The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam Read Online Free PDF

and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy handhold, that never breaks” (Qur’an 2:256).
    But is this really tolerance the way that modern Westerners understand it? It might be a reasonable facsimile if that were all the Qur’an has to say about the subject. But it isn’t.
     
    PC Myth: The Qur’an teaches believers to take up arms only in self-defense
     
    At this point, Islamic apologists might grant that the Qur’an doesn’t leave relations between believers and unbelievers at the live-and-let-live stage. They may admit that it counsels believers to defend themselves, and will argue that it is somewhat akin to the Catholic Church’s just-war theory.
    There is support for this view in the Qur’an: “Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.” So Muslims are, in this verse at least, not to start conflicts with unbelievers. Once hostilities have begun, however, Muslims should wage them furiously: “And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you there then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. But if they desist, then lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.”
    And what is to be the conclusion of this war? “And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah” (Qur’an 2:190–193). This would seem to indicate that the war must continue until the world is Islam—the “religion is for Allah”—or under the hegemony of Islamic law.
    Consequently, there is a problem with the interpretation that jihad warfare can only be defensive. The South African mufti Ebrahim Desai repeated a common teaching in Islam when he answered a question at “Islam Q & A Online.” The questioner asked, “I have a question about offensive jihad. Does it mean that we are to attack even those non-Muslims which don’t [sic] do anything against Islam just because we have to propagate Islam?” Desai responded:
     
You should understand that we as Muslims firmly believe that the person who doesn’t believe in Allah as he is required to, is a disbeliever who would be doomed to Hell eternally. Thus one of the primary responsibilities of the Muslim ruler is to spread Islam throughout the world, thus saving people from eternal damnation. Thus what is meant by the passage in Tafsir Uthmani [a commentary on the Qur’an] is that if a country doesn’t allow the propagation of Islam to its inhabitants in a suitable manner or creates hindrances to this, then the Muslim ruler would be justifying in waging Jihad against this country, so that the message of Islam can reach its inhabitants, thus saving them from the Fire of Jahannum [Hell]. If the Kuffaar [unbelievers] allow us to spread Islam peacefully, then we would not wage Jihad against them. 1
     
     
----

Just Like Today: Jihadists cite Muhammad’s battles to prove jihad is not just defensive

I n an article titled “The True Meaning of Jihad,” posted in 2003 at the website Khilafah.com, which is affiliated with the jihadist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, one Sidik Aucbur cites the example of Muhammad against those who would argue that jihad is purely defensive:
Moreover some will say that Jihad was only defensive; this is incorrect. A quick study of the Life of the Prophet (SalAllahu Alaihi Wasallam) shows us something different:

The Battle of Mut’ah was instigated by the Muslims against the Romans; the Muslims were 3,000 faced against a Roman army of 200,000.

The Battle of Hunayn was inevitable shortly after the Muslims had conquered Makkah.

The Battle of Tabuk was also instigated to finally destroy the Romans.

We see from the ijmaa (Consensus) of Sahaba [the companions of Muhammad], that they too instigated Jihad, through As-Sham, Iraq, Iran, Egypt and North Africa.