Jihadist Rule On Killing Women and Children part 1

333 magnify

The above photo is a dime a dozen, and of much younger kids. As you will see in this and upcoming posts, if we were to go by their rules…these young children are fair game. Thank God we don’t operate under Jihadist guidelines.

Here we have part 1 in a series I plan to write, having to do with the fact that Jihadist have done everything in their power to either, ignore the Quran teaching, that it is prohibited to kill women, children and the elderly….Or to come up with various rulings giving them permission to kill the above groups.


Killing Women, Children, and the Elderly is Permitted

One of the elements of annihilation in these Islamist writings is the permission given to kill women, children, and the elderly. Some Hadiths of the Prophet Muhammad forbid killing them, as in the Hadith from the compilation by Abu Daoud according to which the Prophet told Khaled Ibn Al-Walid during one of the Islamic raids, “Do not kill a woman or an oppressed person.” Also, in the compilation of Hadiths by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, the Prophet said, “Do not kill the children [of the polytheists].” This is why Islamist clerics struggled with the question of how to justify attacks by Islamist organizations in which women, children, and the elderly were killed.

One Islamist writer actually based his justification for killing these noncombatants on the conduct of the Prophet Muhammad himself. In an essay published in September 2001, titled “The Truth of the New Crusader War,” the writer, who calls himself “The Crusader Vanquisher Salah Al-Din” after Salah Al-Din Al-Ayyoubi, the 12th-century sultan who took Jerusalem from the Crusaders, set out the circumstances under which killing infidel women, children, and elderly is permitted according to Islam.

Make a note of that first paragraph and the word “raid”, we will be dealing with that in a future post, on this subject matter.

“The second case: It is permitted for Muslims to kill inviolable infidels in the event that they [the Muslims] attack them and cannot differentiate between those with immunity and the warriors or fortifications and, accordingly, they are permitted to kill them as a result [of inability to distinguish] and NOT WITH PREMEDITATION. This is because of what the Messenger said when asked about the offspring of the infidels [whom Muslims attacked] in an ambush and [during it] harmed their women and their children and said: ‘They [the children] are of them [the warriors].’ This proves that it is permissible to kill women and children because of [the deeds of] their fathers when it is not possible to distinguish between them [and the infidel warriors]…

No matter how you slice it, they violate their own laws of conduct. They give rulings that are suppose to make it easier for Jihadist to kill women and children….but I just don’t see it. How is it on 9/11 they didn’t know there would be women and possibly children in those towers. The planes certainly had women and children on them along with elderly people. We can also debate the fact that the men in the planes and WTC, were not fighting any Muslim, or at war with any Muslim country.

I don’t know how, with any stretch of imagination, you can call a bus boy at a restaurant, or a janitor, or an office worker, a “warrior”. The only way that any of those guys in the WTC were “warriors” were on their PlayStation at night. Some may have been in the reserves, but the fact still remains, we were not at war with anybody.

And lets not forget all those premeditated bombings around the world. Killing women, children and elderly willy nilly. Its been a feeding frenzy of violating the rules of “combat”. I guess you only have to follow some of the rules…What of the recent genocide in Iraq, over 500 deaths, according to some reports. That was premeditated, try telling me that they didn’t know, women and children were in that village. And how were those people fighting against their attackers??

In Iraq, they kill Muslims all day and all night. A multitude of women and children. And in Darfur, where they not only kill women and children, but in the women they don’t kill, they rape to plant “tomato’s”.

Oh, but these guys are soooo self righteous so pious. “We are TRUE Muslims”. Way to go fella’s. Give me a break. What a bunch of sanctimonious baloney.

The third case: It is permissible for Muslims to kill inviolable infidels if they are aiding the fighting in deed, word, opinion, or any other way. This is because of the Prophet’s order to kill Duraid ibn Al-Simma, who was 120 years old and went with the Hawazin tribe [to fight against the Muslims] to give them counsel.

I wonder who gets to make that decision….”We killed them because they were ‘thinking’ about going against us….Do we have any proof…no, but they are a kufar, so you know they were thinking it.” You can imagine that happening right??

“The fourth case: It is permitted for Muslims to kill inviolable infidels when there is a need to burn the fortifications or the fields of the enemy in order to weaken his strength, to breach the ramparts, or to topple the country, even if the inviolable ones die as a result, such as the Prophet did in the case of Banu Al-Nadhir.

Hmmm, now let me think, were the attackers on 9/11, planning on storming the World Trade Center?? No. Did they think that flying the planes into those buildings would cause the country to topple?? No. As a matter of fact, there was some word that came out later that Osama Bin Lyin had first thought of attempting to blow up a nuclear reactor, but that decision was nixed because they didn’t know how that would effect the world as a whole.

How much support would he have gotten had he created a few nuclear meltdowns that effected the whole world. As it was he didn’t think that the U.S. would respond the way that we did. (Can’t imagine why he would get that idea.) (thanks Clinton)

“The fifth case: It is permitted for Muslims to kill inviolable infidels if they need to use heavy weapons that cannot differentiate between those who are inviolable and the warriors, as the Prophet did at Taif.

They have an excuse for everything don’t they. Maybe you should look at rule number one…the fact that none of the targets on 9/11 were military, except maybe the Pentagon. So, all the other attacks should have been void. Especially when you remember that we were not at war with anybody when we were attacked.

“The sixth case: It is permitted for Muslims to kill inviolable infidels if the enemy uses women and children as a human shield and it is not possible to kill the warriors except by killing this shield. In such a case it is permitted to kill them all.

We don’t make a habit of using ANYONE as human shields, however, there are various Jihadist groups that do, and cry to high heaven when a civilian gets killed. Just a little more of that…”Do as I say, not as I do” thing. No one wants a civilian killed, and unfortunately civilians do sometimes get killed during war. But, there is still a bit of hypocrisy here as well. Why would you set off a IED when you know there are a bunch of kids around??

“The seventh case: It is permitted for Muslims to kill inviolable infidels if the latter had an agreement with the Muslims and broke the agreement, and the imam had to kill the inviolable ones to make an example of them, like the Prophet did with Banu Qurayza.”

Can’t see that one applying at all.

In one upcoming issue, it is basically one of these self righteous Jihadist, going after another Muslim, for the crime of disagreeing with him. This seems to be the standard fare, either you agree with me, or you are not a Muslim, you are all kinds of things, but not a Muslim.

This will be coming from a different website, than where I have gotten some of my stuff, but the theme is the same. These radicals make it clear on this and other websites, that Shiite Muslims, are not Muslims and are worthy of death.


17 Responses to “Jihadist Rule On Killing Women and Children part 1”

  1. salahudin Says:

    good blog entry!

    “No matter how you slice it, they violate their own laws of conduct”


    the truth is that these assholes are simply BIGOTS. they are fascistic.

    I actually feel sorry for their lives… which are lived in hatred.

    no one wants to live in hatred… but they do because their hearts and minds have been twisted by bigotry. It’s so sad.

    I wish I could change them… help them.

  2. Eagle Says:

    Thank you and I totally agree, if you read, “A Study in Jihadist Delusion and Mental Illness” I pointed that fact out. I am always amazed when I see the hypocrisy. Its amazing that they can’t see it for themselves. You would think that the people that visit their blogs would be able to see it. But obviously they all drink from the same water fountain. The scary part is the amount of traffic those websites get.

    I think we all wish that we could change them. I’ll tell you what, on my other blog I have a guy that comments on it that is just like the Jihadist’s blogs I visit. He is so blinded by hatred, that no matter what you tell him, or try to point out to him, you can’t change his mind.

    The problem is….his hatred is geared toward ALL MUSLIMS. He has convinced himself that there are no moderate Muslims. That the radicals, are the so called moderates. I point out websites for him to check out, of Muslims that don’t agree with the radical ideology and he blows it off. What pisses me off is every time I get a Muslim to comment on MY blog, he attacks them. 😦

    He asks questions, but they are more accusations then questions. I should erase them, but having had that done to me, I won’t do that to someone else. Short of that, I don’t know what else to do. Got any idea’s??

    I gave him the links to the blogs in my blogroll. I even gave him a link that I thought could be too upsetting to place on this blog. Which is “Arabs for Israel” I have found that Israel causes people to hyperventilate, so I am trying to stay off that subject for the time being.

    That came up after a Muslim commented on my blog and pointed out that the Quran was against all the things the Jihadee’s were doing. In the process of her comment, she made some statements about Israel. When my resident jerk started posting comments, I pointed out to him that not all Muslims were against Israel, I then gave him the link. I haven’t checked his reply, but I am sure he has a negative one.

    The young woman made a long list of encouraging remarks. I am taking those, and posting them to my favorite radical blog. Then I will use it for a blog entry. That is if they answer my questions and not just erase them, which is what they do if they have no answers.

    Anyway even that is not enough for this guy. He has become a giant pain in the butt. If you have any suggestions let me know.

  3. salahudin Says:

    Ah.. one of those eh?

    My suggestion is to disparage him and side with Muslims. That will piss him off. If you push him enough, he’ll go berserk-angry and make a fool of himself.

    Also it will help gain you more credibility with Muslims so that they’ll read your blog more often. 🙂

  4. Eagle Says:

    I have been working on doing just that. And you’ve given me a great idea, I will make a post for this blog, based on his comments and my remarks to them :D. First I am posting part 2 of the above category.

    I have so much to do, but I am really not comfortable 😦 and when I am… I am too drugged up to think clearly. I put a lot of thought into all of my posts. I don’t want to offend anybody, but still get my message out.

    One thing is for sure, I am sick and tried of emails complaining about this guy. And people asking if I believe in his views. So far NOTHING I have said, has cause him to back off. But my latest remarks have not been answered yet. We shall see.

  5. Callum Says:

    What baffles me is that you consider it okay to kill innocent men. Of course killing innocent women, children and the elderly is wrong, just as wrong as killing innocent men.

    You rightly accuse Islamists of sexism, yet ignore their obvious sexism against men, as they are apparently the same as your prejudices.

  6. Eagle Says:

    Did I? I thought I made it pretty clear that Islamist were going against the Quran, which was the topic of this post. Pointing out that no matter how you cut it, they are wrong.

    Even giving them the most of remote, benefit of the doubt they are wrong. Don’t know how you missed it, but there it is for you.

  7. shiva Says:

    If Osama. said he has the right to nuke new york, and and his millions of followers, support him, then I dont think it is relevant if it is against the quoran or not.

    Nassir bin Hamad al ‑Fahd,a radical Saudi sheikh,issued a fatwa (a legal ruling) called, A Treatise on the Legal Status of Using Weapons of Mass Destruction against Infidels

    In it,al ‑Fahd carefully analyzed the four major objections that Muslims have traditionally raised to the use of WMD (mass casualties; indiscriminate deaths of non ‑combatants
    deaths of Muslims;and horrific ways of dying,including being burned alive),explained away each one in detail,and then provided a general justification for using these weapons.

    Al ‑Fahd begins with a general statement that there is no
    obligation when there is inability,and there is no prohibited thing when there is necessity.Those two statements are taken directly from Islamic jurisprudence —a very different section of Islamic jurisprudence than that dealing with WMD or even with warfare in general.But he uses them to make an argument that there is an obligation to use WMD —not just permission but an actual obligation —and their use cannot be prohibited because there is a necessity to do so.

    Al ‑Fahd then goes on to refute in detail the four taboos.With respect to mass casualties,he argues that
    there are three different statements in the hadith [traditions about Muhammad ]and in the Qur ’an saying that mass casualties are justified in this case.

    First is a statement that you should chastise even as you have been chastised; ( Sura 16:126)

    second,you should repay evil with evil; (Surah 42:40)

    and third,who so commits aggression against you,do
    you commit aggression against him in like manner. (Surah 2:i94)

    Al ‑Fahd argued that America and its allies have caused massive casualties in the Islamic world for which America should be held responsible.

    In addition,the Americans have killed men,women,and children without discrimination,so that Muslims have the right now to kill without discrimination as well.

    Well Eagle you say, one thing, yet we have a cleric, who says something else, and he has the some pretty strong backing.

    Now who am I to believe,

  8. Eagle Says:


    That was kind of the point of the series. The Quran says one thing, so they need a bunch of ‘rulings’ to give them the appearance of legitimacy.

  9. cerebate Says:

    Finally some glimmer of hope
    “If Osama. said he has the right to nuke new york, and and his millions of followers, support him, then I dont think it is relevant if it is against the quoran or not.”
    Now following on in that logic
    If Osama. said he has the right to nuke new york, and the majority of muslims dont support him, then do you think it is relevant if it is against the quoran or not?

  10. cerebate Says:

    “the truth is that these assholes are simply BIGOTS. they are fascistic.
    I actually feel sorry for their lives… which are lived in hatred. ”
    Ive never been able to understand how much hatred the jihadists have, that they are able to kill children and justify it to themselves.

  11. Eagle Says:


    I’ve wondered that myself.

  12. shiva Says:


    If Osama. said he has the right to nuke new york……….

    If Osama. said he has the right to nuke new york, and the majority of muslims dont support him, then do you think it is relevant if it is against the quoran or not when New york is like a lake of vaseline glass.

  13. Sukran Says:

    Those terrorists, so-called Jihadists has nothing to do either with Qur’an or Islam.

    They are not led by their religion.

    They are led by EXTREME POVERTY, lack of EDUCATION, lack of UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR OWN RELIGION, SEVERE MENTAL ILLNESSES caused by oppression they have been suffering for hundreds of years because of their own governors and also IMPERIALISM.

    It is not easy to thing to become a terrorist.

    When people has nothing -love, job, money, property, degree, self-respect, self-confident, etc.- to lose in their life, with unbearable desperation and hopelesness, it turnes out all hate, resentment, violence and death, in another word suicide. They are neither bloody monsters nor stupid. They just have been kept misarable by feudalist and imperialist oppressors.

    “I think we all wish that we could change them.”

    Yes, they can be changed but only by themselves, maybe with a little bit help. They need to have fear to lose something other than their LIFE.

  14. Eagle Says:


    You would think they would be in fear of losing their souls. I think that those who lead young men into doing the stuff they are doing are the worse of all.

    I have to agree with koranist on one thing, they need to learn the Quran on their own and not by someone who wants to use them as a political pawn. It’s a sad state of affairs to be sure.

  15. Eagle Says:

    BTW Sukran,

    Welcome to the blog. 😀

  16. cerebate Says:

    I used to believe this. One day i stopped making these excuses . No matter how poor or oppressed or uneducated these people are , it doesnt justify some of the acts. I cant even understand how they do it, the absolute lack of a conscience.
    I dont believe in a hell, but somedays I wish it existed.
    Dont get me wrong , I understand what you are saying, as I have seen the frustration of poverty some people have ,and the way it explodes in a mob.

  17. shiva Says:

    Those terrorists, so-called Jihadists has nothing to do either with Qur’an or Islam.
    They are not led by their religion.


    I and thousands like me are forsaking everything for what we believe. Our drive and motivation doesn’t come from tangible commodities that this world has to offer. Our religion is Islam, obedience to the one true God and following the footsteps of the final prophet messenger.
    Your democratically elected governments continuously perpetuate atrocities against my people all over the world. And your support of them makes you directly responsible, just as I am directly responsible for protecting and avenging my Muslim brothers and sisters.
    Until we feel security you will be our targets and until you stop the bombing, gassing, imprisonment and torture of my people we will not stop this fight. We are at war and I am a soldier. Now you too will taste the reality of this situation.

    Mohammad Sidique Khan was the oldest of the four suicide bombers responsible for the 7 July 2005 London bombings,
    studied at Leeds Metropolitan University.

    Are the people who commit terrorist acts poor, even if they are from countries that are not?


    Just recently we saw poor uneducated doctors, on a suicide mission in Glascow, and a failed mission in London

    Remember, most of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were middle-class sons of Saudi Arabia and many were well-educated. And Osama bin Laden himself is from one of the richest families in the Middle East.

    And one other thing — poverty does not cause terrorism but rather terrorism causes poverty. With terrorism comes the cessation of business, trade, open markets, investment, good will, and at the very heart — trust. Industries die when a terrorist infrastructure is established. Jobs disappear, expectations of a bright future vanish and are replaced by expections of misery and ongoing fear.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: