Sunday, August 08, 2010
Anas Zahed, a columnist for the Saudi government daily Al-Madina, criticized Arab and Muslim intellectuals who limit the term jihad to a personal, spiritual struggle and reject its interpretation as waging war against occupation, which he said is its principle meaning.
Following are excerpts:
“Islam without jihad is the product of colonialism and is in no way connected to the Islam of Muhammad. Without question, the greatest jihad is personal jihad, and therein lies the proof that the term jihad in Islam is not limited [solely] to waging war… [But] this does not mean that the term jihad does not include many other aspects, among them those which relate to the individual’s responsibilities to society, and the relations of the [Muslim] society and ummah with societies and countries that declare war on a Muslim state.
“[However,] ever since the American [declaration of] war against what is called terrorism, there has emerged a group of Arab and Muslim authors and academics who try to limit jihad to one dimension, namely to personal jihad. This is exactly what happened in India during the period of British colonialism, when the Qadian sect, also known as Ahmadiyya, emerged and rejected the principle of fighting the colonialists. [They] abolished the duty of jihad in the sense of waging war, and were content with preaching merely personal jihad.“What is striking is that these preachings, which were intended to rescind the duty of jihad from Islam, existed then, and still exist now, alongside the most brutal type of imperialism and occupation ever known to the Islamic world, and specifically to the Arab world. This fact sheds doubt on the intent of the philosophers, authors, and members of the media who took it upon themselves to disseminate a ‘friendly’ Islam that obligates its followers to live with occupation, [population] transfer, the resettlement of land, and the expulsion of its inhabitants by force of arms.
Saturday, June 12, 2010 — by Pamela Geller
After the media feeding frenzy our pro-freedom bus ads created for Muslims in trouble, I thought you should know we received hundreds of emails from Muslims thanking us and added a good number of safe houses too.
I also thought you ought to have a look see at all of the convert to Islam ads that were running across the country.
Zomblog had the best recap of the convert to Islam ads that ran nationwide in a half a million dollar campaign. Where was all the hostile media then? Did they dare attack the Islamic supremacists that ran these dawah ads to convert the kuffir and the infidel? No they stayed quiet and subdued.
But SIOA’s little bus campaign made these spineless, gutless wonders go ballistic on me which just goes to show you two things. First, how sick and in trouble our society already is and that these bigots and supremacists advocate for the killing of apostates because that is the objective of the pro-freedom bus ads. To save lives. But the jihadists don’t like it so out from under their rocks come thire shills, slugs, worms, tools and useful idiots.
Published May 27, 2010
White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan speaks to reporters in the White House Jan. 7. (AP Photo)
The president’s top counterterrorism adviser on Wednesday called jihad a “legitimate tenet of Islam,” arguing that the term “jihadists” should not be used to describe America’s enemies.
During a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, John Brennan described violent extremists as victims of “political, economic and social forces,” but said that those plotting attacks on the United States should not be described in “religious terms.”
He repeated the administration argument that the enemy is not “terrorism,” because terrorism is a “tactic,” and not terror, because terror is a “state of mind” — though Brennan’s title, deputy national security adviser for counterterrorism and homeland security, includes the word “terrorism” in it. But then Brennan said that the word “jihad” should not be applied either.
“Nor do we describe our enemy as ‘jihadists’ or ‘Islamists’ because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community, and there is nothing holy or legitimate or Islamic about murdering innocent men, women and children,” Brennan said.