Many of you asked for this:

The proof I promised you           How many times had I heard the same cliché spoken as presumed truth and used to justify or excuse flagrant criminal behavior? Here’s what Tim said:

I defy you to name one religion that has not committed crimes in its names. Socrates was killed for blasphemy.

He was upset that I had written that the problem wasn’t with Muslims; the problem is with their religion, Islam. What follows is a history lesson posted by a colleague on the Net:

From page 464 (690 in the Arabic) of the earliest Muslim biography of Muhammad, Muhammad presides over the beheading of 600 to 900 disarmed, captive Jews:

Then [the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe] surrendered, and the apostle [Muhammad] confined them in Medina in the quarter of d. al-Harith, a woman of B. al-Najjar. Then the apostle went out to the market of Medina (which is still its market today) and dug trenches in it. Then he sent for them and struck off their heads in those trenches as they were brought out to him in batches. Among them was the enemy of Allah Huyayy b. Akhtab and Ka`b b. Asad their chief. There were 600 or 700 in all, though some put the figure as high as 800 or 900. As they were being taken out in batches to the apostle they asked Ka`b what he thought would be done with them. He replied, 'Will you never understand? Don't you see that the summoner never stops and those who are taken away do not return? By Allah it is death!' This went on until the apostle made an end of them.

Why is this relevant? That question is better asked this way: Why is it STILL relevant? Sadly, there’s an answer that is all too easy to understand, so easy that even the simplest mind can grasp it. Here it is: since Mohammad is regarded as the last prophet and the perfect man (and role model), everything he did sets an indelible standard. In other words, context be damned.

If he killed Jews and made concubines of their wives (and slaves of their children), then why should Jews be better treated now than then? To do so contradicts Islamic precedent as set by the actions of Mohammad.

That’s why Daniel Pearl was beheaded. The same as the Jews of the Banu Qurayza tribe. But that’s not all.

The Koran dictates a version of anti-Semitism that is permanent rather than the kind that might be ameliorated if they learn to like us better because we gave them Gaza or returned the Sahara or cared for their wives and children at Hadassah Hospital. They won’t and they can’t because of stipulations in the Koran as described by Dr. Andrew Bostom [please see: Why do the media’s Middle East pundits ignore the Jew-hatred intrinsic to Islamic doctrine? by Andrew G. Bostom, PJ Media February 3, 2013]:

…Referencing well-established Antisemitic motifs from the Koran (citations provided, below), Sheikh Youssef intoned,

Muslim brothers, God has inflicted the Muslim nation with a people whom God has become angry at [Koran 1:7] and whom he cursed [Koran 5:78] so he made monkeys and pigs [Koran 5:60] out of them. They killed prophets and messengers [Koran 2:61 / 3:112] and sowed corruption on Earth. [Koran 5:33 / 5:64] They are the most evil on Earth. [5:62 /63]

The crux of all these allegations is a central antisemitic motif in the Koran which decrees an eternal curse upon the Jews (Koran 2:61/ reiterated at 3:112) for slaying the prophets and transgressing against the will of Allah. It should be noted that Koran 3:112 is featured before the pre-amble to Hamas’ foundational Covenant. This central motif is coupled to Koranic verses 5:60, and 5:78, which describe the Jews transformation into apes and swine (5:60), or simply apes, (i.e. verses 2:65 and 7:166), having been “…cursed by the tongue of David, and Jesus, Mary’s son” (5:78). Muhammad himself repeats this Koranic curse in a canonical hadith, “He [Muhammad] then recited the verse [5:78]: ‘…curses were pronounced on those among the children of Israel who rejected Faith, by the tongue of David and of Jesus the son of Mary’ .” The related verse, 5:64, accuses the Jews of being “spreaders of war and corruption,”—a sort of ancient Koranic antecedent of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion—invoked not only by Hamas and Hezbollah leaders, but “moderate” Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas who cited Koran 5:64 during a January 2007 speech which urged Palestinian Muslims to end their internecine strife, and  “aim their rifles at Israel.”

Indeed the Koran’s overall discussion of the Jews is marked by a litany of their sins and punishments, as if part of a divine indictment, conviction, and punishment process. The Jews’ ultimate sin and punishment are made clear: they are the devil’s minions (4:60) cursed by Allah, their faces will be obliterated (4:47), and if they do not accept the true faith of Islam—the Jews who understand their faith become Muslims (3:113)—they will be made into apes (2:65/ 7:166), or apes and swine (5:60), and burn in the Hellfires (4:55, 5:29, 98:6, and 58:14-19).

 The centrality of the Jews’ permanent “abasement and humiliation,” and being “laden with God’s anger” in the corpus of Muslim exegetic literature on Koran 2:61/3:112, is clear. By nature deceitful and treacherous, the Jews rejected Allah’s signs and prophets, including Isa, the Muslim Jesus.

 Ikhwanonline.com from November 21, 2004 quoted Muhammad Morsi stating,

 …it is confirmed by the Quran that Jews are the most hostile of men to Muslims. The Almighty says: “Certainly you will find the most hostile to those who believe are the Jews and those who are polytheists.” [Koran 5: 82] The verse confirms that Jews are the most hostile enemies of the Muslims.. 

Supplements to the perfect and unchangeable Koran are the Hadiths [please see: Hadith (Hadis), Hadith Sahih, Hadith Qudsi | Islam-Muslim According to Arabic lexicographers, the word Hadith or Hadis means news or new information. In technical terms it is understood to mean the ..... www.islam-muslim.net/hadith-hadis -]. Another Net correspondent points to those supporting documents that shore up Jew-hating as a requirement. Here is what was posted regarding jihad:

…This battle is not going to happen between Arabs and Zionists, or between Jews and Palestinians, or between Jews or anybody else. It is between Muslims and Jews as is clearly stated in the hadith.

Which hadiths does Qaradawi mean? He is clearly referring to some of the most infamous ones; even many non-Muslims have heard of them:

Muhammad says that one day the very stones will help Muslims to kill Jews.

Muhammad says it both in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, Islam's two most canonical hadith collections:

Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177:

Narrated Abu Huraira [a companion of Muhammad]:

Allah's Apostle [Muhammad] said, "The Hour [that is, Judgment Day] will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Sahih Muslim, Book 041, Number 6981:

Ibn 'Umar [son of the 2nd caliph, Ibn Umar was about 18 when Muhammad died] reported Allah's Messenger [Muhammad] (may peace be upon him) as saying: You will fight against the Jews and you will kill them until even a stone would say: Come here, Muslim, there is a Jew (hiding himself behind me); kill him.

There are many more hadiths that say the same thing.

Although these sources are ancient, they are currently regarded as essential and precedent setting. To the most religious Islamic fundamentalists, they retain their power as sacred guidelines written in impervious stone.

When it comes to promoting hatred and division among our human species, no other religion persists in doing it as well.

                                    B. Koplen 5/12/13

There's a reason I disagree...

The way it is, not the way I want it to be…    For years, I’d sought answers, had asked psychologist friends to help me understand her behavior. Most often, I received little more than sympathetic shrugs. Some looked askance as if I were exaggerating. Not until after I chose to escape that inexplicably dark marriage did I finally find a counselor who explained by saying, quite simply, “Read this.”

She’d given me a copy of I Hate You, Don’t Leave Me, a book about borderline personality disorder. [please see: I Hate You, Don’t Leave Me:  Understanding the Borderline ... While the public is familiar with more mainstream psychological diagnoses…, the only knowledge most individuals have of borderline ...psychcentral.com/lib/2011/i-hate-you- dont-leave-me..] That book liberated me, offered profoundly relevant insights; I could have written every page. I’d lived every word.

Those who knew both of us defended her, claimed her as a true friend. I couldn’t argue, and didn’t have to. Eventually, she manipulated them as she had me, without regret and without an apology.

“What can I do?” I asked another counselor, when I accepted that I’d better learn to protect myself. In essence, his words boiled down to a simple phrase, “Stay away!” He seemed to know I was outmanned.

When I asked what she could do to help herself, he told me that most who have that disorder seek help as they approach 40. Failing to do that, he suggested, led to a life of struggle and denial.

I took his advice. Still do. Indeed, when I see other instances of intentionally deceptive acts by anyone who is unable to apologize or unwilling to accept their role in the disruption of a potentially peaceful relationship, I’m on guard. Often I search for truth as a check on both my perception and theirs.

Of late, I’ve found that to be necessary as a result of dialogues with those who are at odds with my perception of Islam. Some tell me about their Islamic friends; one mentioned good guys who are Islamic cabbies in New York City. Still others claim that very few have anything to do with jihad.

Of course, all of them are right. That’s why I try to differentiate; it’s not Muslims per se who concern me. It’s Islam, its worldview and its tenets. Its truest believers hold that the Koran is a perfect text that cannot be changed or reinterpreted. In fact, Mohammad’s acts and deeds and comments are regarded as sacred; he is a role model and his actions cannot be questioned. His simplistic worldview harbors violence; the world is made up of believers and non-believers. Those who don’t believe must be provided the opportunity to convert. Should they refuse, their lives and their belongings are fair game.

That was Mohammad’s way; the most righteous seek to follow his teachings to the unadulterated letter. Therein lies great danger and extremism that defies compromise or peaceful cohabitation on our crowded planet.

When I’m chided for this claim, it’s often because I see the harm that caused when we voluntarily overlook the existential threat, especially of jihadis who pride themselves in asymmetrical warfare.

Doing battle with them is essential. When I get lambasted, it’s because I don’t believe in fighting a gentleman’s war with them. If they don’t fight by our more civil rules of engagement, we must learn to fight them by using theirs. Otherwise, we’re deceiving ourselves by casting the battlefield in a much too rosy hue.

It’s anything but. One of my Net correspondents, a woman who’s scholarship I respect, stated the problem succinctly as it applies to Egypt following its makeover after the deception formerly known as the Arab Spring:

… For starters, the doors to ijtihad, as they say [Ijtihad - New World Encyclopedia

Ijtihad (Arabic اجتهاد) technical term of Islamic law that describes the process of making a legal decision by independent interpretation... www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Ijtihad -], slammed shut on the Sunni side centuries ago. There is no more ijtihad - there is fiqh, which is the study of jurisprudence, but that is about knowledge of the shariah and application of the shariah, not its interpretation. Consensus of the scholars (ijma) was achieved by the 10th century on all aspects of shariah and all that is left to modern day jurists is its enforcement [my emphasis](and the occasional new situation raised by modern technology, for example - but for that, there's qiyas  - not really ijtihad).

Then, you should have a look at the 1990 Cairo Declaration of the OIC, in which every Muslim country (and there are more members today than then) withdrew from the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and instead defined "human rights" as purely those rights granted under shariah. Note especially Articles 24 and 25 in this regard. [again, my emphasis]

So, when the Egyptian constitution renews and reinforces its submission to shariah, it is on that basis - no "international norms." Shariah.

Which is why the hudud [Hudud Definition - Duhaime.org Law Dictionary and Legal ...

The legal definition of Hudud is Muslim law: divine punishments; the category of crimes most egregious and therefore most severely punished. www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/H/Hudud.aspx] punishments can be enforced to this day under shariah in Muslim-ruled places where shariah is fully enforced - or why legal inequality between Muslims and non-Muslims is a bedrock of this new Egyptian constitution (note the removal of language about "citizens" - which would imply equality). It is also why the clauses in the new Egyptian constitution referring to women are very careful not to grant them equality with men - because that would be a violation of shariah. [my final emphasis]

                                                B.Koplen 5/9/13

with a gun in his hand...

Well worth defending       Times were simpler then. I wasn’t surprised that my Israeli friend pulled over to give a ride to a hitchhiker, a young soldier in Israel’s IDF. Armed with what appeared to be an Uzi (or a Dror or an IMI Negev light machine gun), the young soldier carefully slipped into the back seat. He was in the reserves; he’d been called to report for duty.

We spoke about Syria and the Golan Heights. Seemingly well informed, the young man spoke confidently about the IDF’s preparedness. “We have contingency plans,” he told us. “We could take control of Syria in 24 hours.”

Impressed with his certainty, I listened as he spoke about Israel’s numerous enemies; many were neighboring countries. Despite his David-will-conquer-Goliath attitude, I could see why Israel seemed a scary place to outsiders. Countless times before my trip to Israel, I’d been asked whether it was a safe place to visit.

I thought about that this past Sunday. News reports described apparent Israeli airstrikes against Syrian missile and chemical weapon storage facilities. Although pictures of the results of those successful missions were impressive, what amazed me was the ineffectiveness of Syria’s air defense system. I thought of the young soldier I’d met years ago. Perhaps he’d had good reason to boast about Israel’s capabilities.

Those were my thoughts as I addressed a group of women at a book club in Roanoke. Because we were meeting at the reform Temple, I’d assumed all who were there were Jewish. I was about half right.

Women of all ages were there. Following my presentation, their questions and comments were intelligent and insightful. I enjoyed every minute of my time spent with them.

I’d been invited to tell them about Light One Candle. Rather than review the book, I chose to describe my relationship with its author, my dear friend Solly Ganor. For almost two hours, I spoke about the history of our relationship, how it began with a chance meeting on the Net.

“I responded to one of his essays,” I told them, “never expecting Solly to reply. But he did.” With that, he and I began swapping essays. Eventually, when I first traveled to Israel, I met Solly at a Holocaust survivors’ reunion at Ramat Gan near Tel Aviv.

I went on to describe my Humanities course for which Light one Candle is the required text. “None of my students are Jewish,” I told the group before I knew that many of them either hadn’t been or weren’t Jewish.

That didn’t seem to matter. Each woman had been so impressed with the book that I wasn’t surprised to hear a few of them say that Light One Candle should be required reading for all high schools. Many agreed with my appraisal of the book as being one of the best ever about the Holocaust.

The group was curious and responsive. Their leader had been a teacher; many others were or had been. So were their husbands. I invited all of them to come to visit my class, especially when I show the documentary, Sugihara. In it, Solly makes a cameo appearance to tell about meeting the remarkable ambassador from Japan, Sugihara, in Solly’s aunt’s candy shop in Kaunus, Lithuania.

As a result of that meeting, Sugihara met Solly’s family and learned of the plight of Jews under attack by the Nazis. Deeply moved by what he saw and heard, Sugihara defied his government and wrote visas for thousands of Jews who never would have escaped the Holocaust.

When I was in Israel last month, my daughter and I visited Solly and his wife, Pola. They had prepared lunch for us. As we sat and ate, we talked about Sugihara, about Mrs. Sugihara, a saintly woman. She, too, is featured in the documentary.

Then Solly asked, “Did I show you this?”

He left the table and returned with a picture of him as a soldier in the Israeli army, the first modern Israeli army. I saw the rifle he was holding and wondered whether it was the one in his book, the one that had been used by the Nazis. It was.

“They had been given to us by Czechoslovakia,” said Solly.

Although I wanted to ask more questions, I chose to listen instead. I reasoned that Solly probably had lots to say about current threats to Israel, about Syria and Lebanon and Egypt and Jordan.

“We’re so glad to see you,” he said. His smile was brilliant; it touched me deeply, made me forget for a moment all that I had to know about our very dangerous world. Somehow, Solly had learned how to put aside those realities and his older terror born of Holocaust brutalities.

He’d taught me to do the same just as his book teaches my students. I felt as if I were in the presence of an almost angelic master.

To him and Pola, I raised my glass and toasted, thankfully, “L’chaim!”, to life!

                                                B.Koplen 5/7/13

A way to explain...

K.I.S.S.        Every semester I’m faced with a daunting task that involves finding ways to compare and contrast our American culture with many others. To ensure that I know where to begin, I administer a diagnostic the first day of class. Rather than indoctrinate my students, I seek to engage them by knowing where to begin.

Because many more than half of the world’s population is either Christian or Muslim (or is under the influence of those two religions), I ask each student to explain what he or she knows about Islam. Since almost 100% of my students are Christians, I ask them to compare their religion to Islam.

This coming semester, I may phrase the questions differently.

“Does our American culture share a similar belief in the Ten Commandments with Islam?” Answers would be telling.

I may pose a more difficult question, one that, hopefully, may prompt them to research the answer: “Please explain why it is important to study Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini and his role in the Holocaust.” [please see: Haj Amin al-Husseini - Jewish Virtual Library - Homepage Haj Amin al-Husseini (1893-1974) ... Known later as the Grand Mufti, al-Husseini was able to establish himself as the preeminent Arab power in Palestine. www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/mufti.html -]

Although Haj Amin was a most important figure, I won’t expect a single student to recognize his name. Following the Boston Marathon massacre, I hope that will change.

Bear in mind that my intent is to educate, not to inflame.

That said, certain comparisons are so basic and so essential that it has proven perilous to ignore them. To make that point, I always ask whether everyone in the world believes in ethics outlined in the Ten Commandments. In the past, most of my students assume the answer is yes.

But it’s not. Although it may be true for those who pledge their allegiance to “America and to the Republic for which it stands…” it is not true for many aliens who are in America both legally and illegally. Indeed, their views are radically different.

Here’s why. Our laws, grounded in the Ten Commandments, are thought to apply to every single human, especially those who have or want to have American citizenship. Some would say that the scope of our freedoms and our national sense of justice is or should be seen as universal.

For most Americans and for most Muslim Americans, such a supposition holds. However, as Muslims become more grounded in fundamentalist Islamic tenets, a conflict arises.

Why is that? Although it may be difficult to believe the answer is simple enough for my most naïve students to comprehend, unfortunately it is.

To admit that their ability to understand is unfortunate speaks to the stunning simplicity of Islam’s message: the world is divided into two spheres. One of them, Dar al Islam, the world of Islam, contains all who believe in Allah and who also believe that Mohammad was his prophet, the perfect man.

Those of us who are not Muslims belong to Dar al Harb, the world of war. Until we convert to Islam and become part of Dar al Islam, we are regarded as lesser beings. Terms most commonly used are dhimmi, kuffar, infidel, and non-believers. Many of us, Jews and Christians, are referred to as people of the book.

Islamic rules for us differ greatly than those for Muslims. Although examples are not hard to find, some of the most obvious can be found in Saudi Arabia. Non-Muslims are not allowed in their holy sites, especially Mecca. Churches and synagogues can’t be built there.

Islamic peace with Dar al Harb depends on necessity. Formerly, those who wanted to live in peace with the Islamic forces that were in control had to agree to their second-class status. Doing so meant that they would willingly pay a tax, jizya, to acknowledge their dhimmitude.  Maimonides struggled with such restraints [please see: Maimonides/Rambam - Jewish Virtual Library - Homepage If one did not know that Maimonides was the ... To avoid persecution by the Muslim sect — which was wont to offer Jews and Christians the choice of ... ww.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/.../biography/Maimonides.html -]; they are still being held as standards.

Troubling as that is, it’s even more important to know that such a worldview persists. The reason for that is also brilliantly clear: it’s in the Koran. And the Koran is perfect and immutable, changeless. For those who accept its authority, dictates that originated with Mohammad remain in force today.

Especially the part about Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb. [please see: Photos and Documents of Amin Al Husseini: Nazi Father of ...This page shows how the Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin Al Husseini, ... German Chancellor Adolf Hitler and Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini: Zionism and the Arab ...www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery -]

                                    B.Koplen 5/2/13