NYT’s Tom Friedman calls for Islamic civil war, again
Cover via Amazon
Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Tom Friedman and author of “The World is Flat: A Brief History of the 21st Century,” is raising eyebrows for his most recent column in the New York Times calling for a civil war within the Muslim community.
Only Arabs and Muslims can fight the war of ideas within Islam. We had a civil war in America in the mid-19th century because we had a lot of people who believed bad things — namely that you could enslave people because of the color of their skin. We defeated those ideas and the individuals, leaders and institutions that propagated them, and we did it with such ferocity that five generations later some of their offspring still have not forgiven the North.
Islam needs the same civil war. It has a violent minority that believes bad things: that it is O.K. to not only murder non-Muslims — “infidels,” who do not submit to Muslim authority — but to murder Muslims as well who will not accept the most rigid Muslim lifestyle and submit to rule by a Muslim caliphate.
To naysayers like Greg Marx over at the Columbia Journalism Review, Friedman would no doubt say that he’s merely advocating that Muslims have a war of ideas, hash it out, so to speak, and weed out extremists in the process. He’s not literally advocating for a Islamic civil war. Still, is this kind of rhetoric a glib treatment of the real possibility of more violence stemming from at least a portion of the Muslim community?
*Update
Daniel Larison at the American Conservative has a response to Friedman’s column that is worth checking out. Here’s a snippet…
In the same column in which he complains that Westerners treat Muslims as nothing more than objects and deprive them of agency and responsibility, he urges on the mass slaughter of said Muslims by other Muslims to get them to stop believing “bad things.” In short, he won’t credit them with being morally responsible agents until they embark on a bloody religious war of his design.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Islam needs the same civil war. It has a violent minority that believes bad things: that it is O.K. to not only murder non-Muslims — “infidels,” who do not submit to Muslim authority — but to murder Muslims as well who will not accept the most rigid Muslim lifestyle and submit to rule by a Muslim caliphate.
……………………………….
Islam forbis killing non muslims or tertorise them.There is no prophet saying or verse in Quran that order muslim to do such a criminal act.
Kill the infidel’ is the phrase many people believe is the ideology that Muslims have towards the non Muslims.
There are some specific verses that are very often “snipped” out of context, either by those trying to malign the faith, or by misguided Muslims themselves who wish to justify their aggressive tactics.
For example, one verse (in its snipped version) reads: “slay them wherever you catch them” (Qur’an 2:191).
But who is this referring to? Who are “they” that this verse discusses?
The preceding and following verses give the correct context:
“Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loves not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. But if they cease, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevails justice and faith in God; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression”
(2:190193).
These verse were revealed at a time when Muslims of Madinah were under constant attack from the Makkans. An example would be when the Makkans conducted the public crucifixion of the companion of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), Khubaib bin Adi. These would be classified as ‘terrorist activities’ according to the modern usage of the term. So what does this verse say in this context? “Fight in the cause of God those who fight you”, “unless they (first) fight you there” – the context of this verse applies to those who initiate the attack against Muslims. And even after they attack, the verse makes it clear: “But if they cease, God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” And it also makes clear the purpose for what Muslims fight: “fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God”. It is the duty of Muslims to defend humanity from oppression and persecution and to establish justice. Muslims believe that God has placed us here on earth as his deputy or viceroy, and thus, it is our duty to enjoin the good and forbid the evil, to establish peace and justice in the land. Dr. Maher Hathout writes the following on verses 2:190-194:
These verses were applicable to a particular situation or if, hypothetically, the same situation was to be repeated? Historically, fighting back against the aggressors was prohibited during the thirteen years of the Meccan period. After the migration to Medina and the establishment of the Islamic state, Muslims were concerned with how to defend themselves against aggression from their enemies. The aforementioned verses were revealed to enable them to protect the newly formed state by fighting in self-defence against those who fought them. However, the Qur’an clearly prohibits aggression. The verses explain that fighting is only for self-defence. Thus, a Muslim cannot commit aggression and kill innocent men, women, children, the sick, the elderly, monks, priests, or those who do not wish to fight. A Muslim is also mandated not to destroy plant life of livestock. (Hathout, Jihad vs. Terrorism; US Multimedia Vera International, 2002, p.49, emphasis added)
The historical context is something that must always be considered where developing an understanding of Qur’anic verses. Without knowing the circumstances behind the revelation, one cannot apply the verse as accurately.
As for who kill civilians,these people represent themselves and deviate from the prophet teachings who forbids killing innocents .It is important to distinguish between the deviant sects al khwarij and muslim .Al khwarije who say that they are true muslims and who revolt against the rulers. They believe that they should not have the right to obedience .Moreover,fighting without his permission is a transgression against his rights and that lead to chaos.
They consider every other muslim to be unbeliever and they are the true muslims in the world.They say if u leave them u leave islam.look at their site.
They require every member to pledge his/her allegiance (baiy’ah in Arabic) to their current leader, .This is rejected by scholars and by muslims.
Pledging allegiance can only be given to the leader of the Muslims, and it is given by the decision makers – i.e., the scholars and people of virtue and status and the comon folk .
Another point of benefit is that the Muslim should be aware that the principles of many of these sects are still alive and propagated by certain individuals and/or groups, and accordingly the believer must be cautious
And what shows the danger of extremism and deviation from the truth and staying away from what Ahlus Sunnah wal Jama’ah is upon, is the statement of the Prophet ( صلى الله عليه وسلم ) from the Hadith of Jabir (May Allah be pleased with him):
إنَّ أخوفَ ما أخاف عليكم رجل قرأ القرآن،
حتى إذا رُئيت بهجته عليه وكان ردءاً للإسلام،
انسلخ منه ونبذه وراء ظهره، وسعى على جاره بالسيف ورماه بالشرك،
قلت: يا نبيَّ الله! أيُّهما أولى بالشرك: الرامي أو المرمي؟ قال: بل الرامي
Indeed what I fear most for you is that a man reads the Qur’an until magnificence is seen upon him and he is a support for Islam and it is withdrawn from him and he throws it behind his back and strives against his neighbor with the sword and he accusing him of shirk. I said O’ Prophet of Allah, which one is more worthy of (the accusation of) shirk, the accuser or the accused? He said: The accuser .The prophet Mohamed said
Whoever rebels against my Ummah and fights the righteous and unrighteous of them, does not avoid its believers and does not fulfill his obligation to whom he has a contract, then they are not from me and I am not from them . [Muslim 1848
It is worthy to mention that
the International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS), headed by the world-renowned scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi denonced terrorism.
The International Union for Muslim Scholars (IUMS) was really appalled to see the bloody incidents both inside and outside the Muslim world such as those that took place in Egypt, London, Turkey, and other countries. Such grisly incidents left behind great numbers of innocent civilian casualties who were killed in cold blood without any sin committed on their part. The IUMS, which is keen to clarify Islam’s stance concerning these grisly bombings, decides the following for the whole Muslim Ummah and other nations:
1. All divine religions in general and Islam in particular assert the sanctity of human life and strongly prohibit aggression against it. All divine religions clearly state that the blood of all human beings is sacred and unlawful to shed unless the human being himself committed a criminal act or caused corruption in the land or transgressed against the lives of others. The Qur’an, along other divine scriptures, states that (Whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if be had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind) (Al-Ma’idah 5:32).
2. Islam considers killing others and taking their lives as one of the gravest of sins in the sight of Allah. Such heinous sin and abominable crime lead to Allah’s curse in this world and His severe punishment in the Hereafter. In addition, committing such a crime is a strong support for the application of retaliation or qisas on the perpetrator and it makes no difference whether the one they killed is a Muslim or a non-Muslim. Allah Almighty says, (Whoso slayeth a believer of set purpose, his reward is Hell for ever. Allah is wroth against him and He hath cursed him and prepared for him an awful doom) (An-Nisaa’ 4:93).
The above divine warning encompasses all those who utter the Shahadatayn (Two Shahadahs)—testifying that there is no God but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) strongly condemned `Usamah ibn Zayd when he killed a man in one of the battles after the man had uttered the Shahadatayn. The Prophet addressed `Usamah saying, “Have you killed him after he uttered the Shahadatayn, `Usamah!” To this `Usamah responded, “Prophet of Allah, he uttered the Shahadatayn for fear of the sword (that is, in order to save himself from being killed).” The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) then said, “Have you split his heart into two pieces?”
Thus, we are to deal with people as Muslims as long as they are apparently known to be Muslims. The above ruling also applies to those who have a permanent pledge with Muslims. This category of people is named by Muslim jurists as Dhimmi or non-Muslims living under the protection of the Muslim state. This category is protected by the covenant of Allah, His Prophet, and the whole Muslim Ummah. They are known, according to all jurists, as ahl dar al-Islam or the people belonging to the abode of Islam; they are citizens who enjoy the same rights and bear the same responsibilities as Muslims.
There is another category of people who have an interim pledge with Muslims, such as those who enter Islamic territories through the state authorities or any other recognized body such as travel agencies, etc. The individual pledge of security of a single person is as effective as the state pledge, and it prohibits any violation or cancellation of this individual pledge.
With this in mind, Islam considers the act of issuing an entrance visa to a tourist to be a pledge of security given to this tourist, and hence it categorically prohibits transgressing the security given to tourist. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is reported to have said, “Anyone who kills a Dhimmi will not smell the fragrance of Paradise ” (Al-Bukhari).
3. Islam, which prohibits killing innocent civilians, also prohibits terrorizing the secured and terrifying the peaceful. Islam considers it a basic right that everyone enjoys security regarding himself, his family, his property, his religion, and all other special rights that man strives to protect. Islam ranks safety as one of the top blessings Allah favored man with, and it considers committing any violation against this safety as an act that entails Allah’s curse in the Hereafter and His punishment in this world. It is no wonder that Islam stresses the punishment of theft and highway robbery, as such crimes threaten the security of people.
Islam also prohibits terrorizing the Muslim even if it is done jokingly. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) stressed this when he said to a Muslim who jokingly terrorized his brother, “It is not permissible for a Muslim to terrorize another Muslim.” In this hadith, the Prophet did not intend terrorizing Muslims in particular, but the word Muslim was mentioned in the above hadith because the context of the situation was that a Muslim terrorized another Muslim and not somebody else (that is, a non-Muslim). With all this in mind, the Prophetic hadith assures “The believer is the one to whom people feel secured regarding their blood and property.”
4. The Islamic Shari`ah basically asserts openly that every man is responsible for his own actions, mistakes, and crimes. A person is not responsible for mistakes or crimes done by others unless he is personally sharing in them. Allah Almighty says, (Each soul earneth only on its own account, nor doth any laden bear another’s load) (Al-An`am 6:164). Moreover, the Qur’an declares that this ruling is shared by all divine scriptures, as Allah Almighty says, (Or hath he not had news of what is in the books of Moses. And Abraham who paid his debt. That no laden one shall bear another’s load) (An-Najm 53:36-38).
Based on this, it is not permissible to punish the innocents because of an act committed by the guilty or to punish the group for a sin committed by a handful of its individuals. Taking the rough with the smooth, as far as the issue in point is concerned, is an erroneous judgment that does not belong to the Shari`ah. The Islamic Shari`ah has nothing to do with the acts of those few deviated people who follow its teachings but change them from their proper contexts. They claim to punish people because of injustices done by their rulers.
Reality bears witness that the victims of those crimes are the peaceful citizens such as those who were killed in London bombings recently while going to their work in the morning or going to their schools, universities, etc. The same are those victims killed in the bombings that hit the Egyptian Red Sea resort of Sharm El-Sheikh. Those innocent victims are peaceful Egyptians and tourists given the pledge of security as clarified above.
5. The ethical constitution of legitimate war in Islam dictates that it is prohibited to kill anyone except those who are fighting. In this legitimate war, fighting is restricted to face-to-face confrontation between Muslims and the army of the aggressors. Upon seeing a woman killed in the battlefield, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) renounced the act and said, “That woman shouldn’t have been killed anyway!”
Moreover, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade killing women, children, the aged, monks in their hermitages, farmers in their lands, and traders. This ruling of prohibition is stressed by the Qur’anic verses, the Prophetic hadiths, as well as the directives given by the Rightly-Guided Caliphs.
How come that people who neither carry a weapon nor participate in war against Muslims practically or verbally are killed?
6. The IUMS has previously issued a fatwa related to the prohibition of kidnapping innocents who have nothing to do with war. Even if it happened that an innocent is kidnapped, then he should be dealt with honorably, as he enjoys the same honorable status of treatment that should be rendered to the prisoners of war (POWs) whom the Prophet ordered his followers to treat kindly, as Allah Almighty says regarding them: (and afterward either grace or ransom till the war lay down its burdens) (Al-Ahqaf 47:4).
For the above, the IUMS has asked the kidnappers to fear Allah regarding those who kidnapped them, and to treat them honorably until they set them free. The IUMS took part in releasing the French and Italian hostages in Iraq, and it has condemned the killing of the head of the Egyptian diplomatic mission in Iraq, too, and these days it calls for the release of the Algerian diplomat in Iraq and those kept with him
Muslims best example and model is the prophet Mohamed.It is the reliable second source after Quran.The prophet Mohamed may peace and blessings be upon him and all prophets enjoins on muslims all what is good and forbids what evil .He assertes and cares that muslims should be be compassionate , helpfiul , generous and caring .He loves those who respect and help the eldery , orphans , widows.In his tradition and sayings he never order the killing of innocents and civilians.He ensures to non muslims their religious freedom and right.Unbias written historical books are the best evidence.
No wonder a non Muslim like Michael H Hart acknowledged that Muhammad is the number one people in the world beyond Jesus and any other men that ever exist.
If a non Muslim thought Muhammad is the number one, then a Muslim that testifies Muhammad as the messenger of God should also know that Muhammad is a perfect man that free from sin or error. That is why Muslims should learn the story of Muhammad and follow his examples.
Dear friends
A Muslim is peaceful.he hates no one nor he brings harm to even an aunt .He likes MAN and respects his belief.
PACT OF NAJRAN between prophet Mohamed and christains of Najtan.Those who kill innocent civilians should be punsihed for deviating from the teaching of the prophet and for terrorising our brothers christain and non muslims.
In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.
This pact of Muhammad (S.A.W.), Prophet of Allah is for the people of Najran.
1. Although Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.), had the power to take a share from their produce, gold, silver, weapons and slaves, he treated the people generously and leaving aside all these things, he fixed for them two thousand hullas of the value of one Auqia each, annually — one thousand (to be supplied) in the month of Rajab and one thousand in the month of Safar.
2. Each Hulls shall be of the value of one Auqia and whichever is of more or less value, shall be accounted for accordingly.
3. If instead of Hullas, something like armours or horses or riding camels are given it shall be accepted in accordance with its evaluation.
4. It shall be obligatory on the people of Najran to arrange for the stay of my workers. But they will have to pay taxes within one month. They should not be made to stay far more than a month.
5. If due to a rebellion in Yemen we have to wage war, the people of Najran will have to lend 30 armours, 20 horses and 30 camels. If any of the animals are lost, the people of Najran shall be provided substitutes.
6. The lives of the people of Najran and its surrounding area, their religion, their land, property, cattle and those of them who are present or absent, their messengers and their places of worship are under the protection of Allah and guardianship of His Prophet.Their present state shall neither be interfered with, nor their rights meddled with, nor their idols deformed. No Usqu (Bishop) Rahib or Waqa, shall be removed from his office. The intention being that no change in whatever state every one is; shall be made (status quo shall be maintained).
7. Neither the people shall be punished for any past crime or murder, nor shall they be compelled to do military service. Neither shall Ushr be imposed on them nor any army shall enter their area.
8. If any one of the people of Najran demands his rights, justice shall be done between the plaintiff and respondent. Neither oppression shall be allowed to be perpetrated on them, nor shall they be permitted to oppress any one.
9. Whoever from the people of Najran takes interest alter the conclusion of the pact, shall be excluded from my assurance.
10. No one from the people of Najran shall be implicated in the crime of someone else.
11. Whatever has been written in this pact, Allah and Muhammad His Prophet (S.A.W.) are guarantors for it, unless there is an order from Allah, in this connection, and as long as the people of Najran remain faithful and adhere to the conditions which have been made for them, except that some one compels them to do otherwise.
Seal: Allah’s Prophet Muhammad
Note: Najran which was the biggest centre of Christianity in Arabia is a district of north Yemen. There was a very splendid Cathedral which the Christians regarded as their Kaaba. Large estate attached to the Cathedrals was a source of big income. When the people of Najran received the letter of the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.), they sent a delegation to the Prophet (S.A.W.), which studied the conditions and had discussions. The Holy Prophet (S.A.W.), invited them to a Mubahila (Invocation of Allah’s Curse an the party which is in the wrong) and asked them to pray to Allah along with their kith and kin, to send His Curse on the liars. The delegation did not accept the challenge lest they should be destroyed and agreed to conclude a pact.