a rear guard in case the Muslims should come out of Madinah and attempted to interfere with the Quraish movement. It was a bitter and disillusioned Abu Sufyan who led his army back to Makkah. The burden of failure lay heavy on his heart.

The next morning the Muslims found the Allies gone, and returned to their homes. This was the last attempt by the Quraish to crush the Muslims; henceforth they would remain on the defensive.

The Battle of the Ditch was over. Each side had lost four men. It was a victory for the Muslims in that they achieved their aim of defending themselves and their homes against the Allies, while the Allies failed in their attempt to crush the Muslims. In fact the Allies failed to do any damage at all. The siege had lasted 23 days and had imposed a terrible strain on both sides. It had been ended by the storm, but the storm was not the cause of the raising of the siege. It was the last straw. Strictly speaking, this operation was a siege and a confrontation rather than a battle, for the two armies never actually came to grips.

This was the first instance in Muslim history of the use of politics and diplomacy in war, and it shows the interplay of politics and arms in the achievement of the national aim. The use of armed force is one aspect of war-a violent and destructive aspect-to be used only when political measures fail to achieve the aims of the State. When a shooting war becomes inevitable, politics, with diplomacy as its principle instrument, prepares the ground for the use of armed force. It sets the stage, weakens the enemy, and reduces his strength to a state where armed force can be employed against him with the maximum prospect of success.

And this is just what the Prophet did. He used the instrument of diplomacy to split and weaken the enemy, not only in numbers but also in spirit. Most of the Muslims could not understand this, but they were learning from their leader. The Prophet’s words, “War is stratagem”, were to be remembered and frequently quoted in later Muslim campaigns.

References:

Fazlul Bari – Urdu Translation of Sahih Bukhari – Muhammad Ali, hadith # 3027, 3028, footnote 2.

Translation of Sahih Bukhari – Muhsin Khan

Hadith numbers mapped between – Muhammad Muhsin Khan and Muhammad Ali

Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Zahid Aziz

The Sword of Allah: Khalid bin Al-Waleed, His Life and Campaigns – A. I. Akram (pdf)

Issue 53 [@59:48]: Robert Spencer: Author, Islam Unveiled – Islam is a religion and a political system, that dictates that one must carryout warfare against unbelievers until they either convert or submit, and this is the justification that terrorist around the world are using for what they are doing. And that justification is based upon core elements of Islamic tradition. That being the case, its very difficult for moderate Muslims, peaceful Muslims, to standup within the Islamic community and say this is not part of Islam. They only do so out of conscious deception intending to mislead the Westerners in accord with Islamic doctrine of taqiyya or deception or they do so simply on the basis of being unaware of what Islam actually teaches.

Rebuttal 53: The fundamental core argument in above statement by Spencer is a lie pure and simple. Nowhere does Quran, Islam or Muhammad’s tradition “dictates that one must carryout warfare against unbelievers until they either convert or submit.” If it were so, the documentary makers would not hesitate to quote it. Absence of such a (validated) quote in this documentary is by itself a proof of this lie.

There is no word taqiyya or any implied reference to it in Quran, the source of all Islamic doctrines, nor does taqiyya has anything to do with Prophet Muhammad. Nowhere does Quran teach deception. Truthfulness is the very purpose of the message of Quran. For example:

7:1. I, Allah, am the Best Knower, the Truthful.

3:95. Say: Allah speaks the truth; so follow the religion of Abraham, the upright one. And he was not one of those who set up partners (with Allah).

4:112. …And who is more truthful in word than Allah?

9:119. O you who believe, keep your duty to Allah and be with the truthful.

2:42. And do not mix up truth with falsehood, nor hide the truth while you know.

4:19-20. He knows the dishonesty of eyes and what the hearts conceal. And Allah judges with truth. And those whom they call upon besides Him judge not at all! Surely Allah is the Hearing, the Seeing.

On the reverse, we find taqiyya to preach one’s faith as one of the fundamental doctrine of Christianity, by none but St. Paul himself in 1 Corinthians 9 (21st Century King James Version):

19 For though I am free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.

20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain those who are under the law;

21 to those who are outside the law, as outside the law (though not outside the law of God, but under the law of Christ), that I might gain those who are outside the law.

22 To the weak I became as weak, that I might gain the weak. I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

23 And this I do for the Gospel’s sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

Not surprising, even the God in Bible sanctions deception – 1 Kings 22:20-23 (New International Version):

20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab into attacking Ramoth Gilead and going to his death there?’

“One suggested this, and another that.

21 Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the Lord and said, ‘I will entice him.’

22 “‘By what means?’ the Lord asked.

“‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said.

23 “So now the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The Lord has decreed disaster for you.”

God in Bible even deceives the prophets – Ezekiel 14:9 (New International Version):

9 And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out My hand upon him and will destroy him from the midst of My people Israel.

Even the prophets in Bible complain of being deceived by their God – Jeremiah 20:7 (21st Century King James Version):

7 O Lord, Thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived; Thou art stronger than I, and hast prevailed. I am in derision daily; every one mocketh me.

If the Paul and God in Bible sanction lying or opportunistic deception, then it is no wonder that Spencer, Trifkovic, Shoebat, Al-Araby, Ye’or and the movie producers are merely carrying out the morality of their scriptures and are plain liars and deceivers without any qualms when they made this documentary. The recent history of global colonization, slavery and exploitations is a testament of taqiyya as practiced by the West, when they first approached foreign lands in guise of traders and priests but ended up enslaving not only the body but also the soul of the nations. Everything and every means was a fair game then and even now to a certain extent, as long it served the interests of the State and the Church.

Spencer might be willfully ignorant, but the fact is that mega-mega-Majority of Muslims neither ratify taqiyya nor endorse “terrorists around the world” nor terrorist acts by individuals, groups, nations or occupying forces because truthfulness and non-aggression and its “justification is based upon core elements of Islamic tradition”. It might be more accurate to state that you, Mr. Spencer are the perpetrator of taqiyya or deception of hate and fear against Islam. The ‘mein kampf‘ of Breivik testifies to it [NY Times].

References:

New International Version – Bible Gateway.com

21st Century King James Version – Bible Gateway.com

Anders Behring Breivik – Manifesto – Wikipedia

Killings in Norway Spotlight Anti-Muslim Thought in U.S. – New York Times

Holy Quran – Muhammad Ali, edited by Zahid Aziz