You are here

Historical-Research

Summary: 

An excerpt from Colonel Ojukwu’s Ahiara Declaration of 1969 may make [b][/b]clear what lay behind the attempt to create an independent Biafra:

"[b]Our struggle has far-reaching significance. It is the latest recrudescence in our time of the age-old struggle of the black man for his full stature as man. We are the latest victims of a wicked collusion between the three traditional scourges of the black men - racism, Arab-muslim expansionism and white economic imperialism.

The Biafran struggle is, on another plane, a resistance to the Arab-Muslim expansionism which has menaced and ravaged the African continent for twelve centuries....

"Our Biafran ancestors remained immune from the Islamic contagion. From the middle years of the last century Christianity was established in our land. In this way we came to be a predominantly Christian people. We came to stand out as a non-Muslim island in a raging Islamic sea. Throughout the period of the ill-fated Nigerian experiment, the Muslims hoped to infiltrate Biafra by peaceful means and quiet propaganda, but failed. Then the late Ahmadu Bello, the Sardauna of Sokoto tried, by political and economic blackmail and terrorism, to convert Biafrans settled in Northern Nigeria to Islam. His hope was that these Biafrans of dispersion would then carry Islam to Biafra, and by so doing give the religion political control of the area. The crises which agitated the so-called independent Nigeria from 1962 gave these aggressive proselytizers the chance to try converting us by force.

"It is now evident why the fanatic Arab-Muslim states like Algeria, Egypt and the Sudan have come out openly and massively to support and aid Nigeria in her present war of genocide against us. These states see militant Arabism as a powerful instrument for attaining power in the world. Biafra is one of the few African states untainted by Islam.

Therefore, to militant Arabism, Biafra is a stumbling block to their plan for controlling the whole continent. This control is fast becoming manifest in the Organization of African Unity.

Summary: 

During the Biafra War of 1967-1969, which was triggered by a massacre by Muslims of Christians, the entire Western world stood by and allowed the Muslims of the North to slaughter the Christian, mainly Ibo, south. These Muslims were aided by outside Muslims, including Egyptian pilots who strafed and bombed Ibo villages, killing tens of thousands — without any opposition, anti-aircraft fire, anything.

The war was brought on by the Jihad against the Christian Ibo and other Christian peoples of southern Nigeria by the Hausa and Fulani Muslims of the north (Islam itself was spread most recently in the 1804 Jihad declared by Othman Dan Fodio), and by the desperate attempt of the Ibo (Igbo) people to free themselves from Muslim aggression. Tens of thousands of civilians were murdered — by the Egyptian pilots who repeatedly bombed and strafed them.

Great Britain, France, the United States, all of Europe, did nothing to help the Christians. Col. Ojukwu, in his Ahiara Declaration (for the full text, google “Jihad Watch” and “Posted by Hugh” and “Ahiara Declaration”), said that the Biafrans were fighting off a “Jihad” that was being waged against them — and the word was not being used figuratively.

Summary: 

Muslims often complain of "misconceptions" about their religion, yet few seem to know all that much about the true history of Islam and its founder, Muhammad.  As a result, the biggest misconceptions about Islam are often those propagated by Muslims themselves. Here, we refute the contemporary mythology of Muhammad by referring to the earliest and most reliable Muslim historians, who based their writings on those who actually knew their revered prophet. The historical compilations of Ibn Ishaq (compiled by Ibn Hisham), al-Tabari, Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are greatly respected in the Muslim academic community as a priceless source of biographical information and the details of Islam's origin and rise to power.  These writings also provide the context for the Quran. 

Summary: 
Muslims are adamant in asserting that the Quran is the final Testament of Allah However,the historical reliability of the qur'an  has been challenged by both archeological& manuscript evidence.manuscript,documentary and archaeological evidence all fail to confirm many of the claims of the Muslims
Let's examine some of the external documentary sources and modern archaeology
Summary: 

In this paper, we will discuss a contentious theory on the Muslim qibla, or the direction of prayer, of the first mosques in the earliest period of Islamic history. A small, defiant, and largely discredited group of Orientalists have argued that the early mosques were not oriented toward Makkah, but somewhere in northern Arabia or even Jerusalem, a theory that challenges the Muslim belief that the earliest mosques were directed toward the Kʿabah. The notion that early mosques were oriented toward northern Arabia/Jerusalem insidiously suggests the possibilities that the earliest Muslims did not pray toward Makkah and that the Islamic traditon of a qibla facing Kʿabah was a later development, hidden from history by some sort of a conspiracy. The divisive appeal behind such a theory is rather obvious when we consider that it has been chiefly propagated by Western scholars such as Patricia Crone and Michael Cook. Dutifully parroting this theory is Joseph Smith, an assiduous Christian missionary whose anti-Islamic propaganda is largely restricted to the internet.

Summary: 

These are the main issues I found with Islam.  If you want to understand the real problems I found, start here.

Reflections

Dialogues and discussions I had after leaving Islam.  Some thoughts

Rulings/Fiqh

These are not why I left Islam.  They are reflections after leaving Islam.  Keep in mind that even if I was completely wrong about every single one of these, it would not make me come back to Islam.  As a Secular Humanist, I find these to be troubling issues we find and they seem to show that Allah is not the intelligent supreme being that sent us a beautiful wise religion but rather a 7th century invention with barbaric rules and orders that matched that early era but do not belong in today’s world.

History

Sometimes history is not what it seems

Summary: 

In this article we intend to supplement the following excellent discussion of Q. 9:5 by our dear brother Silas: The Verse of the Sword: Sura 9:5 and Jihad

Our purpose is to examine Q. 9:5 and 29 in light of the testimony of Muslim sources in order to see whether these texts refer to defensive jihad, e.g. fighting only those who attack and oppress Muslims. Or do these texts actually command Muslims to attack and/or subjugate the disbelievers in the context of offensive military warfare for the purpose of expanding Islam politically and geographically.

The Passage

Summary: 

Why do politicians and other religious illiterates intone the vacuous mantra that Islam is a ‘religion of peace’every time there is an atrocity like the Manchester bombing, last week? 9/11 should have stopped such nonsense in its tracks sixteen years ago. But no, they continue to inform us that Islamic terrorism has nothing whatever to do with ‘peaceful’ Islam.

Summary: 

The problem faced by the orthodox religious authorities in the Muslim world, however, is very similar to that which confronted the Catholic Church in the 16th century: escaped genies are tricky things to get back into bottles. The same impulse that prompted Luther to affirm the primacy of scripture over Catholic doctrine has also long been at work in Islam. As far back as the 13th century, a scholar based in Damascus by the name of Ibn Taymiyya proposed that the surest way to know God’s purpose was to study the practices of the first three generations of Muslims: the “forebears”, or “Salafs”. Reports of what Muhammad and his earliest followers had done, so he argued, should always trump subsequent tradition. Like Luther, Ibn Taymiyya was condemned as a heretic; but he also, again like Luther, blazed a momentous trail.

Salafism today is probably the fastest-growing Islamic movement in the world. The interpretation that Isis applies to Muslim scripture may be exceptional for its savagery – but not for its literalism. Islamic State, in its conceit that it has trampled down the weeds and briars of tradition and penetrated to the truth of God’s dictates, is recognisably Salafist. When Islamic State fighters smash the statues of pagan gods, they are following the example of the Prophet; when they proclaim themselves the shock troops of a would-be global empire, they are following the example of the warriors of the original caliphate; when they execute enemy combatants, and impose discriminatory taxes on Christians, and take the women of defeated opponents as slaves, they are doing nothing that the first Muslims did not glory in.

Summary: 

But what Holland at no point mentioned was why he had not gone to film in another city which – mistakenly or otherwise – is far more important in Islam: Mecca. The reason is that Holland is not a Muslim and so is not only unable to film in Mecca but also is not allowed to go there.

.....

‘The British Muslim community will not allow Channel 4 to distort our faith and our history.’

Is that a threat? It doesn’t seem a very moderate way of responding to an interesting programme. He concludes:

‘The Ramadhan Foundation calls on Channel 4 to apologise for this programme, withdraw it from online viewing and also order an immediate inquiry into why this was allowed to be broadcast. How many Muslims Scholars, community leaders were given a copy of this programme before transmission? Whether historic facts in relation to Islam were verified by the presenter and who his sources were.’

Gosh! Did Channel 4 know that they had to pass their programmes by ‘community leaders’? Who will censor programmes for the rest of us?

Pages

Subscribe to Historical-Research