ISLAMIC SCRIPTURE REQUIRES MUSLIMS TO LIE ABOUT ISLAM BEING NO THREAT TO NON MUSLIMS

REALITY OF ISLAM

Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should generally be truthful to each other, unless the purpose of lying is to “smooth over differences.”

There are several forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, the best known being taqiyya. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause of Islam (WORLD DOMINATION). – in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

The Hadith makes it clear that Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them or protect themselves. These types of lies are:

Taqiyya – Saying something that isn’t true as it relates to the Muslim identity.

Kitman – Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills “it shall be as if he had killed all mankind”) while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of “corruption” and “mischief.”

Tawriya – Intentionally creating a false impression.

Muruna – ‘Blending in’ by setting aside some practices of Islam or Sharia in order to advance others.

 

SARSOUR
Linda Sarsour is a famous deciever in islam who is so successful with deceit that she even leads a feminist movement of non muslims.

 

 

Quran

Quran (16:106) – Establishes that there are circumstances that can “compel” a Muslim to tell a lie.
Quran (3:28) – This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to “guard themselves” against danger, meaning that there are times when a Muslim may appear friendly to non-Muslims, even though they should not feel friendly.

Quran (9:3) – “…Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters…” The dissolution of oaths is with pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.  (The next verse refers only to those who have a personal agreement with Muhammad as individuals – see Ibn Kathir vol 4, p 49)

Quran (66:2) – “Allah has already ordained for you the dissolution of your oaths…”

Quran (40:28) – A man is introduced as a believer, but one who had to “hide his faith” among those who are not believers.

Quran (2:225) – “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts”

Quran (3:54) – “And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.” The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is Makara, which literally means ‘deceit’. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be “compelled” to deceive others for a greater purpose.

Hadith and Sira

Sahih Bukhari (52:269) – “The Prophet said, ‘War is deceit.'” The context of this is thought to be the murder of Usayr ibn Zarim and his thirty unarmed companions by Muhammad’s men after they were “guaranteed” safe passage (see Additional Notes below).

Sahih Bukhari (49:857) – “He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar.” Lying is permitted when the end justifies the means.

Sahih Bukhari (84:64-65) – Speaking from a position of power at the time, Ali confirms that lying is permitted in order to deceive an “enemy.”

Sahih Muslim (32:6303) – “…he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything that the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them).”

Sahih Bukhari (50:369) – Recounts the murder of a poet, Ka’b bin al-Ashraf, at Muhammad’s insistence. The men who volunteered for the assassination used dishonesty to gain Ka’b’s trust, pretending that they had turned against Muhammad. This drew the victim out of his fortress, whereupon he was brutally slaughtered.
From Islamic Law:

Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746 – 8.2) – “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory… it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression…  (See the Permissible Lying section on the Sharia page for more)

“One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie.”

 

 

Though not called taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans (known as Hudaibiya) that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later. Some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.

Another example of lying is when Muhammad used deception to trick his personal enemies into letting down their guard and exposing themselves to slaughter by pretending to seek peace.

Humanity

 

This happened in the case of Ka’b bin al-Ashraf (as previously noted) and later against Usayr ibn Zarim, a surviving leader of the Banu Nadir tribe, which had been evicted from their home in Medina by the Muslims.

At the time, Usayr ibn Zarim was attempting to gather an armed force against the Muslims from among a tribe allied with the Quraish (against which Muhammad had already declared war). Muhammad’s “emissaries” went to ibn Zarim and persuaded him to leave his safe haven on the pretext of meeting with the prophet of Islam in Medina to discuss peace. Once vulnerable, the leader and his thirty companions were massacred by the Muslims with ease, probably because they were unarmed – having been given a guarantee of safe passage (Ibn Ishaq 981, Ibn Kathir v.4 p.300).

Such was the reputation of early Muslims for lying and killing that even those who “accepted Islam” did not feel entirely safe. Consider the fate of the Jadhima. When Muslim “missionaries” approached their tribe, one of the members insisted that they would be slaughtered even though they had already “converted” to Islam (to avoid just such a demise). However, the others believed they could trust the Muslim leader’s promise that they would not be harmed if they simply offered no resistance. (After convincing the skeptic to lay down his arms, the unarmed men of the tribe were tied up and beheaded by the missionaries – Ibn Ishaq 834 & 837).

Today’s apologists often rationalize Muhammad’s murder of poets and others who criticized him at Medina by falsely claiming that they broke a treaty with their actions. Yet, these same apologists place little value on treaties broken by Muslims. From Muhammad to Saddam Hussein, promises made to non-Muslim are distinctly non-binding in the Muslim mindset.

Leaders in the Arab world sometimes say one thing to English-speaking audiences and then something entirely different to their own people in Arabic.  Palestinian leaders routinely tell Westerners about their desire for peace with Israel, even as they whip Palestinians into a hateful and violent frenzy against Jews.  Yassir Arafat even referenced “Hudaibiya” – an admission to conning gullible non-Muslims.

The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off the potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad. This effort worked so well that John Walsh, the host of a popular American television show, claimed well after the fact that their bar trips were evidence of ‘hypocrisy.’

The transmission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is “a bomb on board” but that everyone will “be safe” as long as “their demands are met.” Obviously, none of this was true, but these men, who were so intensely devoted to Islam that they were willing to “slay and be slain for the cause of Allah” (as the Quran puts it) saw nothing wrong with employing taqiyya to facilitate their mission of mass murder.

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) insists that it “has not now or ever been involved with the Muslim Brotherhood, or supported any covert, illegal, or terrorist activity or organization.”  In fact, it was created by the Muslim Brotherhood and has bankrolled Hamas.  At least nine founders or board members of ISNA have been accused by prosecutors of supporting terrorism.

 

The notorious Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is so well known for shamelessly lying about its ties to terror and extremism that books have been written on the subject.  They take seriously the part of Sharia that says “it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory”.  The goal being the ascendency of Islam (and Sharia itself) on the American landscape.

Prior to engineering, several deadly terror plots, such as the Fort Hood massacre and the attempt to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner, American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was regularly sought out by NPR, PBS, and even government leaders to expound on the peaceful nature of Islam.

In 2013, a scholar at the prestigious al-Azhar university decreed that Muslims may wear the cross in order to deceive Christians into thinking they are friendly.  He cited 3:28 which says not to be friends with non-Muslims unless it is a way of “guarding” yourself against them.”Hiding faith” can mean deceiving others about Islam in order to make it appear more attractive.

 

For example, a prominent Muslim activist in the United States, Linda Sarsour, bills herself as a “progressive” and says that gays, women, and religious minorities need not worry about Sharia being imposed.  When a quick check in Muslim countries easily exposes this hoax.

Authors: The religion of peace/ noislamonazis

RELATED ARTICLE: JIHAD IS THE SUBMISSION/KILLING OF NON- MUSLIMS UNTIL ISLAM OWNS THE PLANET.

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s