<<< Previous Page

---

The Devil and Mr. Muhammad

To understand how Muhammad was able to pull this off, you must first understand the principle of abrogation. As happens in all religious codices, Islamic scripture is at times confusing because subject matter will be treated to somewhat conflicting admonishments. So as believers strive to abide, they must know which verses in are authoritative, and which are subordinate. Abrogation describes the Quran’s conflict resolution methodology, which asserts a strictly linear way to determine which of any conflicting verses must be considered valid: The most recent of any two or more contradictory verses always supersedes the least recent.

This practice allowed Muhammad to forget his prior verses (the way he forgot the date of his first revelation, and the way he “forgot” prior Biblical scripture) and still claim legitimacy whenever he became publicly exposed as inconsistent. What was his explanation for inconsistency in supposedly perfected, divine revelation? He invented the notion of the “Satanic Verses” (the explanation of which in a fictional novel got Salmon Rushdie a death warrant (fatwa) from an orthodox Iranian Imam, the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1989). With this principle, he assured his people that if a subsequent verse contradicted a prior one, that the devil must have made him say the first one (So Flip Wilson’s famous “the devil made me do it” line was entirely non-comedic in Muhammad’s desperate attempt to avoid charges of hypocrisy and the perpetuation of a fraud). Literally, Muhammad declared that since all of his prophesy is non-mortal, the older verses must have been interjected by Satan! And therefore, the new verse must be accepted as divine unless it is later replaced.

“Never did We send a messenger or a prophet before thee (including Muhammad), but, when he framed a desire (in prophesy), Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm (and establish) His Signs (Via Muhammad, the final prophet): for Allah is full of Knowledge and Wisdom.” Koran 22.052

Keep in mind, this verse was given in response to a scribe’s objection that another verse the scribe had previously recorded had completely contradicted an older one. This mea culpa verse is reinforced by another which explains the methodology of abrogation.

“None of Our revelations do we abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but we substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?

Also translated as:

Whatever communications we abrogate or cause to be forgotten, we bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?” Koran 2.106

So the only way a sane person can comprehend this statement and others like it (and the only way orthodox Muslims have ever understood their scripture) is to interpret the Quran as strict commandments and unalterable truth with the most recent prophesy superseding the least recent prophesy, and all accepted Islamic prophesy superseding conflicting Biblical scripture. There’s no gray...it’s purely black and white.

This admission of Satan’s work in his theology allowed him to configure a morph-able practice of legislate-as-you-go. The question you should be asking is: if Muhammad could simply cancel prior scripture with new verses, what was the general direction of his prophesy...toward violence or away from it? And, are all peaceful verses abrogated, such as the oft-proclaimed “there shall be no compulsion in religion”? The answers are frightening yet clear.

Muhammad’s wars and the incorporation of violence, oppression, and terrorism into the heart of Islam are embodied in the last Sura of the Quran, Sura 9. Sura 9 consists of two main discourses. The first discourse (vv. 1-37), is called Bara’at. Bara’at means “deliverance”. This discourse basically is the “edict of intolerance” that Muhammad issued one year after his victory in Mecca and only a few months before his death. The other main discourse of this Sura is called Taubah or “repentance” and refers to conditions that he imposed for accepting the repentance of those who committed the (to Muhammad) nearly unforgivable sin of abstaining from going to war with him against the Tabuk!

Eviction Notice

By 622 AD, the Meccans had had enough of Muhammad’s insolence, threats and disrespect for their laws and religions. They literally evicted him from Mecca. Note that they did not kill him for insults only a fraction of which would earn a good throat-slitting by the average Muslim enforcer today, they kicked him out. So much for the theory that 7th century people were less civilized than their modern counterparts. So Muhammad gathered up his band of miscreants and headed to Medina, the city of his mother’s ancestry. This emigration is known as the Hijra.

Muhammad arrives in Medina

Prince of War

To understand his background as a war criminal, you must understand Muhammad’s financial condition. While Muhammad married a wealthy widow and had personal access to her money, he did not have nearly enough capital to establish a movement, let alone an empire. Muhammad did not begin his reign of power in Medina with substantial assets. He therefore could not feed or care for his people, who because of their threatening attitudes toward non-Muslims, were considered outcasts and trouble makers. Muhammad recruited from discontented elements in society, much the way communism, socialism, and fascism has done in the twentieth and present centuries.

Therefore, in order to provide means to sustain his cult, he resorted to piracy on the “high seas” of the desert. His targets were inter-city trade caravans, and he always justified such immoral practices of theft under the shield of his religion. Muhammad’s raiders were fierce, unbridled, arrogant, and murderous. This is how the practice of Islam began, and it became the nexus of the Islamic empire and Islamic ethics ever since. Keep in mind; this was no “Robin Hood”. Wars of aggression became codified in Islam and Muhammad made it an official religious act to allow the taking of slaves and the pillaging of conquered lands. It is Islamic edict, however for the victors to hand over 20% of all captured booty to Muhammad for his personal and arbitrary use, which he claims would be redistributed to the needy. I can’t help drawing comparisons to communism and fascism here.

“And know that whatever thing you gain (in war spoils), a fifth (of it) is for Allah and for the Messenger and for the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer, if you believe in Allah and in that which We revealed to Our servant, on the day of distinction, the day on which the two parties met; and Allah has power over all things.” Koran 8.041

 

Leader of the Assassins

Liberal Peace Treaties: Then and Now

As time went by, Muhammad’s cult of war, slavery, and forced conversions spread. His forces grew and his territory enlarged. Likewise, his ambitions and the need to satiate his empty soul also grew. Among his favorite targets of highway robbery were residents of the city that had cast him out, Mecca. In the year seven of Hijra (629 AD), the beleaguered Meccans were weary of financial losses and risks they faced along the all-important trade routes. Mecca was a large town capable of engaging in a protracted war against Muhammad, but they were traders and craftspeople, not warriors. Muhammad at this time controlled only 1500 armed men. His growing forces were more suited to pillaging and raiding, as opposed to all out war, so there was a kind of stand-off, in which Muhammad pressed forward, and the Meccans desired a truce in order to allow themselves to continue to conduct business and trade (This sounds a lot like the current US and Western attitudes toward warfare today...don’t let it your need for security interfere with your 401K! Perhaps we can learn from the bad judgment of the Meccans).

Muhammad agreed to a truce in exchange for the right to use Mecca as a religious base. He signed a peace treaty with the Meccans (aka the Quraish) in a town called Hudaibiyah, a few miles outside of Mecca. The treaty essentially stated that for 10 years Muslims would not attack the Quraish and their caravans and would not harass them by waylaying their caravans and plundering their properties. In exchange the Quraish would allow the Muslims to perform Hajj starting the next year.

After signing that accord, Muhammad focused his battle strategy in the North and raided the populations of Northern Arabia, starting with Khaibar, which was a prosperous Jewish town (reminiscent of Germany’s invasion of Poland after signing a nonaggression pact with the Soviet Union). All these wars were aggressive on people who did not attack the Muslims and showed no interest in doing so. He used tactics of terror and fierce, brutal warfare to create quick wins. Immediately he then subdued by slaughter many other smaller populations, making it a point of prophesy to cast terror in the hearts of the majority of the Arabs.

“And those of the People of the Book who aided them - Allah did take them down from their strongholds and cast terror into their hearts. (So that) some ye slew, and some ye made prisoners.” Koran 032.026

“And He made you heirs of their lands, their houses, and their goods, and of a land which ye had not frequented (before). And Allah has power over all things.” Koran 036.027

Souls for Sale

But Muhammad’s battle strategy was also an ingenious recruitment strategy. This is what makes Islam a cult. Muhammad essentially made it a focal point of the religion to encourage defeated people to join Islam. If they did join, they received the right to rape, pillage and take slaves from the next town. If they did not join Islam and refrained from the fight, they were either murdered or enslaved. In order to join Islam, all one had to do was pledge to abide by the code of conduct, including Jihad. The initiation pledge was a simple chant, “there is no god but Allah and Muhammad was his prophet”. So, to the conquered people, where was the downside in joining Muhammad’s side?

However, Muhammad never intended to honor the treaty. Like Hitler did with the Soviet non-aggression pact 1300 years later, he would break the agreement as soon as he found it advantageous to do so. Only two years after the treaty of Hudaibiyah Muhammad felt strong enough to attack Mecca and was able to gather 10,000 Muslim men to accompany him. Most of those who accompanied him were newly “recruited” Muslims from vanquished Northern villages. But he was an emerging tyrant and some of the tribes feared that refusing his demand would anger him and they too could subsequently become his victims. In other words they tried to stay out of his harm by appeasing him (this sounds amazingly like present day Europe). Among them were the two big tribes of Sulaim and Tamim. Muhammad couldn’t afford to threaten everyone, just as he was about to sack Mecca, so to sweeten the deal Muhammad offered them a share of whatever booty would be found and whatever slaves would be created from the victims.

But then as today, not all Muslims were narcissistic, sociopaths like Muhammad. Many had consciences, even as they felt forced into his cult. Most Arabians at that time felt a man’s word was his bond. These skeptical new recruits along with outside observers needed to be kept from detesting Muhammad for his transgressions. So they observed Muhammad’s actions regarding violating his own treaty. Muhammad had to act with cunning. His final card was always in his ability to stack the deck, since he was the prophet, he could make up the “divine” rules. The solution to Muhammad’s dilemma was the fortunate timing of prophesy called “deliverance”.

Dr. M. Khan the translator of Sahih Bukhari and the Quran into English writes: "Allah revealed in Sura Bara'at the order to discard (all) obligations (covenants, etc), and commanded the Muslims to fight against all the Pagans as well as against the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) if they do not embrace Islam, till they pay the Jizia (a tax levied on the Jews and Christians) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued (as it is revealed in 9:29). So the Muslims were not permitted to abandon "the fighting" against them (Pagans, Jews and Christians) and to reconcile with them and to suspend hostilities against them for an unlimited period while they are strong and have the ability to fight against them. So at first "the fighting" was forbidden, then it was permitted, and after that it was made obligatory " [Introduction to English translation of Sahih Bukhari, p.xxiv.]

Dealing with the Devil

In this discourse Muhammad declared that all the treaties which he had previously signed with the Pagans are null and that the Pagans had four months of grace to submit to him and after that they would be hunted down and as the verse 2 says; “covered with shame” (code for slaughter). This shame as an offense to Allah authorized Muslims to act as Allah’s protectors and guardians of Allah’s honor.

The verse 3 clearly states that after the lapse of those four months, Muhammad would unilaterally dissolve his treaties and obligations with the Pagans and as Allah’s principal on earth: "will inflict grievous penalty on those who reject his Faith."

Thus Muhammad had his pretext embedded in scripture. Now all Muhammad had to do was to find an excuse to start a war.

In the vicinity of Mecca there were two tribes with a long standing feud between them. One was Bani Bakr who had Meccans for allies and the other was Bani Khoza’a, who sought the protection of Muhammad when he was stationed in Hudaibiyah. While both sides feuded and took lives back and forth, the environment of warfare and alliances had recently changed. Muhammad was now becoming the power to be reckoned with. Some men of the Bani Bakr, in their traditional custom of hostility, effected a petty raid on their enemies, the Bani Khoza’a, and killed a few of them. The victims took their complaints to Muhammad to punish the aggressors. Entreaty was hardly necessary. The opportunity that Muhammad had been waiting for had finally arrived. He immediately gave his word to avenge their blood: "If I assist you not with the same aid as if the cause were mine own, then let Allah never assist me again!" But it was the invasion of Mecca that Muhammad was really coveting.

Instead of Bani Bakr, Muhammad started making preparations to attack Mecca . The conflict between the Bani Bakr and the Bani Khoza’a was a continuing feud between two tribes that were entirely unrelated to the tribe of Quraish, with whom Muhammad had signed his peace treaty. It would be senseless to believe that on such grounds one can find an excuse for Muhammad to annul the treaty and attack Mecca . But to justify this war he accused the Meccans of furnishing weapons to Bani Bakr. The history is written by the Muslims and we have no way to verify their claims against their enemies, but even if this accusation was true, still the Meccans cannot be blamed for selling arms to their allies.

Bloodlust and Empire

But as long as Muhammad kept winning wars, and gave his cult members booty, he was viewed as the ‘real McCoy’. His spiritualism gave his recruits the psychological impetus they needed to overcome guilt, after all Allah...their newly discovered god of the universe...told them they had to do it.

Verse 4 of this Sura refers to this episode where Muhammad spells out his pretext. In this verse Muhammad shifts the blame on his victims and makes his Allah say that the treaties are “not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you.”

Ali read the Bara'at to the crowd of the pilgrims in Mecca one year after the conquest of that city. That year was the last year that the Pagans were allowed to come close to Mecca and its mosque. In this edict Muhammad announced, "the Pagans are unclean; so let them not, after this year of theirs, approach the Sacred Mosque" (Koran 9.28)

From these episodes we can see the cunning nature of Muhammad. It was always he who broke his words and committed all sorts of crimes and then he blamed his victims. But we must remember, to the Muslim, Muhammad’s deeds and words are the epitome of perfection. One cannot even mock Muhammad, much less disrespect his guile. Now you can see why contemporary Muslims behave the way they do, and how it perfectly fits their patterns of behavior since the seventh century. Why they do so much evil and at the same time they justify their crimes and blame their victims. They get this trait from their prophet; the apple never falls far from the tree.

In fact the treaty had another clause that Muhammad had already broken. This clause obliged Muhammad to return the youth of the Quraish who would elope their families and join his marauding gang and obligated him also to let go those converts who wanted to return to their families without coercing them to stay or threatening to kill them as he had ordered in the verse 4: 89 where it says: “if they turn back then take them and kill them wherever ye find them. Apostasy is among the worst offenses in Islam.

Then the verse 5 says: “But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."

So the Pagans were given 4 months to submit to Muhammad, pay tithes (zakat) and send their men to take part in his subsequent Jihads. If they failed to comply they had to prepare themselves to suffer the consequences that were described in verse 5.

Uncharitable Giving

Understand that the zakat is translated as "regular charity" but since this tax was not voluntary, the word charity is a deceitful euphemism. It never called for direct payments to the poor, only to Muhammad (reminds me of present day liberals who worship at the altar of government social welfare programs and deride the notion of personal giving). Muhammad would use it for his personal wealth or for military ventures as he saw fit. Don’t pretend that there were independent auditors about. Even today the "charities" that Muslims pay to the mosques routinely go to finance Islamic terrorism. “Obligatory charity” is an oxymoron. So in reality zakat is not charity at all, but a tax used then, as today to build the Islamic empire.

Stop the Fighting Only When the Resistance Submits

Verse 6, says that “If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.”

But this is nothing more than the law of the conservation of energy. One can only take so many slaves and murder so many people. It is always better to have an ally than to have disenchanted, resentful slaves, or dead bodies to have to deal with. If a conscript would like to become a fellow zealot, welcome him!

Except counter-strikes by cities under siege, the Muslims were never attacked by anyone in any formal, militaristic manner. Muslims were always the aggressors in wars led by Muhammad and afterwards. And they never lost a war, so there is no excuse for them to have continued fighting as a means of reprisal. In fact Muhammad’s wars are called Qazwah and that means: raid, sudden attack, ambush. Muhammad was not in the habit of declaring wars or giving his enemies a chance to assemble. He sometimes used intimidation to win a bloodless coup, but he always attacked his victims with no warning and took them by surprise, when people had gone to the fields after their daily business, the gates of their fortresses were open and they were unarmed.

The following hadith makes this point very clear:

Ibn 'Aun reported: I wrote to Nafi' inquiring from him whether it was necessary to extend (to the disbelievers) an invitation to accept (Islam) before meeting them in fight. He wrote (in reply) to me that it was necessary in the early days of Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a raid upon Banu Mustaliq while they were unaware and their cattle were having a drink at the water. He killed those who fought and imprisoned others. On that very day, he captured Juwairiya bint al-Harith. Nafi' said that this tradition was related to him by Abdullah b. Umar who (himself) was among the raiding troops.” Sahih Muslim Book 019, Number 4292.

The rest of Muhammad’s final chapter of evil reads as if Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot had written it, or just good old fashioned Satan.

“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last day, nor hold the forbidden (that) which hath been forbidden by Allah and his messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jiziyah with willing submission. And feel themselves subdued.” Koran 9:29

“O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be harsh against them. Their abode is Hell,- an evil refuge indeed.” Koran 9.073

Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe!” Koran 9.012

“What! will you not fight a people who broke their oaths and aimed at the expulsion of the Messenger, and they attacked you first; do you fear them? But Allah is most deserving that you should fear Him, if you are believers.” Koran 9.013

“Can you expect for us (any fate) other than one of two glorious things- (Martyrdom or victory)? But we can expect for you either that Allah will send his punishment from Himself, or by our hands. So wait (expectant); we too will wait with you." Koran 9.052

“Allah hath promised to Believers, men and women, gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein, and beautiful mansions in gardens of everlasting bliss. But the greatest bliss is the good pleasure of Allah: that is the supreme felicity.” Koran 9.072

“Ask forgiveness for them or do not ask forgiveness for them; even if you ask forgiveness for them seventy times, Allah will not forgive them; this is because they disbelieve in Allah and His Messenger, and Allah does not guide the transgressing people.” Koran 9.080

The problem is that there are two kinds of Muslims. Those educated in true Islam who understand and accept their evil (terrorists), and those Muslims who refuse to acknowledge their past and present evils. Many so-called “moderates” do not know the history of Islam. They are fed convenient lies and they make no effort to find out the truth. Those rare individuals who can access the truth and find it horrendous and unacceptable must become apostate, a transgression punishable by death. This is why so few come out against Islam. Literally no Muslim can use scripture to declare terrorists to be heretics or even radicals, because the work of Jihadists is the truth of Islam. It is better to shut up and pretend that Islam is capable of some fallacious notion of “reform”.

Terrorists and Islamist supremacists enjoy the deception to which craven pacifists in the West willingly subscribe, because even though they know that there is no scriptural basis for “moderate Islam” any more than there is basis for thinking that a woman can be a little bit pregnant. But if it keeps the heat off of them long enough for Islam to infect America and Europe with the seeds of evil, so be it. Once the “moderate” heretics have become established, the true Islam will simply cast them aside. It’s not like Muslims are up in arms about the disgusting acts of Islamic Jihad anywhere in the world. CAIR, America’s primary terrorist front group has only disdain for American attempts at national security, not for daily Islamic atrocities worldwide. The deluded “moderates” and their leftist allies are “useful idiots” (Stalin’s term for Western liberals) to the cause of Islamic supremacy.

False gods always demand the blood of innocents.

...How mutilated, see, is Mahomet; In front of me doth Ali weeping go, Cleft in the face from forelock unto chin; And all the others whom thou here beholdest, Disseminators of scandal and of schism While living were, and therefore are cleft thus. A devil is behind here, who doth cleave us Thus cruelly, unto the falchion's edge Putting again each one of all this ream...

Picture and verse from Dante’s Inferno