Skip to comments.New Islamic Caliphate Declares Jihad on … Muslims
Posted on 07/17/2014 7:00:41 PM PDT by markomalley
The new caliphate of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadithe Islamic State, formerly ISISrecently made clear that it means to follow in the footsteps of the original caliphate of Abu Bakr al-Sadiq (632-634), specifically by directing its jihad against fellow Muslims, in Islamic parlance, the hypocrites and apostates, or in Western terminology, moderates.
This came out in the context of the current conflict between Israel and Hamas, with some Muslims asking the newly formed caliphate when it would launch a jihad on the Jewish state.
The Islamic States response? Allah in the noble Koran does not command us to fight Israel or the Jews until we fight the apostates and hypocrites.
On one of the Islamic States question-and-answer websites, some asked why it was not fighting Israel but instead shedding the blood of the sons of Iraq and Syria. The new caliphate responded:
The greater answer is in the noble Koran, when Allah Almighty speaks about the near enemy. In the majority of verses in the noble Koran, these are the hypocrites, for they pose a greater danger than the original infidels [born non-Muslims, e.g., Jews and Christians]. And the answer is found in Abu Bakr al-Sadiq, when he preferred fighting apostates over the conquest of Jerusalem [fath al-Quds], which was conquered by his successor, Omar al-Khattab.
Theres much to be said about this response, rife as it is with historical allusions.
First, it is true. After the prophet of Islam died, a great number of Arabian tribes that had submitted to his rule by becoming Muslimsthe word muslim simply means one who submitsthought they could now renege, and so they apostatized in droves. This sparked the first Ridda, or apostasy wars, waged by Abu Bakr al-Sadiq, who became the first caliph on Muhammads death in 632. For nearly two years, till his own death in 634, his caliphates entire energy was focused on waging jihad on all the recalcitrant Arab tribes, forcing them by the edge of the sword to return to the fold of Islam.
Tens of thousands of Arabs were burned, beheaded, dismembered, or crucified in the process, according to Islamic history, especially by the Sword of Allah. It was only afterwards, under the reign of the second caliph, Omar al-Khattab (634-644), that the great Islamic conquests against the original infidelsthose non-Arab peoples who had never converted to Islam, Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, etc.took place.
Islams war on the apostate, so little known in the West, figures prominently in Islamic history. Indeed, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the most influential Islamic clerics today, while once discussing the importance of killing any Muslim who apostatizes from Islam on Al Jazeera, correctly stated that If the [death] penalty for apostasy was ignored, there would not be an Islam today; Islam would have ended on the death of the prophet.
In short, and as the Islamic State is now arguing, the first and greatest enemy of Islamthe nearest enemyis the apostate and hypocrite, for they are the most capable of subverting Islam from within.
This phenomenon of pious Muslims fighting and killing lukewarm Muslims, or Shia and Sunnis fighting one anotherwhile the original infidel stands by or gets awayhas many precedents throughout history. For example, in its response, the Islamic State further justifies not fighting Israel by saying:
The answer is found in Salah ad-Din al-Ayubi [Saladin] and Nur ad-Din Zanki when they fought the Shia in Egypt and Syria before [addressing] Jerusalem. Salah ad-Din fought more than 50 battles before he reached Jerusalem. And it was said to Salah ad-Din al-Ayubi: You fight the Shia and the Fatimids in Egypt and allow the Latin Crusaders to occupy Jerusalem? And he responded: I will not fight the Crusaders while my back is exposed to the Shia.
All of this history quoted by the Islamic State is meant to exonerate the new caliphates main assertion: Jerusalem will not be liberated until we are done with all these tyrants, families, and pawns of colonialism that control the fate of the Islamic world.
Welcome back to the first century then...
And while the media fixates on the Ukraine and Russia, Obama is the one who empowered this mess. And let’s not forget that Libya is currently in a state of civil war too.
Seventh century, seventh century gov_bean_counter.
Kill the infidels! Until they are dead!/S
Correct. Sleep meds kicking in...
For a while it'll be really, really, bad as groups try to keep the focus on non-Muslims by getting ever more gory headlines but it won't be long before Muzzies are killing one another in ernest in numbers that haven't been seen since Pol Pot.
They serve Satan and are paid the usual Satanic wages, death and destruction.
Typical of muzzies. “Kill! Kill! Kill!”
And when they run out of “infidels”, they start killing each other for not being “Muslim” enough.
Islam, a false religion based on false book that does not make sense, written by an epileptic, thief, murderer, and child abuser.
A religion that denies Christ because “God cannot have a son.” Yet they conveniently forget about the daughters of allah: al’uzzah, allat and manat. I guess daughters are Ok but sons—no chance. That makes sense, the false “prophet” Muhammed loved those women especially the ones he stole from those he murdered, not to mention his child “bride” Aiesha, married at six and consummated at nine years old.
This “religion” is so messed up they cannot decide what is up or down.
Now a jihad against fellow muslims. This is nothing new; they have been doing this since the seventh century. Our only problem is making the west wake up to the Saracen horde. Of course the liberals always want freedom of religion—as long as that religion is not Christianity.
Quarantine. Then let allah sort it out. No, fighting apostates will not make the islamic world stronger. At “best” it will turn the islamic world into a violent band of Amish. at “worst”, the region will self depopulate.
Perhaps the author or some other expert can fill this in but I recall that their Koran has Allah ( in his royal We voice) affirming that he’s given the land of Israel to the Jews. And telling his followers that the Jews would rebuild their land again someday. And either there or in some other Muslim teaching that it is the duty of all Muslims to help the Jews do this, that allah’s will be fulfilled This all from memory so I would appreciate the source quotes and citations Thanks.
muslkims fighting muslims, is that a bad thing?
muslims fighting muslims, is that a bad thing?
That would be the 5th century AD. Islam is the great lie, of all lies.
There are no new caliphates of Islam, only a rejoining. The in-fighting means nothing- only the advancement of the “idea” of Allah.
Islam is the religion of Satan so by definition it's self destructive.
Jihad against fellow Muzzies is nothing new but this time it'll be particularly bad due to the advanced weaponry available, their inability to exist without importing food, the coming oil glut draining the treasuries of the few who subsidize all the others, and most of all, the population density in the major Muzzie centers.
At some point the modern defenses against widespread disease outbreaks will be targeted right along with all the other "Western Infidel impositions" they go after. When that happens, there will be a significant reduction in the number of Muzzsies on the planet.
Satan works in pretty straight forward ways, really. Until a bit of resistance is obviously in the wings, he pushes forward. When he can see signs of resistance building, he'd much rather have the millions in his hand slaughter one another than risk having them learn the Truth while helping him go after still more.
When it was possible that Reagan signaled a turning point, Islamic Jihad was a good option to Satan. Now, Satan obviously doesn't need a false religion like Islam to conquer the West. We're murdering our future generations at an astonishing rate and wallowing in perversion anyway.
The 600s were the 7th century AD. We're in the 2000s, but it's considered the 21st century.
Translation: The Muzzies are about to go hardcore with Islam
This guy is admired in Muzzie land.
Islam was supposedly birthed, in 550-560 AD. Thanks for the information.
That, plus the certain knowledge that if they fought Israel they’d be wiped the **** out.
surprise surprise surprise
Did the daughters of allah undergo clitorectomies? just askin’.
The sixth is my favorite. Five and nine in second and third place.
islam carries within itself...what?
islam carries within itself...what?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the weeds of its own instruction?
the seeds of its own refluxion...
I can’t recall where it was I read that mohammad said the numerous sects of the ‘religion’ he created would ultimately destroy each other.
From Anas that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam) said:
"The Children of Israaeel divided into seventy-one sects and the Christians divided into seventy-two sects. And my Ummah shall divide into seventy-three sects, all of them being in the Fire except one sect."
[Related by al-Haakim in al-Mustadrak with the Talkhees of adh-Dhahabee (1/128), it is related in Majmooul Fataawaa (3/340) and (16/491) of Ibn Taymiyyah and ash-Shaatibee in al-Itisaam (2/189-191) and by al-Iraaqee in Takhreejul Ihyaa (3/230) and Ibn Hajar in Takhreej Ahaadeethul Kashaaf (p. 63). It was authenticated by Shaykh al-Albaanee in as-Saheehah (no. 203-204, 1492) and in Saheeh Sunan Ibn Maajah (no. 3225-3227) and in Dhilaalul Jannah (no. 63-67).]
You’re a gentleman and scholar!
And then we go to the site you quoted from and they are already fighting about which is ‘shirk’ and any minute now the beheading, amputations and stoning should start.
Islamic State = Rubble and Ashes. May allah be pleased with them all. Paradise is going to fill fast.