Monday, May 19, 2014

Yahya Snow Defends Boko Haram Kidnappers, Rapists, and Terrorists

Muslim apologist Yahya Snow uses an interesting strategy to defend and support his fellow Muslim extremists. When there's a terrorist attack, Yahya will say that Islam doesn't allow such attacks, but he'll also (a) suggest that reports of the attack may be the result of Islamophobic propaganda, (b) explain that the attack, even if genuine, is actually a response to Western aggression, and (c) warn critics of Islam to keep our mouths shut about the attack.

This is the general strategy. Watch how it works when Yahya addresses the kidnapping, torture, rape, and forced conversion of nearly three hundred Nigerian schoolgirls by Boko Haram.


Did you catch that? Islam condemns forced conversion (which it doesn't), but (a) the reports may be false propaganda against Muslims, (b) Boko Haram is only doing it to defend their Muslim brothers, and (c) critics of Islam need to keep their mouths shut about this.

Apparently, Yahya knows that it simply won't be effective to come right out and defend Boko Haram's actions, so he prefers a strategy taken straight from the likes of CAIR: defend terrorists indirectly by blaming infidels and demonizing critics.

Interestingly, by saying that Islam doesn't allow forced conversions, Yahya has condemned Muhammad and his companions. Consider the following description of Muhammad's mission by Muhammad's closest companion, Abu Bakr (who was warning apostates that they would be killed if they refused to return to Islam):
Al-Tabari, Volume 10, p. 55—Abu Bakr to the Apostates: . . . “Verily God, may He be exalted, sent Muhammad with His truth to His creation as a bearer of good tidings and as a warner and as one calling [others] to God, with His permission, and as a light-bringing lamp, so that he might warn [all] who live, and so that the saying against the unbelievers might be fulfilled. So God guided with the truth whoever responded to Him, and the Apostle of God, with His permission, struck whoever turned his back to Him until he came to Islam, willingly or grudgingly.”
Notice the last part. Muhammad "struck whoever turned his back" to Allah until they came to Islam "willingly or grudgingly." That is, people were going to come to Islam whether they wanted to or not.

This is what Yahya assures us has nothing to do with Islam. Does Yahya expect us to believe he's a higher authority on Islam than Muhammad and Abu Bakr?

Taqiyya, anyone?

22 comments:

Jukti said...

Mr Wood, can I say something about that?

Radical Moderate said...

This now surprising coming from BlahBlah Snow.

After all he can not determine if
Abu Waleed is a hater preacher

Jukti said...

There is a disagreement in islam regarding forced conversions of non- judeo-christian non-muslims. Some say that they might be called to convert or otherwise be killed. Others say that they have the right of "dhimmah".
But regarding christians and jews there is no disagreement since the Quran says that they have the right of "dhimmah" and do not have to convert to islam. So forcing pagans to convert might be allowed but it is not allowed for christians. This is cleared in the Quran regarding christians. Because the Quran does not mention other pagans there is disagreement regarding them.
Of course a christian who takes arms against muslims could be forced under certain conditions but this is another topic.

Note that the tradition you cited was regarding the apostates which where fought by Abu Bakr during the Riddah Wars. It is clear that apostates do not have the right to live but this has nothing to do with christians especially not with non-combatants.

If the girls where forced to convert then Boko Haram is erring.

ditimpa jahat said...

keep on the good work of exposing the real Islam!

bob morane said...

incredible!!
Any Saudi Arabia reactions about boko haram acts? guess....

ditimpa jahat said...


Muslims your Islam is the only religion that allows killing of apostates, do you have any shame?

TAREK said...

Hello brethren!
To Jukti
I'm sure you are familiar to the quran. Therefore I'd like to ask this simple question: Does sura 9 Aya 29 condone force conversion directly or indirectly? Please looking forward to get an answer fro you. Thanks in advance.
Good job Dr David please keep it up My GOD WILL ALWAYS BE YOU IN JESUS' NAME AMEN

paki p said...

@jukti
Peace and blessing of LORD JESUS on all.
You said there is a disagreement on forced conversion of Christians and Jews. I would like to all you, the disagreement is by who? By mohammad? No, by sahaba ? No, by early muslims? No, by you and a few taqiyya muslims? May be. If the hadith brother David quoted is for apostates than according to islam aren't Christians and Jews apostates too? mohammad said that everyone was a muslim and so we all should return to islam. And speaking of infidels quran clearly states, Quran 5:17, “Infidels are those who declare God is the Christ, [Jesus] son of Mary". Now alot of English translations translates the word as "disbeliever" but the word is " كَفَرَ" which translates as infidel. I don't know how much you know about the treatment of infidels in quran but I'm sure anyone can explain that to you on this blog.
I'm not being disrespectful but i think you should present islam as the way it is. Thank you

Clark said...

See also http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/mark-durie/boko-haram-and-the-dynamics-of-denial/

David Wood said...

Jukti said: "But regarding christians and jews there is no disagreement since the Quran says that they have the right of 'dhimmah' and do not have to convert to islam."

What happens when they refuse to become dhimmis, Jukti?

Besides, you're missing the point. The girls converted to Islam to avoid being raped. And the Qur'an clearly allows Muslims to rape their female captives.

Jukti said: "Note that the tradition you cited was regarding the apostates which where fought by Abu Bakr during the Riddah Wars."

Yes, but Abu Bakr was talking about what Muhammad did during his lifetime. He says that Muhammad brought people to Islam whether they wanted to become Muslim or not. That's called "forced conversion."

paki p said...

@jukti
@david wood
A dimmih has to shave his head, wear different color shoes, ride a mule, can't build their house of worship, can't openly worship their Lord and give his house and church to a muslim whenever asked for, besides paying jiziya. Let me ask you jukti , would you prefer to be a dimmih? Or you'd be FORCED to convert?

Sebedee Nineyfour said...

Jukti,

You like all Muslims believe that the mass murdering rapist pedophile terrorist sodomite homosexual drunkard false prophet Mohammad was the "greatest man to have ever lived". It is no surprise you are defending forcible conversion to the false Muslim terrorist religion

Jukti said...

First of all I am not making any "taqiyya" and I am not trying to please you as christians. I will mention all situations where christians should be killed as well as those were they should not. I have absolutely no other motivation for this issue except of that what I have learned from islamic law.

1) Tarek, that this exactly what I am talking about. The Quran states there that the infidels should be fought until they pay the jizya i.e. accept the covenent of dhimmah. This clearly shows that the infidels, at least jews and christians have the right to live with their religion without converting. What should be fought is their rule. Infidels do not have the right to rule but do have the right to practice their religion under the covenant of dhimmah.
There is also another verse saying the same.

2) paki, when disagreement is said then this means disagreement among the jurists or the Sahaba. I said that there is disagreement over forcing non judeo-christian infidels but there is NO disagreement regarding this for christians and jews. The Quran says that they can live with their religion.

3) David Wood,

(a) If they do not accept the jizya then the males are killed of course and the women are enslaved.
But who wants to has the possibility to believe in Jesus Christ and worship him as much as he likes. The conditions for it are the dhimmah.

(b) They can also be "raped" when they convert to islam. When someone is enslaved then converting to islam will not make him free. This is an interesting point. If a non-muslim has muslims slaves and accepts the dhimmah he can keep them further. If he does not accept the dhimmah and becomes a harbi he loses his slaves but they are not freed. They stay slaves for the new owners even if they are muslims. So "raping" might be for slaves but a muslim slave can also be "raped". So there is no point in this from the legal perspective.

(c) You are right that this is said. But this does not prove that christians and jews have no right of dhimmah. It could be meant for the arab pagans who according to islamic law indeed have no right of dhimmah. Christians have the right of dhimmah because it is written in the Quran. An ambigious hadith cannot nullify this. You have also to look at how the Prophet and Abu Bakr treated jews and christians. They allowed them the jizya.

It would be interesting to see any tradition about the Prophet or the Sahaba where they forced jews or christians to convert to islam without being males who were fighting. So where was a peaceful christian or jewish tribe refused from the dhimmah?

Thanks for letting me participate here.

Tom said...

@Jukti
".... I am not trying to please you as christians. I will mention all situations where christians should be killed as well as those were they should not."

I am dumb founded, it is clear that islam provides you with different mandates for subjugation, murder, pillaging, debauchery, savagery, slavery etc In complete contrast to, The Foundation of our Lord Jesus Christ's teaching,
Matt.5:43-45
43"You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE your neighbour and hate your enemy.' 44"But I say to you, LOVE YOUR ENEMIES and pray for those who persecute you,…"

this muhammad has polluted the minds and hearts of over a billion people, and they have lost all moral compass when they are taught to be victims, resulting in a mindset to exert revenge with brutal force filled with hatred!!

It all means that the end times is fast approaching.

paki p said...

Peace and blessings of my risen LORD JESUS CHRIST be with you and all.

You said, "The Quran states there that the infidels should be fought until they pay the jizya i.e. accept the covenent of dhimmah. This clearly shows that the infidels, at least jews and christians have the right to live with their religion without converting"

You seem to be confused with who your quran says infidels really are.
Christians and Jews are Ahl-Al-Kitab (people of book) and infidels are kafirs. But according to surat-ul-maida verse 17 your quran contradicts itself and says that Christians are kafirs too. You already know what surat-ul-tawba verse 29 says about infidels!

You said," Christians have the right of dhimmah because it is written in the Quran"
As you can see above that Christians as Ahl-Al-Kitab might have rights but as kafirs they don't. Now you can tell us which quranic verse is true and which isn't?

You said," when disagreement is said then this means disagreement among the jurists or the Sahaba"
Your prophet and allah didn't have any disagreement on the treatment of Christians. You tell us who is the authority? mohammad and allah ? Or sahaba akram?

You said," If they do not accept the jizya then the males are killed of course and the women are enslaved."
I hope you know what a dimmih status is and how a dimmih is treated by islam. And its really creepy that you very matter of factly tell us about killing our brothers of they don't want to live a humiliating second class pathetic excuse of a life ,your prophet prescribed. Would you choose a life like that?

You said," . This is an interesting point. If a non-muslim has muslims slaves and accepts the dhimmah he can keep them further"

Which planet do you live on? What muslims slaves and non-Muslim owners? The only Muslim who were slaves at that time were owned by your prophet or other muslims. No non-Muslim owned any muslim slave. where do you get these stories from? Or do you read everything backwards?

Thank you of participating in this discussion but i would suggest that read AND understand your own religion.
Thank you and God bless

Answering Judaism said...

It would be nice if Yahya Snow actually was man enough to debate Sam or David publicly. Though if it comes to that, is there any point giving Snow a platform?

Jukti said...

The people of the book are infidels. Being the people of the book means just that they have more rights in this world than other infidels. When it comes to questions of the hereafter there is no difference between the ahlul kitab and pagans. Whoever does not believe in the Prophet is an infidel kafir.

I think it is clear that christians have the right of dhimmah. There is nothing that could change this. Therefore forcing christian non-combatants to convert is not allowed.

I think the response of Yahya Snow is very good. Boko Haram has it's mistakes but they are still our brothers who fight to enforce the shariah law in Nigeria. We can criticize them for some of their wrongdoings but we will never dismiss them like many hipocrites such as Timothy Winters or Atabek Shukurov. In the UK there is a big problem with modernist muslims. Preachers like Hamza Yusuf or Yusuf Estes are much better therefore.

paki p said...

@jukti
I thought in the beginning of this discussion that you are a rational person and have a little knowledge of your religion but now i know you are clueless of the teachings of your islam, you keep going in circles.
Ahl-UK-kitab have no rights what so ever once you label them as infidels.I showed you from your quran. But like every other baby Muslim you are more than willing to throw everything under the bus. So there's no point in having a discussion.
Thank you for participating though.
Btw your brothers in islam (boko haram and alikes) do things that yusuf estes don't agree with. To yusuf islam is like puppy love wrapped in rose petals but Infact its a thorn bush.
Thank you and God bless

paki p said...

@jukti
One more thing. By your responses I wouldn't be surprised that you're yahya snow himself! ......just saying

Jukti said...

@paki, you are not fair. I have nothing against fighting christians and enslaving them and also having sex with their women. I only say that there is no forced conversion of captives.
We follow the pact of Caliph Umar. He did never force a christian or jew to islam.
Your claims regarding the difference between infidels and ahl ul kitab is your own opinion which has no base. Try to prove that muslims did force jews or christians to convert.

paki p said...

@jukti
I have nothing against fighting muslims, enslaving them and having sex with their women either BUT my LORD JESUS says no to that. And so i don't.
I have explained it to you but you don't want to reason and i don't want to go in circles with you. It doesn't matter which chalipha you follow all of your chaliphas have to follow Mohammad.
PEACE IN CHRIST

Dacritic said...

"I have nothing against fighting christians and enslaving them and also having sex with their women."

I have nothing to say to such a person. Oh wait, he is only being a real Muslim who adheres to the commands of Muhammad. I suppose if I have nothing to say to such a person I'll be considered an Islamophobe.