Posted by: mystic444 | December 26, 2011

‘Islamist’ terrorism in Nigeria

[Believers] do not revile those they call on beside God in case they, in their hostility and ignorance, revile God. To each community We make their own actions seem alluring, but in the end they will return to their Lord and He will inform them of all they did (Qur’an, Sura 6:108, Abdel Haleem English version).

This past weekend there was another series of bombings of Christian churches, this time in Nigeria. An “Islamist” group called “Boko Haram” is being blamed (reportedly, they have claimed responsibility).

The question is, how is it possible that muslims – those who submit to and obey God and His prophets – could be involved in such an atrocity? If you’ve been reading my blogs, or muslim sites like The American Muslim, you will know that muslims consider such things to be completely contrary to Islamic teaching from the Qur’an. As the above quoted verse says, even abusive speech aimed at the ‘false gods’ of unbelievers (and by implication at the unbelievers themselves) is prohibited by God. No matter how clear it is to a muslim that things or beings which people worship other than God are being worshiped wrongfully, and no matter how much we might despise such worship, we must be careful to remain polite and inoffensive in our speech to ‘unbelievers’.

How much more so, then, is violence against ‘unbelievers’ and their places of worship prohibited! If we are not to even speak abusively, how in the world can we justify physical harm and murder of those we consider ‘unbelievers’ – and destruction of their buildings?

Although this is a clear implication from the above verse, fortunately we are not left to draw conclusions simply from seemingly clear implications. As I have previously shown there are explicit verses in the Qur’an not only prohibiting violent attacks against places of worship, but calling on muslims to fight to protect such buildings.

(2:114, Yusuf Ali English version) And who is more unjust than he who forbids that in places for the worship of God, God’s name should be celebrated?-whose zeal is (in fact) to ruin them? It was not fitting that such should themselves enter them except in fear. For them there is nothing but disgrace in this world, and in the world to come, an exceeding torment.

(22:39 and 40) To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, God is most powerful for their aid;- (they are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, “our Lord is God”. Did not God check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of God is commemorated in abundant measure. God will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily God is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will).

And if those verses aren’t explicit enough, consider this charter Muhammad (peace be with him and his family) gave to representatives from St. Catherine’s Monastery at Mt. Sinai:

This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.
Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by Allah! I hold out against anything that displeases them.
No compulsion is to be on them.

Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.
No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses.
Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet. Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.
No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.
The Muslims are to fight for them.
If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval. She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.
Their churches are to be respected. They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.
No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).

That charter can be found easily with an online search; but I have copied it from an article by Sheila Musaji at “The American Muslim”.

The prohibitions against aggressive warfare, murder, and harming places of worship, are so clear and explicit, that it becomes plain that whoever does these things are not ‘devout muslims’ simply following the commands they believes God has given them in the Qur’an. They are in fact the enemies of Islam, and of all mankind.

I feel sure that I’m not the only one who is deeply suspicious whenever I read of such atrocities attributed to “Islamist terrorists”. Such anti-Islamic actions stink to high heaven not of “Islamists” but of “false flag” operations of “Intelligence” Agencies (Israeli, British, or USA for instance). The public has been so brainwashed with propaganda about the inherent violence of Islam – which supposedly teaches that all ‘infidels’ must be killed – that those “Intelligence” Agencies know that hardly anyone will even raise an  eyebrow when false evidence is placed to implicate “muslim terrorists”. One of their chief aims is to keep piling up ‘evidence’ of how evil Islam is in order to keep up support for continuing invasions and warfare against those barbaric muslim countries.

In this case, the news reports inform us that “Boko Haram” has claimed responsibility. But any thinking person will understand how easy it is to fake such a claim.

However, admittedly, all I have is my suspicion. I have no access to real evidence that this is a ‘false flag’ operation – other than the fact that the actions are so plainly contrary to Islam that it’s very difficult to imagine muslims doing such a thing. So assuming that these bombings of Christian churches in Nigeria were in fact actually done by an “Islamist” organization known as “Boko Haram”, I’ll just repeat that they are in reality the enemies of Islam, not its devout adherents. All those who are in truth devoted and submitted to God and His prophets (especially the “final prophet” Muhammad – peace to him and his family) wholeheartedly denounce those terroristic acts of violence and those who did them, and say with the Qur’an (2:114): For them there is nothing but disgrace in this world, and in the world to come, an exceeding torment.



  1. To answer your question, unfortunately, it’s quite easy.

    We see in the Koran a dehumanization of unbelievers like a beating drum; verse after verse deconstructs non-Muslims or those who reject the prophet.

    Then there are the verses that call for actual violence against unbelievers:

    8:35 – And their worship at the (holy) House is naught but whistling and hand-clapping. Therefore (it is said unto them): Taste of the doom because ye disbelieve.


    9:29 – Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden — such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book — until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled.


    So it’s no surprise that those who read the Koran most carefully are also the world’s most violent terrorists.

    Unfortunately, this violent mindset is deeply rooted in Muslim texts and teachings. As Robert Spencer has shown, Jihad warfare against unbelievers is a normative Muslim belief. These groups are simply an extension of what past Muslim armies have done to non-Muslims. Today, without a centralized Caliphate, disparate groups operate in their own way by waging war against unbelievers as per 9:29.

    Muslims need to be open about what their religion has historically taught and re-interpret their religious teachings in order to peacefully co-exist with the non-Muslim world. That includes repudiating militant, mainstream Muslim teachings on Jihad and also the discriminatory laws and behaviors non-Muslims are subject to in Muslim majority nations that feeds intolerance and fills the ranks of Muslim hate supremacist groups such as Boko Haram and al-Qaeda.

    • I very much like the pseudonym you’re using, “InPeace” – and may God’s peace be with you.

      I wrote a reply to your comment; but it turned out to be so long that I decided to post it as a blog article instead. Perhaps you’ll be willing to read it; and if you still have objections you can post them in the comments on that article.

  2. ousmane Mossad are not involved, try to face your own failings, not live in denial.

    mystic444, you try to place every islamist terror action as a made up conspiracy. Wouldn’t matter, but that Loon Watch probably do not know you’re a Dave Irving fan as I just read at AaJay’s blog about Loon Watch and Dave Irving’s piece. Funny thing Loon Watch have your website on their blogroll, but they probably have not read your blog posts, or know that you’re an anti-semite and think Dave Irving is a ‘historian’ as opposed to a Nazi. No worries. I’ll let them know.

    • Tabetha – You will no doubt be pleased to know that I received notification from Garibaldi at loonwatch (in a very polite way, however) informing me that they have decided to remove the link to my blog site from their blog roll. They did request me to keep commenting, but they didn’t want to confuse people into thinking they agreed with my 9/11 Truth position, and defense of David Irving.

      Naturally I find it disappointing that they would do so based on vilification by a knee-jerk Zionist such as yourself. However that is their decision to make. I was honored that they decided to include me on their blog roll in the first place (I had not requested it, and it took me by surprise). I have certainly never attempted to hide my viewpoints (though the David Irving question never came up until recently) either on my blog or in my comments on loonwatch. Incidentally, I posted a comment on loonwatch defending David Irving against slander before I posted on AJ’s blog.

      I deny the charge that I am an “anti-Semite”; and I believe anyone reading my blog can easily discern that. I am emphatically an anti-Zionist, and deny any legitimacy to the current “Jewish State of Israel”; but in this I am in agreement with Orthodox Jews Against Zionism as well as other Jewish organizations. If I am anti-Semitic, so are those Jews! 😀

      I make no apology for defending David Irving against the charge of being a “Holocaust denier” (and I fail to see how my denying that he is a Holocaust denier can make me a Holocaust denier). He calls into question some of the ‘history’ of that event; but that no more means he denies the event itself than a Civil War historian denying the validity of some events in that war means he denies the War itself.

      As I said in AJ’s blog, I most certainly consider Mr. Irving to be a true historian; even more so than some other historians, because he made painstaking efforts to consult original, primary documents to ascertain the facts. This included learning to read and speak German so that he could go directly to the sources rather than depending on the research and translations of other historians. Whereas other historians, who couldn’t read and speak German, just quoted each other, David Irving quotes Hitler himself, his officers and friends, etc. I insist that constitutes him a true historian, even though you may not like his conclusions.

      I most certainly do NOT ask Jewish people to become “Christians” in the ‘orthodox’ sense which deifies Jesus the son of Mary (peace be on him). God forbid that I should do such a thing. However, I do ask Jewish people to accept Jesus as a human Prophet of God, and also the Arabian Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him and his family). I do not believe that the Jews as a people will ever enter into the fulness of God’s blessings until they believe in and submit to ALL of God’s Prophets including those final two.

      And I do not believe that anyone who supports the lies and vicious murders of the Zionist regime in Palestine has God’s blessing. If that offends you I’m sorry; but I’m not apologizing for holding to that view.

  3. As salamou aleikum. Don’t worry dear brothers and sisters in islam. This is certainly a false flag operation as this used to happen elsewhere like in Iraqi, Pakistan, Egypt, etc. The authors are: the great ennemies of islam: MOSSAD, CIA, etc.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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


%d bloggers like this: