Sahih Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Sahih Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.

Sahih Bukhari (52:65) - The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word (Islam) should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause. Muhammad's words are the basis for offensive Jihad - spreading Islam by force. This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today. (See also Sahih Bukhari 3:125)

Sahih Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'

Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)

Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious

Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah

Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."

Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."

Bukhari (52:73) - "Allah's Apostle said, 'Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords'."

Bukhari (11:626) - [Muhammad said:] "I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes."

Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause..."

Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"

Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'"

Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)."

Muslim (19:4294) - "When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him... He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them."

Muslim (31:5917) - "Ali went a bit and then halted and did not look about and then said in a loud voice: 'Allah's Messenger, on what issue should I fight with the people?' Thereupon he (the Prophet) said: 'Fight with them until they bear testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger'." The pretext for attacking the peaceful farming community of Khaibar was not obvious to the Muslims. Muhammad's son-in-law Ali asked the prophet of Islam to clarify the reason for their mission to kill, loot and enslave. Muhammad's reply was straightforward. The people should be fought because they are not Muslim.

Muslim (31:5918) - "I will fight them until they are like us." Ali's reply to Muhammad, after receiving clarification that the pretext for attack Khaibar was to convert the people (see above verse).

FD wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2016 at 1:03pm:


There is no way *you* could interpret it that way, but then, you were brought up in the western moral matrix. 

The arab, who was brought up in the middle eastern/Islamic moral matrix, can, and often does interpret it that way. 

You need to look further than the end of your nose karnal.  There's a whole world of diversity out there, that you're oblivious to.

... wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2016 at 1:22pm:


Most of the "Arabs" we're talking about were raised and educated in the West, Honky. Many were raised in secular households. Some even converted to Islam.

You're right. I'm quite oblivious to this phenomenon. I have no idea how someone could become so brainwashed that they'd be prepared to carry out a mass murder-suicide.

You?

FD wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2016 at 1:27pm:


We are drawn to become part of groups for the purpose of competing with other groups - when you wilfully deny the existence of any "other", as per the prime directive of liberalism, you become blind to the fact that this is how the human mind operates.

Striving for the good of ones group is how we advanced out of the caves and in to cities, but it could also send us right back there, if we won't defend our group against competing groups.  The arab (and indeed the entire world, besides westerners) hasn't forgotten this, so they will go to any lengths to promote their group, one means by which is in attacking other groups (the west).  Yes, that includes mass murder/suicide

Western Liberalism attempts to deny the existence of any ingroup/outgroups (in theory, but in practice "conservatives" are the only outgroup).  In doing so, not only do they allow competing groups to attack them, they also refuse to allow their own group to defend itself.  If there is no "other" how could you attack or defend against it? 

It wouldn't take a genius to find the end result of that equation - even you could do it, if you allowed yourself to.  Bottom line is, just because you're blind, doesn't mean everyone else is.  The regressive left is like a child playing hide and seek, and hiding by covering their own eyes, thinking if they can't see you, you can't see them. 

... wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2016 at 1:42pm:


Since the cave days, we've come to define groups as nations. For a while there, it was monarchs, and before them, it was those who could recruit the biggest armies. Alexander the Great, for example, conquered much of Central Asia, and was followed by an even bigger conqueror and empire-builder, Ghengis Khan.

These conquerors became kings and emperors. In the 19th century, their kingdoms and empires became nation states. Since then, we've struggled, fought and died for empires and nation states.

We don't yet have a model that allows us to identify and specify vaguely defined groups. The "War on Terror" was deliberately vague. The Jihadists are making use of this problem. They move between nation states. They are driven by their own ideas about what constitutes their group, and these are vaguely defined too. Al Qaida, for example, have different ideas to ISIS. Jihadists are not united.

Your definition of the enemy as Arabs doesn't help. Arabs include Christians and Muslims. Even if you killed all the Arabs, you'd be stuck with other Muslim groups. Persians, for example, were the US' main target through the 80s and 90s.

FD wrote on Aug 3^rd, 2016 at 2:38pm:



We're all part of different and sometimes overlapping groups.  Sometimes relations are friendly between them, sometimes not so.
The point is, there are always groups.   

The idiotic delusion that "we are all one" can only lead to annihilation.  It is a refusal to compete. Surrender.  Submission.  It's not for me to say if western liberals should or should not go down that path, that is their choice.  But nor is it their place to drag many overlapping groups down with them.

Or to put it in a language they (might) understand:

An alternative might be next time cultists are protesting with signs saying "behead those who insult the prophet" they be overwhelmingly and unambiguously outnumbered by representatives of the many millions holding signs saying "not in my name" or something. 

The tiny minority is stealing your airtime. 

The many millions are hardly seen let alone heard.  I know you take exception to that but it is true, the  many millions can hardly gather a token presence.