William Dalrymple: Scribes of the new racism

'The massacre of 8,000 unarmed Muslims at Srebrenica never led to a stream of pieces about the violence of Christianity'

25 September 2001

Seidnaya is a Greek Orthodox convent in Syria, three hours' walk from Damascus. The monastery sits on a great crag of rock overlooking the orchards and olive groves of the Damascene plain, more like a Crusader castle than a place of worship.

According to legend, the monastery was founded in the sixth century after the Byzantine Emperor Justinian chased a stag onto the top of the hill during a hunting expedition. Just as Justinian was about to draw his bow, the stag changed into the Virgin Mary, who commanded him to build a convent on the rock. The abbey quickly become a place of pilgrimage. To this day streams of Christian, Muslim and Druze pilgrims trudge their way to Seidnaya from the mountains of Lebanon and the valleys of the Syrian jebel. A couple of years ago, while on a six-month tramp around the Middle East, I went to spend a night within its walls.

By the time I arrived at the abbey church, it was after eight o'clock on a dark and cold winter night. Two nuns in black veils were chanting from a lectern, while a priest, hidden behind the iconostasis, echoed their chants in a deep, reverberating bass. The only light came from a few flickering lamps suspended on gold chains.

Inside the church I witnessed a small miracle. The congregation in the church consisted not principally of Christians but almost entirely of heavily bearded Muslim men and their shrouded wives. As the priest circled the altar with his thurible, filling the sanctuary with great clouds of incense, the men bobbed up and down on their prayer mats as if in the middle of Friday prayers in a great mosque. Their women mouthed prayers from the shadows. A few, closely watching the Christian women, went up to the icons hanging from the pillars; they kissed them, then lit a candle and placed it in front of the image.

At the end of the service I saw a Muslim couple approach one of the nuns. The woman was veiled; only her nose and mouth were visible through the black wraps. Her husband, a burly man who wore his straggly beard without a moustache, looked remarkably like the wilder sort of Hezbollah commander featured in news bulletins from southern Lebanon. But whatever his politics, he carried in one hand a heavy tin of olive oil and in the other a large plastic basin full of fresh bread loaves, and he gave both to the nun as an offering, bowing his head as shyly as a schoolboy and retreating backwards in blushing embarrassment.

It was an extraordinary sight, yet this was, of course, the old way. The Eastern Christians, the Jews and the Muslims have lived side by side in the Levant for nearly one and a half millennia and have only been able to do so due to a degree of mutual tolerance and shared customs unimaginable in the solidly Christian West. The same broad tolerance that had given homes to the hundreds of thousands of penniless Jews expelled by the bigoted Catholic kings from Spain and Portugal protected the Eastern Christians in their ancient homelands – despite the Crusades and the almost continual hostility of the Christian West.

Every schoolchild knows that the closest medieval Europe ever came to a multicultural or multi-religious society was Islamic Spain and Sicily; but it is perhaps less well known that, as late as the 18th century, European visitors to the Mughul and Ottoman Empires were astounded by the degree of religious tolerance that they found there. As Monsieur de la Motraye, a Huguenot exile escaping religious persecution in Europe, put it, "There is no country on earth where the exercise of all religions is more free and less subject to being troubled than in Turkey." If that coexistence was not always harmonious, it was at least a kind of pluralist equilibrium which simply has no parallel in European history.

I have been thinking of Seidnaya a lot since the atrocity at the World Trade Centre a fortnight ago. Since then we have seen the right-wing "qualities" and the tabloids forming an unholy alliance united in virulent Islamophobia, as a hundred "experts" in Islam have popped up to offer their views on a religion few seem ever to have encountered in person. Conrad Black's Daily Telegraph has been the cheerleader of this tendency – printing a whole series of leaders and comment pieces denouncing Islam, while always being careful to state that the fundamentalists and terrorists do not of course represent the views of "decent Muslims".

So we have seen Patrick Sookhdeo explain to Daily Telegraph readers that Islam is, uniquely, a "religion that sanctions all forms of violence" (which apart from anything else makes one wonder if Mr Sookhdeo has ever read the Old Testament: "I will send my terror in front of you... you shall utterly demolish them and break their pillars in pieces," Exodus 23 v23-24, 27). While in The Times Michael Gove has been writing pieces almost every day warning of the danger from those fanatical Muslim hordes: "They are already there in their thousands. And they are not going to respect weakness any more than Lenin did."

The image these writers are projecting of Islam is ludicrously unbalanced, inaccurate and one-sided. Moreover, such prejudices against Muslims – and the spread of idiotic stereotypes of Muslim behaviour and beliefs – have been developing at a frightening rate in the last decade, something the horrific assault on the World Trade Centre can only exacerbate. Anti-Muslim racism now seems in many ways to be replacing anti-Semitism as the principal Western expression of bigotry against "the other".

The horrific massacre of 8,000 Muslims – some unarmed – at Srebrenica in 1995 never led to a stream of pieces about the violence and repressive tendencies of Christianity. Equally the extraordinary size and diversity of the Islamic world should caution against lazy notions of a united, aggressive Islam acting in concert against "the Judeo-Christian West" .

Islam is no more cohesive than Christendom: neither is it a single, rational, antagonistic force. We are different from the Swedes, the Serbs and the fundamentalist evangelicals of the American mid-west; so the Indonesians are totally different from the Mauritanians, and the Hezbollah headbangers of Lebanon. There is no such thing as "the Muslim mind" – anti-democratic, terrorist, primaeval in its behaviour, or however else it is portrayed – versus a rational, peace-loving "Christian mind". The Islamic world, for better or worse, is much like anywhere else in the developing world.

For 1,400 years there has been a debate within Islam between liberal and Orthodox approaches. What is clear, in recent years, is that insensitive and clumsy Western interference in the Islamic world almost always strengthens the hands of the fundamentalists and the conservatives against those who represent more liberal and enlightened interpretations of Islam.

Already we are seeing Pakistan being pushed to the verge of an Islamic revolution as its military government is bullied into helping the Americans against their Afghan kinsmen. Insensitive rhetoric of the kind we have seen in the press, and the use by President Bush of the word "crusade", can only strengthen the hands of the Islamists, fatally weakening the secular states of the region. Most Muslim states would support a precise surgical assault on Osama bin Laden's al-Qa'ida network; they would not put up with a large-scale ground war in Afghanistan or Iraq. We must proceed with the greatest of caution. Such a war is much more likely to destabilise the entire region than to achieve the intended aims.

The writer's most recent book is 'From the Holy Mountain: travels in the shadow of Byzantium' (Flamingo, £8.99)

Please visit for more. Islam Review

Jihad (Holy War)

Jihad is one of many sacred duties Muslims perform. The word "Jihad" is an Arabic word which means "struggle". Jihad can mean striving to be a better Muslim, but it can also mean fighting in the name of Allah. In this sense Jihad is the struggle for the cause of spreading Islam, using all means available to Muslims, including force. This kind of Jihad is often referred to as "Holy War".

In resorting to force, Muslims will not have any problem finding passages in the Quran (believed by Muslims to be Allah's word), and the Hadith (Mohammed's sayings as recorded by Al Bukhari), that will not only condone violence, but will also demand it.

Jihad in the "Quran"

Allah orders Muslims in the Quran to terrorize non-Muslims on His behalf:

"Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies" Surah 8:60

"Fight (kill) them (non-Muslims), and Allah will punish (torment) them by your hands, cover them with shame" Surah 9:14

"I will instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah" Surah 8:12, 17.

Jihad in the "Hadith"

In the Hadith Mohammed also urges Muslims to practice Jihad.

Mohammed once was asked: what is the best deed for the Muslim next to believing in Allah and His Apostle? His answer was :

"To participate in Jihad in Allah's cause" Al Bukhari vol. 1:25

Mohammed was quoted as saying:

"I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, none has the right to be worshipped but Allah" Al Bukhari vol. 4:196

Mohammed also said:

"The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to paradise (if he is killed)." Al Bukhari vol. 1:35.

Mohammed: an Example

When the ‘prophet' of Islam started preaching his new religion in Mecca, he was conciliatory to Christians and Jews. He told them: "We believe in what has been sent down to us and sent down to you, our God is the same as your God" Surah 29:45. This attitude changed completely after he gained strength. Allah then tells him to:

"Fight People of the Book (Christians and Jews), who do not accept the religion of the truth (Islam), until they pay tribute (penalty tax) by hand, being inferior." Surah 9:29

Regarding Christians and Jews, it seems that Mohammed hated the Jews more. During his life time, Mohammed devoted much of his efforts to get rid of the Jews: "You (Jews) should know that the earth belongs to Allah and his apostle, and I want to expel you from this land (the Arabian Peninsula), so, if anyone owns property, he is permitted to sell it" Mohammed was quoted.

At that time there were in Medina three Jewish tribes. Two of them, the Qaynqa and the Bani-al-Nudair tribes, were besieged by Mohammed's men, blocking their access to food supplies, until they surrendered on Mohammed's terms, which were that their lives would be spared, that they must emigrate from Medina, and that they must deposit all their belongings at a certain place for distribution among Muslims.

The third tribe, Bani Qurayza, was not as lucky. After the War of the Trench , in which Mohammed was besieged by the Qurayshites led, by Abu Sofyan, it was alleged that Bani Qurayza agreed to provide help from within to Abu Sofyan's forces. Although the alleged help did not materialize and the siege eventually ended, nevertheless, Mohammed never forgave them for their willingness to help his enemies.

Muslims turned against Bani Qurayza and blocked their streets for twenty five days. The Jewish tribe expressed readiness to accept the surrender terms which had been conceded to the other two Jewish tribes, namely cession of their belongings and departure with safe conduct.

Mohammed, however, would not consent to this, and instead appointed as an arbiter Saad iben Moaz, a man who was known to be on bad terms with Bani Qurayza. Saad ruled that all Bani Qurayza's men should be beheaded, that the women and children should be sold as slaves, and that all their property should be divided among the Muslims. Trenches were dug in the bazaar of Medina for disposal of the nine hundred Jewish bodies whom Mohammed had spent the night slaughtering. (See Ibn Hisham: The Prophet's Biography ; vol. 2 pages 40 & 41)

If Islam Ruled America

Islam is more than a religion; It is a comprehensive way of life. The Quran (believed by Muslims to be God's word), and the Hadith (Mohammed's sayings as recorded by Al Bukhari), prescribe numerous regulations governing every aspect of the social, political, economical, as well as religious life. The belief that "Islam is a religion and a state" is an integral part of the Islamic religion.

Let's examine what Islam would do if it ruled America. What would happen to the values and institutions that we hold dear?

First: Liberty

The United States was built on the Bill of Rights, established by the founding fathers who came here to escape religious oppression. The Constitution gives citizens the right to express themselves as they please, to criticize the president if they believe he is wrong, to worship in the way they want and to act in any way they see appropriate as long as they don't violate the rights of others.

What would happen to this freedom in an Islamic state? Would the citizens be granted the right to choose the religion they want, or would they be forced into Islam according to the Quranic verse: "If any one desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him, and in the hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost." (Surah 3:85). How about the right of a Muslim to change his own religion? Would he be given this right or would he be punished according to the apostasy rule which states that such a person should be punished by death? Mohammed said "Whoever changes his religion, kill him." Al Bukhari Vol. 9:57

Do Muslim activists want us to have the same rights granted to the citizens of an Islamic country such as Saudi Arabia, where women are not allowed to drive an automobile and no one can worship openly according to any religion other than Islam? Do they want us to be ruled by a ruler such as Khomeini, who issued an order to murder a writer, Salman Rushdie, just because he dared to criticize Islam ? Even in a moderate Islamic state such as Egypt, Christians have to obtain a presidential decree to be able to build a church,or even to repair a toilet in a church. They face discrimination in all aspects of their lives, including education, employment and promotions.

Second: Democracy

Our present system in the USA gives the citizens the right to rule themselves, to write the laws that will govern their lives, to decide the amount of taxes to be collected from them and how it will be spent.

One important principle in this great system is the separation of church and state. Islam, however, is built on an opposing concept, for "Islam is a religion and a state." According to Islam, the Quran is the principal source of legislation: "We have sent down to thee the book in truth, that you might judge men as guided by God." (Surah 4:105). If the Quran is the law, what are some of the rules and regulations that will be imposed? Here are just a few examples:

Stealing: punished by hand amputation (Surah 5:38)

Adultery: punished by public flogging (Surah 24:2)

Drinking: punished by 40 or 80 lashes (Al Bukhari 8:77

Resisting Islam: punished by death, crucifixion or the cutting off of the hands and feet (Surah 5:33)

Prisons in Muslim countries are known to be centers of torture rather than rehabilitation.

Third: Equality

Under our system in the United States, there should be no discrimination among citizens based on sex, color, religion or race. Would Islam treat men and women equally when:

It teaches that men are superior to women (Surah 2:228)

It gives men double the share of the women in inheritance? (Surah 4:11)

It gives the man double the value of a woman's witness in court? (Surah 2:282)

Would Islam treat non-Muslims fairly when:

The Quran calls on Muslims not to befriend Jews or Christians? (Surah 9:30)

The Quran imposes "Jizya" (tribute tax) on Christians and Jews that will be collected only from them and not from Muslims? (Surah 9:29)

Mohammed says that a Muslim may not be killed if he kills a non- Muslim." No Muslim should be killed for killing a kafir (infidel or non- Muslim)."
Al Bukhari Vol. 9:50

Could Islam someday rule America?

Islam is the fastest growing religion in America. Today, the number of followers of Islam in the United States has reached 4 to 6 millions. It is a matter of time before Islam will become the religion of the majority. America, then will be labeled an " Islamic country ", ruled by the "Quran" and the "Hadith" or what Muslims call Sharia (The Islamic code of ethics)


"They do blaspheme who say Allah is one of three in a Trinity, for there is no god except One Alah". Surah 5:73

"And behold! God will say: O Jesus the son of Mary didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah? He (Jesus) will say: Glory to thee, never could I say what I had no right (to say)". Surah 5:116

"(Both) the Jews and the Christians say, 'We are sons of Allah and His beloved'. Say: why then doth He punish you for your sins? Nay, you are but men of the men He has created". Surah 5:18

"O People of the book! Commit no excess in your religion: nor say of Allah aught but truth, Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him. So believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not 'Trinity': desist! It will be better for you. For Allah is One Allah. Glory be to Him: (Far exalted is He) above having a son." Surah 4:171

"In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: who then hath the least power against Allah if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all - everyone that is on earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is in between... For Allah hath power over all things." Surah 5:17

"O people of the book (Christians) commit no excess in your religion: nor say of God aught but truth, Christ Isa the son of Mary was (No more than) an apostle of God." Surah 4: 171

"That they said (in boast) "we killed Christ Isa, the son of Mary"...but they killed him not, nor crucified him." Surah 4:157

"That they said (in boast), . We killed Christ Jesus, the Son of Mary. ,,,but they killed him not, nor crucified him." Surah 4:157

"Then We (God) sent to her Our Angel (in the original: Our spirit), and he appeared before her as a man in all respects." Surah 19:17

"Say the Holy Spirit (The Angel Gabriel) has brought the revelation from thy Lord in truth." Surah 16:102

THE "ALLAH" OF ISLAM

In theory Allah in the Quran has 99 names or attributes such as: Omniscient, Omnipotent, Sublime, Living, Everlasting, Holy, Light, Creator, Powerful...etc. In reality, however, the Quran paints a picture of Allah that in many ways resembles Mohammed's own personality.

Whatever Mohammed wanted, Allah wanted for him. However Mohammed reacted, Allah reacted for him. Aisha, (one of Mohammed's 13 wives) was quoted as saying to Mohammed scornfully:

"O Allah's Apostle, I do not see but that your Lord hurries in pleasing you." Al-Bukhari Vol 7:48

Here are just a few examples: When Abu Lahab criticized Mohammed, telling him, . Perish you, Mohammed! Did you invite us here for this?, Allah immediately sends down Surah 111 to condemn both Abu Lahab and his wife.

"Perish the hands of the Father of Flane (Abu Lahab). Burnt soon will he be in fire of blazing flame. His wife shall carry the wood as fuel."

When Al Walid Ibn Almoghira and Omaya Ibn Khalaf mocked Mohammed and boasted of their wealth, Allah sends down Surah 104 rebuking them.

"Woe to every (kind of) scandal-monger and backbiter who pileth up wealth and layeth it by, thinking that wealth would make last forever. He will be sure to be thrown into the fire (of the wrath) of Allah kindled (to a blaze)."

When Mohammed fell in love with Zaynab, wife of his adopted son (Zaid), God approved of divorcing her from Zaid and joined her in marriage to Mohammed: -

"Then, when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her We joined her in marriage to thee, in order that there might be no difficulty to the believers in marriage to wives of their adopted sons." Surah 33:37

When Mohammed's wives demanded higher allowances out of the booty taken from the massacred Banu Qorayza Jewish tribe, God settled it by telling the wives to either be content with their present allowance or face divorce. (See Surah 33:28 & 29)

When Hafsa caught Mohammed, in her bed, making love to his concubine Mariya, Mohammed tried to please angry Hafsa by promising her that he will stay away from Mariya. At this point Allah intervenes in Mohammed's behalf: -

"O Prophet why holdest thou to be forbidden that which God has made lawful to thee? Thou seekest to please thy consorts. But Allah is oft forgiving, most merciful." Surah 66:1

Islam teaches revenge.

"If any one transgress the prohibition against you, transgress likewise against him." Surah 2:194

Islam does not treat women and men as equal.

"To the male a portion equal to that of two females." Surah 4:11

Islam allows men to beat their wives.

"... As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them, refuse to share their beds, beat them ." Surah 4:34

Islam imposes harsh punishment on wrongdoers.

*A thief is punished by the amputation of hands. Surah 5:38
*A drunk is punished by 80 lashes. Hadith vol. 8:770
*An adulterer is punished by 100 lashes. Surah 24:2

Islam must be imposed by force, if necessary.

"And fight them on, until there is no more tumult (seduction) or oppression, and there prevail justice, and faith in God (and the religion becomes Islam)." Surah 2:193

Apostasy from Islam is punishable by death.

"Whoever changes his (Islamic) religion, kill him." Hadith vol. 9:5

Terrorism is the only way.

"And if you are slain, or die in the way of Allah, forgiveness and mercy from Allah are far better than all they could amass." Surah 3:157

worth reading

'The massacre of 8,000 unarmed Muslims at Srebrenica never led to a stream of pieces about the violence of Christianity'

Maybe because it was Christian nations that came to the Albanians' aid when they attacked Yugoslavia.

Muslims have NEVER forcibly come out to stop their own from genocidal acts against Christians and Jews. If the Arabs had won any of the wars against Israel, would Indonesia have sent troops to make sure the Jews were not subjected to genocide? Would they have demanded the Arab armies allow the Jewish women and children to leave the country unharmed? Or would they have been dancing in the streets?

Even when there was the alliance against Iraq, that was to protect their own self interest, they had zero concern for the plight of the Kurds, who Saddam was using chemical weapons on and slaughtering them wholesale. Why? Because they weren't their "Muslim Brothers."

Let us Rejoice fellow FReepers that they are fixin to get exactly what they deserve.

Peace be not unto those pigs who had anything to do with the murder of 6000 civilians.

Shalom

Ankaboot: Most of the quotes in that article he posted come from the Surah. Do all Muslims accept the Surah, how does that work? Can you explain?

Ankaboot: Most of the quotes in that article he posted come from the Surah. Do all Muslims accept the Surah, how does that work? Can you explain?

Egad -- you mean you really want me to read that canned nonsense? Shall I then go on and post selected, out-of-context passages from Deuteronomy and the Prophets that detail the bloody things God had the Children of Israel do to those who attacked them? I can omit the verses that show why just like these Anti-Islam Brigades do when they quote the Qur'an out of context and not infrequently mistranslate it.

Well, let's see ...

Jihad is one of many sacred duties Muslims perform. The word "Jihad" is an Arabic word which means "struggle". Jihad can mean striving to be a better Muslim, but it can also mean fighting in the name of Allah.

Okay, that's fine, there's the grain of truth. We struggle and exert ourselves, and we also have fought in war, which is "harb," and that has involved some killing, which is "qitaal." As a matter of fact, I used to teach jihad, harb and qitaal at the Seventh Infantry Division Noncommissioned Officer Academy in Korea, and actually was involved in some jihad, harb, and qitaal in the early Sixties, although that was all in the name of the United States of America, not God.

In this sense Jihad is the struggle for the cause of spreading Islam, using all means available to Muslims, including force. This kind of Jihad is often referred to as "Holy War".

And that's pure crap. When Islam was established in Arabia, the Byzantines attacked and were destroyed all the way to the Dark Ages. The Roman Legions simply ceased to exist when the caesars threw them at the muslims. The leaders didn't believe the survivors of the early battles, the stories were too fantastic -- so they kept standing together with their locked shields arranged in squares while massed Arabian war horses and fighting camels charged into them with no regard for casualties: martyrdom was something the Romans did to Christians and Jews, not something they fought to get like the muslims did. It's in the annals: the popular books on the Fall of the Roman Empire look at happier times before the Roman armies started fleeing the battlefield in terror.

But the Romans invaded Arabia, and occupied the Holy Land where they routinely massacred unitarian Torah-faithful Christians and Jews, the muslims didn't go to Rome. We were defending -- and that's where all the battle stories come from.

Elsewhere, Islam spread peacefully through business and integrity, not by the sword. The Byzantines have been lying about it ever since.

"Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies" Surah 8:60

More crap. Here's Surah 8:60-61:

And make ready for them whatever force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to frighten the enemy of God and your enemy and others besides them whom you know not -- God knows them. And whatever you spend in God's Way, it will be paid back to you fully and you will not be wronged. And if they incline to peace, incline you to it also, and trust in God. Surely He is the Hearer, the Knower.

There's that "quotation" in context. It's all like that -- they're liars. God says to defend against aggressors, and to prepare to defend against aggressors -- do you have a problem with that? Does Congress have the power to raise armies? For what? Aggression?

"Fight (kill) them (non-Muslims), and Allah will punish (torment) them by your hands, cover them with shame" Surah 9:14

Here's Surah 9:13-15:

Will you not fight a people who broke their oaths and aimed at the expulsion of the Messenger and attacked you first? Do you fear them? But God has more right that you should fear Him, if you are faithful. Fight them: God will punish them at your hands and bring them to disgrace, and assist you against them and relieve the hearts of a faithful people, and remove the rage of their hearts. And God turns to whom He pleases. And God is Knowing, Wise.

Muhammad literally "fled from the swords, from the drawn sword, and from the bent bow, and from the grievousness of war," as you can read at Isaiah 21:15; and the pagan Meccans attacked Madina the following year, and "Within a year, according to the years of an hireling, and all the glory of Kedar shall fail," Isaiah 21:16. Tema and Kedar -- Madina and Mecca -- are all the way through Scripture, you can read about the successive attacks from Mecca and against Madina without ever leaving the chapel, just look for Tema and Kedar, two of the sons of Ishmael, south of the mountains of Paran. Those attacks didn't stop, they're still going on right here at Free Republic, with the Scribes of the new racism trying to instigate more attacks against American muslims.

Mohammed, however, would not consent to this, and instead appointed as an arbiter Saad iben Moaz, a man who was known to be on bad terms with Bani Qurayza. Saad ruled that all Bani Qurayza's men should be beheaded, that the women and children should be sold as slaves, and that all their property should be divided among the Muslims.

Saad bin Moaz was a rabbi who accepted Islam, that's why he was "on bad terms" with the Bani Qurayzah -- who specifically asked for him by name to be their judge, by the way -- who opened the back of Madinah to the attacking armies. The Bani Qurayzah were an autonomous State within the muslim federation and defenders of Madina at the back, where they themselves said they wanted to defend and were bound to do so by their oaths of office and republican covenants. Saad explicitly sentenced them for treason according to the Torah, that was the verdict of their own Law, you can read it in Scripture.

And that's the way with all this stuff from the Anti-Islam Brigades, the Scribes of the new racism. Lies, distortions, half-truths.

Of course we believe in the Qur'an, which is made up of chapters or books called "Surahs," and Scripture as well -- we know what it says. So do the Anti-Islam Brigades and the Scribes of the new racism -- that's why they lie about both.

was-salaam,
ankaboot
--
Rejoice, muslims, in martyrdom without fighting,
a Mercy for us. Be like the better son of Adam.