US Conservatives dispute Bush’s portrayal of Islam

I've seen the graphics, but thanks for taking the time to post them...but it doesn't address the point.

My friend claims that anyone who does not believe that Jesus is the Son of God is th anti-Christ.

She will not answer whether she believes the Jews to be the anti-Christ.

BTW...calling for re-inforcements?

Now awake and thoroughly enjoying Jael dancing around the logical conclusion of her argument, let me reply to various posts made while I was asleep.

Regarding my Biblical exegesis, all I said was that Abraham's promise from God was to make him a great nation. I simply pointed out that the verse could be applied to the Ishmaelites, as they also received divine sanction to create a "great nation," i.e. the Arab nation. I then simply quoted several verses from Genesis 21 to prove this claim.

I never claimed that the Ishmaelites (and by extension the Arabs) were the nation from which all others would be blessed (i.e. the line from which the Messiah would spring), merely that they were a "great" nation.

Regarding Stephen Schwartz, IMO he is not nearly as bad as many here on Free Republic when it comes to Islam. Of course, his unforgiveable sin, at least in the eyes of many of our Balkan posters, was that he accepted some of the more commonly-held "truths" about the Balkans, Serb actions therein, and the KLA at face value and failed to openly campaign for Slobodan Milosevic's release. This may damn him in the eyes of Destro and others, but I would consider that Emerson, Gunaratna, and a great many others also report Serb atrocities in the Balkans (which are disputed in just about every Balkans thread that crawls up around here) at the same time they talk about al-Qaeda involvement there. Of course, while one may disagree with such reports, that doesn't prevent such individuals from being accurate on other matters.

I readily disagree with Schwartz's characterization of Khomeini (just as I disagree with many Freepers' lionization of Milosevic, a discussion for another thread), but that doesn't necessarily mean that the man is not an excellent source of information on Wahhabism, Salafism, and its role in formenting al-Qaeda's current jihad. Also, even some Freepers have to admit that many of the sources that Destro cites are pretty obscure and are not reported in the mainstream press. Schwartz may simply not be aware of the material at hand, just as I was not before I came to Free Republic.

"When the 4 million don't rise up and destroy the cancer in their midst, it is only logical to assume they agree with them..."

Okay, now apply that logic to the American black community. They don't rise up against racist demagogues like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. Yet whenever a focus of opposition like BOND is formed they seem to rally to it. More to the point, those Palestinians who oppose Hamas or the Palestinian Authority must do so very carefully, as exposing such views will generally get them hung from the rafters as "collaborators." I think that if a pro-democratic movement was ever successfully formed within the Palestinian Authority, people would rally to it, just as they now are in Iran.

"Your guru Daniel Pipes estimates that only 10% of the world's muslims support Bin Laden..."

I would actually go as far as to say it might even be as high as 25%. But I see no need to kill or advocate the killing of the other 75% simply because of the actions of the 25%.

"I suggest you and your "moderate" muslim friends take care of your "problem" soon, or you will be hearing the phrase collateral damage a lot more than you bargained for..."

Um, the Middle Eastern nations that aren't hopelessly anti-American are. Turkey, Uzbekistan, Algeria, Tunisia, Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Morocco, Malaysia, and even (post-Bali) Indonesia. Algeria alone has lost over 100,000 of its own citizens in a brutal civil war between the government and the al-Qaeda affiliates GIA and GSPC. And guess who's involved in active fighting against the fanatics? Fellow Muslims who are determined to stop their co-religionist from turning Algeria into the next Afghanistan. Do you want the US to kill them too?

"Okay, now apply that logic to the American black community. They don't rise up against racist demagogues like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton."

Welcome back.

I was trying to find some pictures on the internet to answer my friend Yehuda's post, but it looks like the net has been sanitized, and I could not find a single shot of Reginald Denny being beaten into a coma while people cheered on.

Did black American leaders demand that the black American community rise against these hoodlums? Or did they try to justify the actiions of the rioters?

In light of the obvious answer, do we now need a "final solution" for all blacks as well?

I have a post bookmarked by a fellow FReeper, that addresses this issue better than anyone I have ever read, if you allow me, I'll repost it here for you...and anyone else who may be reading.

~~~~~~~~~~

A small points: 1 billion, 2 billion - on your original point, the folly of going to war with [fill in the blank] billion people, it hardly makes much difference. Either way it's a whole bunch of people to be fighting.
I am a Protestant Christian, and I don't believe that Islam is a path to salvation. That doesn't mean that I claim to know who will be saved in the end; but whoever turns up in the Kingdom of Heaven will be there, I believe, because of Jesus, not because of anything or anyone else.
However, I don't think that it follows from that belief that Islam is pure evil. There is such a thing as God's providence, and it can do all sorts of complicated stuff. Providence can do amazing things with the most flawed material; it can use the most unlikely instruments to provide earthly blessings.
Greek paganism wasn't the way of salvation either, but God blessed the world with beauty and insight through the Greeks. Do those who think that because Islam is not Christianity, it is necessarily demonic also want to burn all the works of the pagan demon-worshipers Plato and Homer and Aeschylus?
Is Islam the way of salvation? No. Is it better for the world, in this life, that people not be pagans but believe, even wrongly, in one God who will judge our deeds in the end? Possibly - depends on circumstances.
No system of belief and practice that was all Taliban, all the time, could have lasted this long and won the loyalty of so many people. Radical Islamists are fighting human nature, not trying to redeem it, and that simply doesn't work in the long run. If that were all there was to Islam, it would have been powerful for about the length of time Soviet Communism was powerful, another ideology that made war on human nature.
There is no question that Islamic theology justified war and conquest for Muslim leaders through the centuries. But what did military jihad mean to the average Muslim villager in the Middle East or India or Central Asia during that period? Very little. The vast majority of Muslims in history, especially after the first couple of centuries, were never near a jihad. Islam for them was a moral and social code, a way of living, that "worked" in the sense that it held together communities in which human beings could live and work and deal with one another. In other words, communities unlike Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.
Furthermore, whatever some of our friends insist the Koran really says, it is indisputable that mainstream Muslims have had different views on all the present-day questions through the centuries. There are old Islamic communities in Central and East Asia that have been far from obsessed with the letter of sharia. Sufism has been extremely influential through centuries in shaping the piety of ordinary Muslims, and it clearly stresses the spirit over the letter.
So who exactly are we at war with? Are we at war, for example, with the US-based Sufi Sheikh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani of the Islamic Supreme Council of America, who urges US Muslims to be patriotic Americans as a religious duty, and supports the separation of Church and state? Kabbani has been warning against Islamist extremism for years, and has been the object of a concerted smear campaign by CAIR and all the other lovely groups on which he blew the whistle. His organization has a whole section on their webpage denouncing and exposing Islamism.
Or are we at war with Khaled Abou El Fadl, the great Muslim legal scholar whose life has been threatened repeatedly by the Islamofascists and their sympathizers?
These men do not represent modernist or marginal streams of Islam. Sheikh Kabbani is the American leader of an old and venerable Sufi order. Abou El Fadl is not a "liberal" Muslim, as the New Republic headline read, but a representative of one of the major traditional schools of Islamic theology and legal interpretation.
Islam has enormous problems dealing with the modern world, but there is reason to think that the sheer quantity of Saudi oil money spent propagating the Wahhabi cult has played a big role in pushing those problems to crisis levels. Wahhabis hate Sufis and traditional Islamic scholarship; their idea of an interpreter of Islam is a power-hungry hater like Bin Laden, an engineer who knows squat about Islamic tradition, but writes manifestos and makes tapes and promotes the blind rage against reality which Wahhabism makes the essence of Islam.

The poster's FReeper name is Southern Federalist.

Yeah, I saw that post by Southern Federalist before.

Nice to be back :)

Just some thoughts and clarifications,

I am honored my posts are remarkable enough to remember and cite.

As for my sources, I post mostly from AP, Reuters and the like.

As for Milosevic, I have never "lionized" the scum bag, but even though he is a scumbag the Serbs were justified to try and remain within the nation they were born in and failing that not to live in nations to be run by the offspring of SS Einstatsgruppen.

And what really motivates me, angers me, is that during the Clinton years NATO and al-Qaeda made common cause, I think the criminal word for it is collusion.

I am not a Serb, nor of Yugoslav extraction. My motivation comes from what I described in the last statement. If not for the al-Qaeda element, Kosovo and Bosnia for me would have been just another messed up occupation like Haiti that never directly affected my life.

But in the Balkans that collusion with the jihad increased the probability of 9/11's success. I want heads to roll even if they be of the American extraction. That includes men like Stephen Schwartz Suleyman Ahmad , whose latest articles by the way are directed as a counter to efforts like mine on FreeRepublic (for were else one find posts implicating the Bosnian and Albanian Muslims with al-Qaeda?).

Sometimes wondering in the wilderness is not a bad place to be. Sooner or later the truth catches up to you and you become legit: Evan Kohlmann, a senior terrorism analyst at the Investigative Project, a Washington D.C.-based counterterrorism think tank established in 1995. He is currently writing a book, The Martyrs of Bosnia: Al-Qaida’s War of Terror in the Balkans.

"Are you one of these brave guys who only go after groups smaller than yours?"

Yeah, that's why I am arguing with three people all by myself.

I love the fact that you excuse off openly calling others in, then accuse me of going after groups smaller than mine.

Classic Clinton!

"The American black community hasn't been killing thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of "non-blacks" in the last few decades for the "crime" of not being black."

So, you are unwilling to blame a small portion of blacks for the killing rampages that blacks have been reveling in for the past two decades (or longer) in Africa, but you are willing to blame a billion Muslims for the actions of a small portion of Muslim extremists.

You are real PC in your generalizations, aren't you?

It all depends on the definition of peace.

It looks like the islamic definition is paralell to that of the communists.

Peace is the lack of opposition to communism!

Just some thoughts and clarifications,

I am honored my posts are remarkable enough to remember and cite.

As for my sources, I post mostly from AP, Reuters and the like.

As for Milosevic, I have never "lionized" the scum bag, but even though he is a scumbag the Serbs were justified to try and remain within the nation they were born in and failing that not to live in nations to be run by the offspring of SS Einstatsgruppen.

And what really motivates me, angers me, is that during the Clinton years NATO and al-Qaeda made common cause, I think the criminal word for it is collusion.

I am not a Serb, nor of Yugoslav extraction. My motivation comes from what I described in the last statement. If not for the al-Qaeda element, Kosovo and Bosnia for me would have been just another messed up occupation like Haiti that never directly affected my life.

But in the Balkans that collusion with the jihad increased the probability of 9/11's success. I want heads to roll even if they be of the American extraction. That includes men like Stephen Schwartz Suleyman Ahmad , whose latest articles by the way are directed as a counter to efforts like mine on FreeRepublic (for were else one find posts implicating the Bosnian and Albanian Muslims with al-Qaeda?).

Sometimes wandering in the wilderness is not a bad place to be. Sooner or later the truth catches up to you and you become legit: Evan Kohlmann, a senior terrorism analyst at the Investigative Project, a Washington D.C.-based counterterrorism think tank established in 1995. He is currently writing a book, The Martyrs of Bosnia: Al-Qaida’s War of Terror in the Balkans.

Just to clarify.

First of all, I wasn't referencing you specifically in #203 when I was referring to "some Freepers" or even "Balkans posters" when I was talking about the defence of Milosevic (and even you have to argue that there are a number of Milosevic apologists here on FR, which is a different thing entirely for being against Operation Enduring Freedom). In regard to the obscurity of your sources, I was simply pointing out that you have to dig around for a lot of the stuff that you post (i.e. it's not front page news here in the US, which I assume is where Schwartz lives). Most Americans have no real idea about the al-Qaeda connection to the KLA (or the Chechens, for that matter) and as a result I think of them as under-informed rather than as fifth columnists.

"That includes men like Stephen Schwartz Suleyman Ahmad , whose latest articles by the way are directed as a counter to efforts like mine on FreeRepublic (for were else one find posts implicating the Bosnian and Albanian Muslims with al-Qaeda?)."

Other than the article I was linked to, I didn't see any that appeared geared towards refuting you. However, I think he has a pollyanish outlook towards the Balkans (particularly after the recent car bombing in Kosovo, the church bombings, and the ongoing fighting in Macedonia). I would point out that Schwartz's view on this matter is directly opposite to that of his sensei, Sheikh Kabbani, whose top lieutenant had an excellent article in the National Review a couple of days ago about the rampant demolition of Sufi shrines in Kosovo, Albania, and Bosnia because the Wahhabis decided that keeping such shrines in business was haram.

BTW, I never said that you were a Serb. My understanding was always that you were a Greek or an American of Greek extraction.

I haven't read all the posts in this thread since it has now ballooned to over 200... but I'll risk a response to a debate that I admittedly am catching mid-stream and am too lazy to read them all.

You state in response to Yehuda: "So, you are unwilling to blame a small portion of blacks for the killing rampages that blacks have been reveling in for the past two decades (or longer) in Africa, but you are willing to blame a billion Muslims for the actions of a small portion of Muslim extremists."

Your example employs moral equivalency between two ongoing events we can all agree are true. If American blacks specifically targeted another minority for genocide your analogy might work, but even the most militant group (say the New Black Panther Party) does not advocate the wholesale slaughter of non-blacks in order to achieve its stated agenda.

As to Black on Black violence in Africa, it seems to be divided into two flavors: regional nationalism or Muslim Jihad against Black Christians (Sudan and Nigeria).

In any event Militant Islam is the only prevailing school of thought promoting an ideology that forces other cultures and religions into submission through violence. In this sense Islamists are unique because it is not just that they can't tolerate diversity in their own society, but rather they can't tolerate the existence of it in any society and are therefore willing to export their Jihad in order to accomplish this goal of a singular Pan-Muslim Caliphate.

"The American black community hasn't been killing thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of 'non-blacks' in the last few decades for the 'crime' of not being black."

True. My point was simply to make that whenever violence breaks out within the black community, the standard line from demagogues like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton is to blame the "white establishment" for "keeping the black man down." How many black leaders stand up and refute this kind of blatant racism?

Or, if we want to get into the rather lengthy antics of groups like the Nation of Islam (which has killed quite a few people), one could ask why black leaders haven't run Farrakhan out of town on a rail. They haven't, so should we infer from this that they support Farrakhan and his objectives? Dear God, I hope not.

Moving on, if we look at what a miserable hell-hole that Africa has indeed devolved into over the last 50 years, we can clearly a type of environment not unlike that of the Middle East. Tell me, how many black leaders have stood up and denounce Mugabe or any of the other thugs who _have_ killed over a million whites over the last half century? Yet Mugabe receives standing ovations from the black community wherever he goes regardless of his policies.

"And maybe you ought to look up 'collateral damage' before you go inferring that I desire the death of 750,000,000 'innocent' muslims."

You and others have stated or at least heavily implied that Islam as a concept is innately hostile towards the West and as such should be regarded as an enemy. Very well, but the logical problem with this is view is that enemies should be destroyed. Muslims follow Islam, therefore Muslims are the enemy. As such, Muslims should be destroyed.

"You have it bass-ackwards - 'pro-democratic movements' are borne of the actions of rebellion against tyranny, not in the minds of squatters who in poll after poll isist on homicide bombings and the destruction of the state of Israel."

Yes, and when you get rid of Arafat, Hamas, and all of the other sources of Palestinian terrorism and de-indoctrinate the population, then we can talk about peace. But that is not going to happen any time soon, hence my position on the subject.

"Want a 'pal' state? Put it somewhere where these 'muslims' can be comfortable with each other:"

I have no real desire for any Palestinian state until Israel does in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip what the US did in Germany and Japan after World War 2. After that, then maybe there can be some civil peace talks, but until then every peace talk is just another PA sham.

Your statement ignores both Farrakhan and his cronies here in the US as well as Mugabe and other co-ideologists in southern Africa, who _do_ specifically target whites.

Islam, Tolerance, and the Cross
Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God.
Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God.
Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.
I Jn 4:7-8 (NIV)

ÇíåÇ ÇáÇÍÈÇÁ áäÍÈ ÈÚÖäÇ ÈÚÖÇ áÇä ÇáãÍÈÉ åí ãä Çááå æßá ãä íÍÈ ÝÞÏ æáÏ ãä Çááå æíÚÑÝ Çááå.
æãä áÇ íÍÈ áã íÚÑÝ Çááå áÇä Çááå ãÍÈÉ.
١ íæÍäÇ ٤þ:٧-٨

The Cross and Tolerance

The crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ provides the divine example for those who suffer wrongfully because of their obedience and submission to God. Even though the Lord Jesus Christ was completely innocent of the malicious charges laid against him, yet he submitted to the injustice without threatening retribution or revenge. And, in an amazing response of love, the Lord Jesus Christ mercifully and graciously requested forgiveness for those who crucified him. He said, "Father, forgive them" (Luke 23:34). The Cross of Christ is the divine foundation for true tolerance.

In his first epistle, the Apostle Peter wrote to the early Christians that they were to follow Christ's example of submission and love too. He wrote,

To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.
"He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth."
When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. 1 Peter 2:21-23 (NIV)

áÇäßã áåÐÇ ÏÚíÊã ÝÇä ÇáãÓíÍ ÇíÖÇ ÊÃáã áÇÌáäÇ ÊÇÑßÇ áäÇ ãËÇáÇ áßí ÊÊÈÚæÇ ÎØæÇÊå.
ÇáÐí áã íÝÚá ÎØíÉ æáÇ æÌÏ Ýí Ýãå ãßÑ
ÇáÐí ÇÐ ÔÊã áã íßä íÔÊã ÚæÖÇ æÇÐ ÊÃáã áã íßä íåÏÏ Èá ßÇä íÓáã áãä íÞÖí ÈÚÏá. ١ ÈØÑÓ ٢þ:٢١-٢٣

The Apostle Peter presented the example of Lord Jesus Christ as the pure and holy one who truly submit to Almighty God. His example demonstrated a pattern of love and submission that the divine prophets of God showed when they were persecuted. In the gospel of Matthew the words of the Lord Jesus noted that the ancient prophets faithfully submitted to persecution. By their submission to persecution, they showed their faithful and true submission of the Supreme One.

"Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. Matthew 5:11-12 (NIV)

The Qur'an bears testimony to the fact that the ancient prophets and apostles were rejected and persecuted. And, more importantly, they endured patiently their persecution and trusted God alone for deliverance rather than taking the sword into their own hands to slay their persecutors. Even though Muhammad knew the testimony and example of the divine prophets, towards the end of his life, he rejected their example of submission to Allah and grasped the bloody sword of death.

And certainly messengers before you were rejected, but they were patient on being rejected and persecuted until Our help came to them; and there is none to change the words of Allah, and certainly there has come to you some information about the messengers. Sura al-Anaam 6:34 (Shakir's translation)

æóáóÞóÏú ßõÐøöÈóÊú ÑõÓõáñ ãøöä ÞóÈúáößó ÝóÕóÈóÑõæÇú Úóáóì ãóÇ ßõÐøöÈõæÇú æóÃõæÐõæÇú ÍóÊøóì ÃóÊóÇåõãú äóÕúÑõäóÇ æóáÇó ãõÈóÏøöáó áößóáöãóÇÊö Çááøåö æóáóÞÏú ÌóÇÁßó ãöä äøóÈóÅö ÇáúãõÑúÓóáöíäó. ÓæÑÉ ÇáÃäÚÇã ٦þ:٣٤

The Apostle Paul affirmed the message of the Lord Jesus Christ and the example of the prophets. He explicitly rejected the idea of revenge because of persecution for faithfulness to God. He argued that divine vengeance is exclusively the prerogative of God who alone is all-wise and all-just. He realized that it is easy to imagine injustice and to use this as a pretext to fight and shed the blood of those you dislike.

Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord.
On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. Romans 12:19-21 (NIV)

áÇ ÊäÊÞãæÇ áÇäÝÓßã ÇíåÇ ÇáÇÍÈÇÁ Èá ÇÚØæÇ ãßÇäÇ ááÛÖÈ. áÇäå ãßÊæÈ áí ÇáäÞãÉ ÇäÇ ÇÌÇÒí íÞæá ÇáÑÈ.
ÝÇä ÌÇÚ ÚÏæß ÝÇØÚãå. æÇä ÚØÔ ÝÇÓÞå. áÇäß Çä ÝÚáÊ åÐÇ ÊÌãÚ ÌãÑ äÇÑ Úáì ÑÇÓå.
áÇíÛáÈäß ÇáÔÑ Èá ÇÛáÈ ÇáÔÑ ÈÇáÎíÑ. ÑæãíÉ ١٢þ:١٩-٢١

So, we see that Christian toleration is founded upon the Calvary's Cross where the Lord Jesus Christ suffered unjustly at the hands of wicked men. Thus, Christians are instructed to live a life of toleration towards all, even those who persecute them. This call to toleration gives the possibility for true peace among all humanity, because it embraces a gracious response even to enemies who may hate us. Our natural animal impulse is to demand revenge and punishment against those whom we feel have dealt with us unjustly whether the injustice was real or imagined.

Islam and Toleration

Islam rejects the Cross of the Lord Jesus Christ; and, as a result, it has no true basis for tolerating persecution. In fact, the Qur'an commands Muslims to "fight with them until there is no persecution" (Sura al-Baqara 2:193). This attitude toward persecution is diametrically opposed to the Christian faith as well as to the attitude of the divine prophets (see above Sura al-Anaam 6:34).

And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors. Sura al-Baqara 2:193 (Shakir's translation)

æóÞóÇÊöáõæåõãú ÍóÊøóì áÇó Êóßõæäó ÝöÊúäóÉñ æóíóßõæäó ÇáÏøöíäõ áöáøåö ÝóÅöäö ÇäÊóåóæÇú ÝóáÇó ÚõÏúæóÇäó ÅöáÇøó Úóáóì ÇáÙøóÇáöãöíäó. ÓæÑÉ ÇáÈÞÑÉ ٢þ:١٩٣

Muhammad taught that it is better to be slaughtered while fighting than to suffer persecution. This is a powerfully motivating call to warfare when a Muslim thinks he is oppressed or persecuted. Rather than being cast upon the justice and intervention of God, Muhammad instructed his followers to embrace the sword and fight.

And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers. Sura al-Baqara 2:191 (Shakir's translation)

æóÇÞúÊõáõæåõãú ÍóíúËõ ËóÞöÝúÊõãõæåõãú æóÃóÎúÑöÌõæåõã ãøöäú ÍóíúËõ ÃóÎúÑóÌõæßõãú æóÇáúÝöÊúäóÉõ ÃóÔóÏøõ ãöäó ÇáúÞóÊúáö æóáÇó ÊõÞóÇÊöáõæåõãú ÚöäÏó ÇáúãóÓúÌöÏö ÇáúÍóÑóÇãö ÍóÊøóì íõÞóÇÊöáõæßõãú Ýöíåö ÝóÅöä ÞóÇÊóáõæßõãú ÝóÇÞúÊõáõæåõãú ßóÐóáößó ÌóÒóÇÁ ÇáúßóÇÝöÑöíäó. ÓæÑÉ ÇáÈÞÑÉ ٢þ:١٩١

This warfare against non-Muslims is to be continued until there is no persecution against Muslims and until all people submit to the authority of Muhammad's religion. It is a carnal call to intolerance and suppression.

And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah; but if they desist, then surely Allah sees what they do. Sura al-Anfal 8:39 (Shakir's translation)

æóÞóÇÊöáõæåõãú ÍóÊøóì áÇó Êóßõæäó ÝöÊúäóÉñ æóíóßõæäó ÇáÏøöíäõ ßõáøõåõ áöáøå ÝóÅöäö ÇäÊóåóæúÇú ÝóÅöäøó Çááøåó ÈöãóÇ íóÚúãóáõæäó ÈóÕöíÑñ. ÓæÑÉ ÇáÃäÝÇá ٨þ:٣٩

Non-Muslims must submit to Islam and pay the Jizya tax as a way to show their acknowledgment of Muslim superiority, as well as to feel themselves subdued and inferior to Muslim power. The Qur'an calls upon Muslims to make no-Muslims dhimmis, a religious status that puts non-Muslims into an inferior and oppressed position within a true Islamic society.

Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection. Sura al-Tawbah 9:29 (Shakir's translation)

ÞóÇÊöáõæÇú ÇáøóÐöíäó áÇó íõÄúãöäõæäó ÈöÇááøåö æóáÇó ÈöÇáúíóæúãö ÇáÂÎöÑö æóáÇó íõÍóÑøöãõæäó ãóÇ ÍóÑøóãó Çááøåõ æóÑóÓõæáõåõ æóáÇó íóÏöíäõæäó Ïöíäó ÇáúÍóÞøö ãöäó ÇáøóÐöíäó ÃõæÊõæÇú ÇáúßöÊóÇÈó ÍóÊøóì íõÚúØõæÇú ÇáúÌöÒúíóÉó Úóä íóÏò æóåõãú ÕóÇÛöÑõæäó. ÓæÑÉ ÇáÊæÈÉ ٩þ:٢٩

So, it is clear that, according to the Qur'an, Muslims may not be oppressed or persecuted. However, they may oppress non-Muslim until non-Muslims feel themselves subdued and inferior. It is strange that oppression is only a terrible vice if it is directed against Muslims, but it is a blessed virtue if it used to bring non-Muslims into subjection to Muslim authority and power.

Conclusion

Because Islam rejects the death of the Lord Jesus Christ upon Calvary's cross, it has no foundation for tolerating non-believers. By contrast, Christians see Christ's rejection, persecution, and death upon the Cross as the most powerful motivation to follow a path of suffering and persecution and to show mercy, grace, and love to saint, sinner, and infidel alike. Rather than trusting the power of the sword against persecution, Christians, like the ancient prophets, are called to trust God who alone is the faithful Preserver and Judge of all men.

Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. Matthew 5:3-12 (NIV)

ØæÈì ááãÓÇßíä ÈÇáÑæÍ .áÇä áåã ãáßæÊ ÇáÓãæÇÊ .
ØæÈì ááÍÒÇäì .áÇäåã íÊÚÒæä .
ØæÈì ááæÏÚÇÁ .áÇäåã íÑËæä ÇáÇÑÖ .
ØæÈì ááÌíÇÚ æÇáÚØÇÔ Çáì ÇáÈÑ .áÇäåã íÔÈÚæä .
ØæÈì ááÑÍãÇÁ .áÇäåã íÑÍãæä .
ØæÈì ááÇäÞíÇÁ ÇáÞáÈ .áÇäåã íÚÇíäæä Çááå .
ØæÈì áÕÇäÚí ÇáÓáÇã .áÇäåã ÇÈäÇÁ Çááå íÏÚæä .
ØæÈì ááãØÑæÏíä ãä ÇÌá ÇáÈÑ .áÇä áåã ãáßæÊ ÇáÓãæÇÊ .
ØæÈì áßã ÇÐÇ ÚíøÑæßã æØÑÏæßã æÞÇáæÇ Úáíßã ßá ßáãÉ ÔÑíÑÉ ãä ÇÌáí ßÇÐÈíä .
ÇÝÑÍæÇ æÊåááæÇ .áÇä ÇÌÑßã ÚÙíã Ýí ÇáÓãæÇÊ .ÝÇäåã åßÐÇ ØÑÏæÇ ÇáÇäÈíÇÁ ÇáÐíä ÞÈáßã. ãÊì ٥þ:٣-١٢