“Taqiyya” is the religiously-sanctioned doctrine, with its origins in Shi’a Islam but now practiced by non-Shi’a as well, of deliberate dissimulation about religious matters that may be undertaken to protect Islam, and the Believers. A related term, of broader application, is “kitman,” which is defined as “mental reservation.” An example of “Taqiyya” would be the insistence of a Muslim apologist that “of course” there is freedom of conscience in Islam, and then quoting that Qur’anic verse — “There shall be no compulsion in religion.” {2:256} But the impression given will be false, for there has been no mention of the Muslim doctrine of abrogation, or naskh, whereby such an early verse as that about “no compulsion in religion” has been cancelled out by later, far more intolerant and malevolent verses. In any case, history shows that within Islam there is, and always has been, “compulsion in religion” for Muslims, and for non-Muslims.
“Kitman” is close to “taqiyya,” but rather than outright dissimulation, it consists in telling only a part of the truth, with “mental reservation” justifying the omission of the rest. One example may suffice. When a Muslim maintains that “jihad” really means “a spiritual struggle,” and fails to add that this definition is a recent one in Islam (little more than a century old), he misleads by holding back, and is practicing “kitman.” When he adduces, in support of this doubtful proposition, the hadith in which Muhammad, returning home from one of his many battles, is reported to have said (as known from a chain of transmitters, or isnad), that he had returned from “the Lesser Jihad to the Greater Jihad” and does not add what he also knows to be true, that this is a “weak” hadith, regarded by the most-respected muhaddithin as of doubtful authenticity, he is further practicing “kitman.”
from:
http://jihadwatch.org/islam101/
Thanks for the post/info.
'Taqiyya' is weird/hazy concept to a non-muslim (i.e., 'me'). I can't find it in the koran, but I believe reference is made to it in the hadiths.
Basically it states 'its OK for the islamic to lie for the cause'.
This creates a brutal Catch-22 situation for the muslim-in-name-only who wants to 'get along'.
'Your religion says its 'ok to lie' (which being a religion belonging to the 'father of lies' - I guess that is understandable) - therefore how do I know you aren't lying when you say you want to live with us in peace?'
Basically, people need to flee this religion. Any religion that encourages murder, mayhem, and lying to protect the 'honor' of its deity needs to really consider what deity is actually being worshiped...