Home      |      Weblog      |      Articles      |      Satire      |      Links      |      About      |      Contact

Militant Islam Monitor > Articles > AZ Cong.Candidate Mohamed Zuhdi Jasser: Put Pal.State On "Current Occupied Territories"- 'Pals.Are Real Victims Of Hamas'

AZ Cong.Candidate Mohamed Zuhdi Jasser: Put Pal.State On "Current Occupied Territories"- 'Pals.Are Real Victims Of Hamas'

Failed Muslim 'Reformer' Funded By Jews 'If We Tell Muslims That Islam Is The Problem We Will Not Win The War"
June 7, 2024

MIM: Jasser's namesake and coreligionists (including Hamas) would be very 'peaced off' at Mohamed Z.Jasser's attempt to proclaim that 'Hamas and other radical Islamist groups" are just propagandizing when they wage jihad and massacre infidels screaming 'Allahu Akbar". This is taqiya on steroids and exposes Jasser for the halal snake oil saleman he is.

"I don't believe Israel is a religious issue for Muslims … Hamas and other radical Islamic groups have propagandized the issues for decades and the latest conflict demonstrates that. It is constant warmongering. Hamas creates, starts these wars, commits acts of terror, and then uses the war as a platform to say all its grievances are Israel's fault."

MIM: It should also be noted (nor should the irony be missed), that Jasser's bio, which included the above statement is on the 'Israel Advocacy Movement' website under the headline '9 Incredible Muslims That Support Israel'. Given that there are nearly 2 billion Muslims in the world the use of "incredible" appears to be an unintentional and very revealing pun.(!)



MIM:The article excerpt below was written by Gavin Ashendon, a British Catholic layman and former priest of the Church of England who served as Chaplain to the Queen for nearly a decade.He hosted a Faith and Ethics program for the BBC. He is a world reknown expert theologian,who was a lecturer at University of Sussex on the psychology of literature and religion and is the author of several books.

,"Islam's problem with Jews goes back millennia"

Gavin Ashenden

October 17, 2023

"….The depth and intractability of the conflict is well reflected by the comments of the Salafi Egyptian Islamic scholar and author, Sheikh Muhammad Hussein Yaqoub:

"If the Jews left Palestine to us, would we start loving them? Of course not. … They would have been enemies even if they did not occupy a thing. … Our fighting with the Jews is eternal, and it will not end . .. until not a single Jew remains on the face of the Earth. … As for you Jews, the Curse of Allah upon you, you pigs of the earth!" (Al-Rahma TV, 17 January 2009)


MIM: Complete article below.


MIM: On the 'Platform' page of his campaign website Jasser only mentions Israel once in the context of Iran as a pro forma gesture and disingenuously portrays 'Palestinians' as innocent victims of Hamas calling them "puppets turned cannon fodder for their genocidal ambitions."

The 'support Israel' mention is a sop to his many Jewish donors and enabler. Jasser is obviously much more concerned about propagandizing the lie that his 'Palestinian' co religionists are unwittingly being used by Hamas as 'puppets and cannon fodder".

Jasser apparently missed a March 20 , 2024 Pal. poll showing that:

Hamas More Popular Than Abbas's Fatah Party

"According to the poll, only seven percent of Gazans blamed Hamas for their suffering. Seventy-one percent of all Palestinians supported Hamas's decision to attack Israel on October 7 — up 14 points among Gazans and down 11 points among West Bank Palestinians compared to three months ago. Fifty-nine percent of all Palestinians thought Hamas should rule Gaza, and 70 percent were satisfied with the role Hamas has played during the war."..."

https://www.fdd.org/analysis/ 2024/03/22/poll-hamas-remains- popular-among-palestinians/#:

MIM: Jasser's foreign policy platform only mentions two countries, Iran and China. In his Iran platform he only cites Israel once and uses the word support in the context of their being an adversary of Iran and by extension useful in combatting Shia Islam. His primary concern is saving his 'Palestinian' co religionists who he intimates have been used against their will by the Hamas jihadis they elected and still overwhelmingly support by falsely claiming they are being manipulated by Hamas "as puppets and cannon fodder".



Iran is a global threat and the #1 state sponsor of terrorism.

Iran and the global network of Shia and Sunni Islamists are the puppet masters and the Palestinians are puppets-turned-cannon fodder for their genocidal ambitions.

History will look back at the six billion dollar ransom paid to Iran and authorized by the Biden administration on the anniversary of September 11th this year, a mere month ago. President Biden has also overseen the further bankrolling of Iran, which, in turn, bankrolls Hamas, which has just now turned the Mid-East into a cauldron of war. This policy must change, for the safety of the United States and the stability of the world.

We must put maximum pressure on Iran, restore economic sanctions support Israel keep the IRGC's designation as a terror group, and push back on the economic opening of Tehran – a mistake that would be similar to the one we made in China.

We can no longer make deals like the six billion dollar prisoner swap overseen by Biden. A new market has been created for American hostage taking and it puts a dollar sign over the head of every American traveling to Iran.

Finally, the best anti-nuclear program is the people of Iran. They want America's maximum pressure campaign back. They want American strength to reign in the worst impulses of their leaders. We need to support the latest anti-Islamist revolution now led by Iran's free-thinking women. It's the best hope for an internal defeat of the mullocracy and thus an Iranian government that is an ally rather than an enemy.



MIM: Mohamed Zuhdi Jasser's 2003 and now deleted Founding Principles And Resolutions of his oxymoronically named 'American Islamic Forum For Democracy' included their intention to spread Islam aka Dawa:

" We will work to promote and enhance the understanding of Islam in America"

Jasser also refers to Israel as "occupied territories" and calls for the need for, completion and formation of an independent Palestinian State on the current 'occupied territories".

" We stand in support of the existing unqualified recognition of the state of Israel behind internationally recognized borders."

MIM:Since all of Israel is considered by Muslims and the international community to be "occupied territories" and to be an artificial entity this is a PC version of 'The River To The Sea'. By extension the 'recognition of Israel behind internationally recognized borders' by his fellow Muslims is utterly disingenuous since many countries in the international community and many Muslim countries refuse to acknowledge the existence of Israel as a legitimate and sovereign member of the 'Family of Nations'. In addition the term recognition which Jasser put in italics is a specious claim since 'recognition' does not reflect the concept of absolute and undeniable truth and is effectively meaningless.

'Recognition' is the rallying cry of the 'Palestinian' Arabs who are demanding and getting 'recognition' for their fictitious claims of peoplehood and the 'right' to have a country despite having no historical, religious or geographic basis for their fraudulent claims.

  1. While as Muslims and American citizens we will take stands on many of the diverse foreign policy positions of our government, we feel it is necessary to make a foundational position statement regarding the state of Israel. We stand in support of the existing unqualified recognition of the state of Israel behind internationally recognized borders.
  2. We also separately stand in recognition of the need for the completion of the formation of an independent Palestinian state on the current "occupied territories" living side by side next to the established state of Israel.
  3. While as Muslims and American citizens we will take stands on many of the diverse foreign policy positions of our government, we feel it is necessary to make a foundational position statement regarding the state of Israel. We stand in support of the existing unqualified recognition of the state of Israel behind internationally recognized borders.
  4. We also separately stand in recognition of the need for the completion of the formation of an independent Palestinian state on the current "occupied territories" living side by side next to the established state of Israel."


American Islamic Forum for Democracy

MIM: The current AIFD website has remained stagnant for years. It now functions as a cyber infomercial aimed at keeping up the pretense of the group's withered existence with the aim of attracting non Muslim supporters and donors.

"AIFD is a convener and co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement."


MIM: An 'About AIFD' has replaced the 2003 mission statement. It is essentially a generic 'About Us' statement with the usual pabulum aimed at non Muslims using the buzz words 'liberty,freedom and democracy'. It bears noting that Jasser writes that these ' U.S. founding principles' can only be acheived through "the separation of mosque and state". As Eliana Benador pointed out in her article "Misleading "Moderate Muslim" Mohamed Zuhdi Jasser Promotes Islam In America" (excerpted below)

About AIFD

The American Islamic Forum for Democracy's (AIFD) mission is to advocate for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state.

AIFD is the most prominent American Muslim organization directly confronting the ideology of political Islam and openly countering the common belief that the Muslim faith is inextricably rooted to the concept of the Islamic State (Islamism). We stand firmly for universal human rights – including gender equality, freedom of conscience, and freedom of speech and expression. Founded by Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, AIFD envisions a future wherein Muslims never feel a conflict between their personal faith and their commitment to individual liberty and freedom. Rather, we work to empower Muslims to be primary advocates for liberty and freedom.



MIM: The original 2003 AIFD Mission Statement:



Resolved in the adoption of the following mission, goals, and founding principles.

Mission: We proud citizens of the United States of America join together as devoted and patriotic citizens and as devout Muslims in this forum in order to serve as a vehicle for the discussion and public awareness of the complete compatibility of America's founding principles with the very personal faith of Islam which we practice.

Core Principles and Goals:

  1. To be a voice of Muslim American citizenry in strong support of the following:
    1. The devout practice of Islam and the Islamic concept of consultation and consent (shura) as being wholly compatible with the American form of democracy
    2. The support of the separation of religion and state as being perfectly non-contradictory with Koranic principles.
    3. As United States citizens we support our American armed forces.
    4. As United States citizens we support absolute and literal adherence to our citizenship pledge.
    5. We support our American interests, domestic and foreign.
  2. To raise the public consciousness regarding the core principles above and the following additional goals and beliefs:
    1. We will promote tolerance in Islam as being a fundamental principle of the Holy Koran.
      1. We recognize the fact that there are no clergy in Islam and we accept the Koran as our main reference for discussions regarding our faith.
      2. We as a group in recognition of democratic principles believe that each Muslim is equally entitled to their opinion concerning the religion of Islam.
    2. We will work to educate the public regarding the existence of a special relationship between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
    3. We will work to educate the public regarding the current threat to America of radicals who exploit Islam through militancy.
    4. We explicitly refuse to acknowledge the justification of any form of terrorism (the targeting of civilians and non-combatants).
    5. We believe in that religion is a matter for individual beliefs without any role for the direct involvement of religion in government.
    6. We believe in the equality of the sexes which is well established in the Koran.
    7. We will work to promote and enhance the understanding of Islam in America.
    8. We will work to express the consistency of the principles of Islam with economic principles of free markets and capitalism.
    9. We will work to promote and enhance the education of Muslims in their history and development as it relates to American democracy and freedom.
    10. We will work to promote the appreciation of the integral role of American patriotism and nationalism in the life of Muslim youth in America.
    11. We will work to stimulate the principles which bring about increased understanding and involvement of American Muslim citizens in American life
    12. We will work to formulate expressions of positions on specific areas of American foreign and domestic policy as they relate to American interests and as relevant to the discussion of Islam and democratic principles
    13. While as Muslims and American citizens we will take stands on many of the diverse foreign policy positions of our government, we feel it is necessary to make a foundational position statement regarding the state of Israel. We stand in support of the existing unqualified recognition of the state of Israel behind internationally recognized borders.
    14. We also separately stand in recognition of the need for the completion of the formation of an independent Palestinian state on the current "occupied territories" living side by side next to the established state of Israel.
  3. AIFD is a tax-exempt public charity under section 501(c)(3) of the U.S Internal Revenue code. Contributions are deductible under section 170 of the code.
  4. ####################################
  • 12th Annual Templeton Lecture on Religion and World Affairs:

  • "Americanism vs Islamism: A Personal Perspective"

    Zuhdi Jasser January 2, 2008


    "…There's a tribal mentality; somehow individuals want to create and advance the ideas of the tribal leaders. The Islamic community has reverted back to pre-Islamic Arabia, to a tribalism that has lost its values. Any time you take an idea in which the ends justify the means, it is basically corruption. Alija Izetbegovic, the president of Bosnia-Herzegovina, said that he was never more Muslim than when he was in solitary confinement under Marshal Tito for 15 years. A Muslim can hear that and think "My rights and freedoms in society are not related to my being Muslim. I have more time to sit and talk to God and be closer to God when I have absolutely no rights and I'm sitting in solitary confinement. Therefore my religion and my piety are unrelated to this earth."…"

    "…Third, we need to change the dreams. The dreams of most Muslims today are still wedded, because they have come from oppression and dictatorships, to religion, because the mosque was the last institution where they had a little freedom of speech, as long as they didn't speak against their own government. That's why the Muslim Brotherhood took over the mosques in Syria, and why the Wahhabis were able to spread texts into most of the mosques in the world, at a cost of $80 billion that they spent on spreading the radical word of Wahhabism. They were able to inculcate this literature into a lot of mosques, under the guise of most of these dictatorships.

    We need to change those dreams from dreams of the utopian caliphate or Islamic states that bring them supposedly Islamic freedom to dreams of Western, individual freedom, where access to government and society is open to all. Much of the leadership on this must come from Muslim business leaders, who can argue for the kind of education that is needed.

    Next, help us establish institutions. The Western enlightenment happened with the establishment of enlightenment institutions, classically liberal institutions that queried the church and government and began to question authority…"

    "…We need help in what I would call a counter-jihad that is still in its earliest, mitotic cell divisions. There are so many factors affecting the ability of Muslims to really contribute and get involved. One is because of fear—moderates are actually the first to be attacked; because of tribalism, because of the lack of knowledge. There are probably more people in this room who understand sharia than in most of the Muslim groups I've spoken to. That's sad. It's because the reins of understanding intellectual theology in Islam are just given up by most Muslims.

    I will conclude with another Jefferson quotation that talks about the patience with which revolutions happen. "The generation which commences a revolution rarely complete it. Habituated from their infancy to passive submission of body and mind to their kings and priests, they are not qualified when called on to think and provide for themselves; and their inexperience, their ignorance and bigotry make them instruments often in the hands of the Bonapartes and Iturbides to defeat their own rights and purposes." (Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1823)

    Jefferson was talking about our country's founding. He didn't end slavery, but Lincoln, who did decades later, probably said it best: "America is the world's last greatest hope for mankind." We have to remember the ideas America stands for, that there are millions of Muslims who came here because of those ideas, and if we tell them that Islam is the problem, we will not win the war.…"


  • #######################

  • MIM: From Jefferson to Jihad

  • In his 2008 Templeton Lecture "Americanism vs Islamism: A Personal Perspective' Jasser deludes the infidels he is addressing that Muslims like Bosnian President Alia Itzebegovic, (a devout Muslim as he himself claims to be) are 'tribalistic and 'corrupting' the true message of Islam which he claims to possess (Reform Zuhdiism).

  • Jasser then goes on to explain that We need to change those dreams from dreams of the utopian caliphate or Islamic states that bring them supposedly Islamic freedom to dreams of Western, individual freedom, where access to government and society is open to all.

  • Much of the leadership on this must come from Muslim business leaders, who can argue for the kind of education that is needed.

  • MIM: To date it appears both the mythical 'Muslim business leaders' and virtual Bosnia Muslims he mentions have decided to opt for Jihad and Martydom over Jefforsonian Ideals.

  • ###########################

  • MIM: The first president of Bosnia -Herzogovina, Alija Ali Itzetbekovic, a Nazi and Al Qaeda operative in Bosnia, made no secret of the Bosnian Muslims' agenda.

    "...the implementation of Islam in all fields of individuals' personal lives, in family and in society, by renewal of the Islamic religious thought and creating a uniform Muslim community from Morocco to Indonesia. ..."

    Bosnian Muslims aka 'The White Al Qaeda'



    MIM:The true face of the Bosnian Muslims/Muhajideen:

    7th Bosnian Muslim Brigade, based in Zenica - the international Islamic mercenary force known as the mujahedeen

    Alija Izetbegovic with members of 7th Brigade

    "... The first and foremost of such conclusions is surely the one on the incompatibility of Islam and non-Islamic systems. There can be no peace or coexistence between the "Islamic faith" and non- Islamic societies and political institutions. ... Islam clearly excludes the right and possibility of activity of any strange ideology on its own turf. Therefore, there is no question of any laicistic principles, and the state should be an expression and should support the moral concepts of the religion. ..." page 22 "The Islamic Declaration" book ("Islamska deklaracija"), written by Mr. Alija Izetbegovic, Bosnian Muslim leader."


  • ##########################

  • MIM: In 2012 Eliana Benador wrote an article about a meeting she attended where Jasser was speaking in front of wealthy Jewish New Yorkers in an attempt to solicit funding for his moribund Muslim Reform Movement and American Islamic Forum For Democracy.

  • Excerpts:



  • "Taqqiya, in Islam, is a doctrine of pious fraud or religious dissimulation... whereby Muslims may under certain circumstances openly deceive infidels by feigning friendship or goodwill provided their heart remains true to Islam."

  • "...Then he (Jasser) spoke of liberties, democracy. And, in the whole speech -which was addressed to a group of New York Jews, he did not mention even once, Israel..."

  • "...His organization, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy's (AIFD) avowed mission is "to advocate for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of "mosque and state."

    It looks as though, for Zuhdi Jasser America's religion is Islam..."separation of mosque and state..." But, we are in a judeo-christian country..."

  • "...His is a very subtle strategy, and it is working, because Zuhdi Jasser, by his own account, is a proud devout Muslim, for whom, Islam is most certainly his number one priority.

    Just remember that whenever Jasser wins over CAIR or others, it is Islam who wins..."

  • http://www.rightsidenews.com/2012060616377/editorial/rsn-pick-of-the-day/benador-misleading-qmoderateq-muslim-zuhdi-jasser-promotes-islam-in-america.html

  • ##################################
  • MIM: In 2012 Dr. Andrew Bostom an exerpt on Jihad and Islamic Jew hatred reviewed Jassers book "A Battle For the Soul of Islam" which would have been more aptly titled " A Battle For the Soul of Mohamed Zuhdi Jasser".

  • #################

Ignorant or Deceitful Regarding the Koranic Doctrines of Jihad and Dhimmitude?

Mohammed Zuhdi Jasser has just released his first book with the understated title, A Battle for the Soul of Islam: An American Muslim Patriot's Fight to Save His Faith Dr. Jasser's egomania aside, the striking disingenuousness which characterizes the book is epitomized by his summary comments on the Koran which glibly dismiss multiple verses that sanction the jihad conquest of non-Muslims, including their subjugation and justified humiliation for a myriad of so-called "offenses."

The Qur'an…is not actually a text that was written with the idea of conquering those of other faiths. Throughout the Qur'an, the debt to Christians and Jews, for their teachings and prophets, is acknowledged over and over again in their common origin from the God of Abraham.

First, Koran 3:67 and its classical exegesis (interpretation) thoroughly debunks Jasser's uninformed or mendacious claim about ecumenical Islamic "indebtedness" to the shared Judeo-Christian ancestry of the Biblical Abraham. The seminal Koranic commentary Tasfir Al- Jalalayn of Suyuti (and al-Mahalli), provides this definitive gloss on verse 3:67—notwithstanding Jasser's ecumenical burbling—which affirms Islam's triumphant supersessionism, vis a vis both Judaism and Christianity:

Ibrahim was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but a man of pure natural belief, a hanif who inclines from all other religions to the Straight Din; a Muslim and affirmer of the Divine Unity. He was no idolator.

With regard to Jasser's spurious assertion that that Koranic text did not instill an eternal conquering impulse among its Muslim votaries, Richard Bell, in his authoritative1937 translation and exegesis of the Koran demonstrates that Sura (chapter) 9, "…is a chapter of war proclamations…", and verses Q.9.29 to Q.9-35,specifically.

…form in effect a proclamation of war against Jews and Christians, and probably belong to the year IX [9-years after the Hijra] when an expedition was designed for the North which would involve war with Christians and possibly also with Jews.

Al-Muntakhab fii Tafsiir al-Qur'aan al-Kariim, (the Culled [correct selection from] Qur'an Commentary, issued by the Vatican of Sunni Islam, Al-Azhar University's Committee for the Qur'an and Sunna [traditions of Islam's prophet Muhammad, and his early followers], 11th edition, Cairo 1985, re-affirms Bell's scholarship,stating with regard to Koran 9:29 and 9:30:

(9.29) O you believers, fight the unbelievers, namely the People of the Book who do not believe True Faith and do not accept the Resurrection and the Recompense [heaven, hell] in the true way, and do not require stopping what God and his Emissary ordered stopped; they do not embrace the True Religion , i.e. Islam. Fight until they believe, or force them to pay the jizya (* the deliberately humiliating poll-tax) humbly and obediently, not grudgingly, so that they contribute to the Islamic budget.

(9.30)…may God curse these unbelievers and their families, out of amazement at how far they have strayed from the Truth, which is clear; but they inclined toward error

The essential pattern of the jihad war is captured in the great Muslim historian al-Tabari's recording of the recommendation given by Umar b. al-Khattab to the commander of the troops he sent to al-Basrah (636 C.E.), during the conquest of Iraq. Umar (the second "Rightly Guided Caliph") reportedly said:

Summon the people to God; those who respond to your call, accept it from them, (This is to say, accept their conversion as genuine and refrain from fighting them) but those who refuse must pay the poll tax out of humiliation and lowliness. (Qur'an 9:29) If they refuse this, it is the sword without leniency. Fear God with regard to what you have been entrusted.

Jihad was pursued century after century, because jihad, which means "to strive in the path of Allah," embodied an ideology and a jurisdiction. Both were formally conceived by Muslim jurisconsults and theologians from the 8th to 9th centuries onward, based on their interpretation of Qur'anic verses (for e.g., 9:5,6; 9:29; 4:76-79; 2: 214-15; 8:39-42), and long chapters in the Traditions (i.e., "hadith", acts and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, especially those recorded by al-Bukhari [d. 869] and Muslim [d. 874]). The consensus on the nature of jihad from all four schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafi'i) is clear.

Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406), jurist (Maliki), renowned philosopher, historian, and sociologist summarized these consensus opinions from five centuries of prior Sunni Muslim jurisprudence with regard to the uniquely Islamic institution of jihad:

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force… The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense… Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.

Molla Khosrew (d. 1480) was a celebrated writer and Hanafi jurist, who was appointed the Ottoman Shaykh-al-Islam by Sultan Mehmed II in 1469. One of Molla Khosrew's authoritative, widely cited legal works, reiterated these classical views on jihad:

…jihad is a fard al-kifaya, that is, that one must begin the fight against the enemy, even when he [the enemy] may not have taken the initiative to fight, because the Prophet…early on…allowed believers to defend themselves, later, however, he ordered them to take the initiative at certain times of the year, that is, at the end of the haram months, saying, "Kill the idolaters wherever you find them…" (Q9:5). He finally ordered fighting without limitations, at all times and in all places, saying, "Fight those who do not believe in God, and in the Last Day…"(Q9:29); there are also other [similar] verses on the subject. This shows that it is a fard al-kifaya

Finally, Shi'ite jurisprudence was in agreement with the Sunni consensus on the basic nature of jihadwar, as reflected in this excerpt from the Jami-i-Abbasi [the popular Persian manual of Shi'a Law] written by al-Amili (d.1622), a distinguished theologian under Shah Abbas I:

Islamic Holy war [jihad] against followers of other religions, such as Jews, is required unless they convert to Islam or pay the poll tax.

By the time of al-Tabari's death in 923, jihad wars had expanded the Muslim empire from Portugal to the Indian subcontinent. Subsequent Muslim conquests continued in Asia, as well as Eastern Europe. Under the banner of jihad, the Christian kingdoms of Armenia, Byzantium, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia, and Albania, in addition to parts of Poland and Hungary, were also conquered and Islamized by waves of Seljuk, or later Ottoman Turks, as well as Tatars. Arab Muslim invaders engaged, additionally, in continuous jihad raids that ravaged and enslaved Sub-Saharan African animist populations, extending to the southern Sudan. When the Ottoman Muslim armies were stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683, over a millennium of jihad had transpired. These tremendous military successes spawned a triumphalist jihad literature. Muslim historians recorded in detail the number of infidels slaughtered, or enslaved and deported, the cities, villages, and infidel religious sites which were sacked and pillaged, and the lands, treasure, and movable goods seized.

And what was the nature of the system of governance imposed upon those indigenous non-Muslims conquered by jihad? In his seminal The Laws of Islamic Governance al-Mawardi (d. 1058), a renowned jurist of Baghdad, examined the regulations pertaining to the lands and infidel populations subjugated by jihad. This is the origin of the system of dhimmitude. The native infidel "dhimmi" (which derives from both the word for "pact", and also "guilt"—guilty of religious errors) population had to recognize Islamic ownership of their land, submit to Islamic law, and accept payment of the Koranic poll tax (jizya), based on Koran 9:29. Al- Mawardi notes that "The enemy makes a paymentin return for peace and reconciliation." He then distinguishes two cases: (I) Payment is made immediately and is treated like booty, "it does, not however, prevent a jihad being carried out against them in the future." (II). Payment is made yearly and will"constitute an ongoing tribute by which their security is established". Reconciliation and security last as long as the pavment is made. If the pavment ceases, then the jihadresumes. A treaty of reconciliation may be renewable, but must not exceed 10 years. This same basic formulation was reiterated during a January 8, 1998 interview by Yusuf al-Qaradawi confirming how jihad continues to regulate the relations between Muslims and non-Muslims to this day.

The "contract of the jizya", or "dhimma" encompassed other obligatory and recommended obligations for the conquered non-Muslim "dhimmi" peoples. Collectively, these "obligations" formed the discriminatory system of dhimmitude imposed upon non-Muslims—Jews, Christians, [as well as Zoroastrians, Hindus, and Buddhists]-subjugated by jihad. Some of the more salient features of dhimmitude include: the prohibition of arms for the vanquished dhimmis, and of church bells; restrictions concerning the building and restoration of churches, synagogues, and temples; inequality between Muslims and non-Muslims with regard to taxes and penal law; the refusal of dhimmi testimony by Muslim courts; a requirement that Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims, including Zoroastrians and Hindus, wear special clothes; and the overall humiliation and abasement of non-Muslims. It is important to note that these regulations and attitudes were institutionalized as permanent features of the sacred Islamic law, or Shari'a. The writings of the much lionized Sufi theologian and jurist al-Ghazali (d. 1111) how the institution of dhimmitude was simply a normative, and prominent feature of the Shari'a:

…the dhimmi is obliged not to mention Allah or His Apostle.. .Jews, Christians, and Majians must pay the jizya [poll tax on non-Muslims]…on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits [the dhimmi] on the protruberant bone beneath his ear [i.e., the mandible]… They are not permitted to ostentatiously display their wine or church bells…their houses may not be higher than the Muslim's, no matter how low that is. The dhimmi may not ride an elegant horse or mule; he may ride a donkey only if the saddler-work] is of wood. He may not walk on the good part of the road. They [the dhimmis] have to wear [an identifying] patch [on their clothing], even women, and even in the [public] baths…[dhimmis] must hold their tongue.

The practical consequences of such a discriminatory system were summarized in A.S. Tritton's 1930 The Caliphs and their Non-Muslim Subjects, a pioneering treatise on the status of the dhimmis:

…[C]aliphs destroyed churches to obtain materials for their buildings, and the mob was always ready to pillage churches and monasteries…dhimmis…always lived on sufferance, exposed to the caprices of the ruler and the passions of the mob…in later times..[t]hey were much more liable to suffer from the violence of the crowd, and the popular fanaticism was accompanied by an increasing strictness among the educated. The spiritual isolation of Islam was accomplished. The world was divided into two classes, Muslims and others, and only Islam counted…Indeed the general feeling was that the leavings of the Muslims were good enough for the dhimmis.

Forty years later, in 1970, S.D. Goitein, one of the greatest 20th century scholars of Muslim, non-Muslim relations (whom Jasser also cites as an authority in his book) wrote the following on the subject of dhimmis under Islamic governance:

…a great humanist and contemporary of the French Revolution, Wilhelm von Humboldt, defined as the best state one which is least felt and restricts itself to one task only: protection, protection against attack from outside and oppression from within…in general, taxation [by the Muslim government] was merciless, and a very large section of the population must have lived permanently at the starvation level. From many Geniza letters one gets the impression that the poor were concerned more with getting money for the payment of their taxes than for food and clothing, for failure of payment usually induced cruel punishment… the Muslim state was quite the opposite of the ideals propagated by Wilhelm von Humboldt or the principles embedded in the constitution of the United States. An Islamic state was part of or coincided with dar al-Islam, the House of Islam. Its treasury was mal al-muslumin, the money of the Muslims. Christians and Jews were not citizens of the state, not even second class citizens. They were outsiders under the protection of the Muslim state, a status characterized by the term dhimma, for which protection they had to pay a poll tax specific to them. They were also exposed to a great number of discriminatory and humiliating laws…As it lies in the very nature of such restrictions, soon additional humiliations were added, and before the second century of Islam was out, a complete body of legislation in this matter was in existence…In times and places in which they became too oppressive they lead to the dwindling or even complete extinction of the minorities.[emphasis added]

Very disturbing polling data released April 24, 2007 from a rigorous face-to-face University of Maryland/ WorldPublicOpinion.org interview survey confirm the magnitude of sentiments favorably inclined towards the ultimate goals of jihadism within the contemporary global Muslim umma, or community. Of the 4384 Muslims interviewed between December 9, 2006 and February 15, 2007—1000 Moroccans, 1000 Egyptians, 1243 Pakistanis, and 1141 Indonesians—65.2%, almost 2/3, hardly a "fringe minority"—desired this outcome: "To unify all Islamic countries into a single Islamic state or Caliphate," including 49% of "moderate" Indonesian Muslims. The internal validity of these data about the present longing for a Caliphate is strongly suggested by a concordant result: 65.5% of this Muslim sample approved the proposition "To require a strict [strict emphasized in original] application of Shari'a law in every Islamic country." Moreover, an earlier survey of British Muslims indicated that up to 40% of them wished to replace Britain's current liberal democratic system with the Shari'a.

Notwithstanding ahistorical drivel from Western Muslim "advocacy" groups such as the Muslim Association of Britain, which lionizes both the Caliphate and the concomitant institution of Shari'a as promulgators of "a peaceful and just society"—despite their legacy of brutal, often genocidal aggression, and imposition of a blatantly discriminatory, totalitarian system of rule devoid of the most basic human rights—the findings from these polls of Muslims across the Islamic world, and within the United Kingdom, are ominous. Pursuit of these goals by Muslims augurs many more innocent, but "licit" non-Muslim victims of jihad.

Mohammed Zuhdi Jasser's grossly inept understanding or deliberately bolderized rendition of foundational, living Koranic doctrines disqualifies him as a serious discussant regarding the drastic reforms required of mainstream, institutional Islam.



MIM: On the 'Resource' page of the American Islamic Forum For Democracy's website the first two books listed are none other than Mohamed K. Jasser's personal version of "The Holy Koran- An Interpretive Translation From The Classical Arabic Into Contemporary English". The second book listed is Mohamed Zuhdi Jasser's "A Battle For The Soul Of Islam: An American Muslim Patriot's Fight To Save His Faith".

Both Mohamed Senior and Junior are medical doctors not theologians.


MIM: Islam or Reform Zuhdiism?

The Holy Koran – An Interpretive Translation from Classical Arabic into Contemporary English
Mohamed K. Jasser

A Battle for the Soul of Islam: An American Muslim Patriot's Fight to Save His Faith
M. Zuhdi Jasser



Islam's problem with Jews goes back millennia

Gavin Ashenden

October 17, 2023

The events in Israel and Gaza have presented the world with a clash of political ambitions of the most intense kind, bathed in the deeply emotive murder and rape of civilians, extending to the burning and slaughter of babies.

But they have also presented the world with a clash of ethical systems. The Muslim protagonists in Gaza have long been willing to use their own civilians as human shields, with the intention of provoking Israelis to rage, and to provoke them also into the collateral killing of Gazan women and children.

The latest incursion into Israel implemented a strategy of doing the maximum inhuman harm to Israeli civilians, and particularly to women and children, with the intention of pushing the Israeli army into revenge attacks on the civilians in Gaza.

When Israel warns the civilians in Gaza to abandon the city in order to pursue the terrorist leaders of Hamas, Hamas strenuously urges them to stay. This whole strategy depends on the Israelis killing Palestinian civilians in revenge as they level Gaza. The intention is to enrage the Islamic world and galvanise a pan-Islamic response to wipe out Israel.

While the politics have a stark simplicity to them, neither the ethics nor the religious background shared the same simplicity. The ethics of Islam and Judaism, particularly relating to forgiveness and revenge, differ considerably. The religions also understand the nature of God very differently, with Yahweh being knowable and Allah unknowable. The religions appear not only complex, but inaccessible to the different/other sides in this war of attrition, information and religion.

Listening to pundits from the left like Alistair Campbell and Rory Stewart set out to describe in succinct compressed narratives the historical claims of the conflict, there is no sense at all of the claim, let alone the legitimacy of the claim of the Jews to have been given the land of Israel by divine covenant. Only that they were temporary occupiers two and a half thousand years ago.

To the left, Jews are simply and only a recent illegitimate colonial force guilty for dispossessing Arabs of Palestine.

At the heart of the political impasse is the refusal of Arab Palestinians to accept any political compromises that allowed for the existence of Israel. They are determined on its extermination. Little mention is made of this in political punditry, but the failure to acknowledge this and its theological rationale makes both conversation and ethical analysis impossible. Some minimum grasp of the theological history is essential.

Embedded in both the Koran and the Hadith is the record of Mohammed with his experience of Jews and Judaism. Like much of the present conflict it was both political and theological at the same time. Only by grasping its essentials can the non-negotiable anti-semitism of Islam be understood.

Few non-Muslims know much of the history of early Islam, and the two distinct stages of Mohammed's career as hybrid prophet and warlord. But his encounters with the Jews were central and critical to the way it developed.

At the simplest level, as Mohammed fought for his life and his success, he entered into a series of complex alliances. In the earlier part in Mecca, relying on the Jews in particular, he collaborated and forged alliances. The earlier part of the Koran reflects this benign approach to both the Jews and Christians he encountered, and it is there that we find the verses of religious collaboration. But after being driven out of Mecca into Medina where he established his role as a successful warlord, his attitude changed.

The Jews caused him offence in two ways. Firstly, they posed a theological problem to the "revelation" of the Koran.

Mohammed combined a paradoxical admiration for the prophetic charisms of the Jews with a certain degree of jealously. Why had the Jews been favoured with the outpouring for prophetic voices they experienced for a millennium? Why had God ignored the Arabs? He presented himself as the final prophetic voice in the Jewish tradition of prophesy (which included Isa, the name for Jesus in the Koran) but alas the most authoritative.

Muhammad became increasingly hostile to the Jews as his claims and ambitions developed. He grew to perceive that there were irreconcilable differences between their religion and his, especially when the belief in the authenticity of his prophetic mission became the criterion of a true Muslim.

The Jewish community challenged "the way in which the Koran appropriated Biblical accounts and personages, for instance, its making Abraham an Arab and the founder of the Kaa'bah at Mecca". The Jews denied his claims. Muhammad responded by accusing them of intentionally concealing its true meaning or of entirely misunderstanding.

Needless to say, the theological clashes over his claims to represent Biblical figures in the Koran were not restricted to Abraham. They included Moses, David, Elijah, Ezekiel, Solomon, Jesus and Mary. Both Jews and Christians disowned the characters that Mohammed imported into the Koran from the Old and New Testament. The names were the same, but their characters, roles and words were very different. Their use appeared to be a mixture of plagiarism and revisionism, and both communities objected and rejected the claims of the Koran to be authentic revelation.

This act of theological repudiation was deeply offensive to Islam, and in the case of Judaism was compounded by an early conflict called The Battle of the Trench.

In 627 the Jews of Banu Qurayza were accused of conspiring with the Meccan enemies of Mohammed, and Islamic forces attacked, defeated and captured them. In a notorious episode Mohammed ordered between 400 and 800 men to be beheaded.

The antipathetic relationship between Jews and Muslims, always complex, began badly and, since Islam means submission and the Jews have been disinclined to surrender the revisionist history of their identity to Mohammed, continued to get worse.

In the Hadith the antagonism is codified with verses such as: "You will fight against the Jews and you will gain victory over them. The stones will say: 'Oh slave of Allah! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him'."

The Koran contains the verse, "Surely Allah has cursed the unbelievers and has prepared for them a burning fire." (Koran 33:64)

Any selection of Koranic verses ought to be accompanied by a commentary which recognises there are benign verses to be found there too. The difficulty is that the violent ones are predominantly nearer the end and the principle of Koranic interpretation, abrogation, gives precedence to later over earlier verses.

The conflict in Palestine and the competing claims to the land that set Muslim against Jew arise from each side having a set of wholly different histories and theologies.

Leaving aside the Gordian knot of their competing complexity, the Islamic view has hardened into hatred. A theological exploration of the spirituality of hatred and forgiveness as the two faiths practice them is also needed, beyond the simplicities of the origins described here.

In a conflict where babies are beheaded and civilians are deemed to be soldiers, a whole series of spiritual, ethical and metaphysical considerations require examination.

The depth and intractability of the conflict is well reflected by the comments of the Salafi Egyptian Islamic scholar and author, Sheikh Muhammad Hussein Yaqoub:

"If the Jews left Palestine to us, would we start loving them? Of course not. … They would have been enemies even if they did not occupy a thing. … Our fighting with the Jews is eternal, and it will not end . .. until not a single Jew remains on the face of the Earth. … As for you Jews, the Curse of Allah upon you, you pigs of the earth!" (Al-Rahma TV, 17 January 2009)


Printer-friendly version   Email this item to a friend