Mohammad-killed opponents


In the name of Allāh,
the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Peace and Blessings of Allāh on Mohammad.
Allāh–the Glorious and the High,
Lord of the worlds
Mohammad–who brought the world
to our feet and eternity to our arms.


Even if Mohammad had killed his enemies unjustly, no prophet, including Jesus, can be shown to have brought benefit to man as Mohammad brought.

The Prophet Mohammad is said to have killed or ordered the killing of his opponents, including those that ridiculed him in their poetry (which castigating may have inspired or encouraged others to militate against Mohammad). (Christians and other critics of Islam take relish in noting these “killings”), and also made pre-emptive attack(s) on his enemies and “grabbed” Safiyyah and Juwairiyyah for wives. (See Mohammad-JuwairiyyahMohammad-Safiyyah;  Mohammad-Rayhana).

(It is to be known that a large number of these “killings” that the Prophet Mohammad is said to have ordered was quoted from Ibn Hisham, also known as Ibn Ishaq. It is said of Ibn Ishaq that: “Throughout his work, Ibn Ishaq precedes every statement with the word za`ama or za`amu, he (they) alleged). It carries with it more than a hint that the statement may not be true, though it might be sound. This attitude reflects Ibn Ishaq’s caution and fairness.”1

Thus, it is evident that such “killings” may be doubtful. Nevertheless even if the Prophet Mohammad ordered such “killings” they are hardly a blot on the Prophet’s character as will be shown).

   Mohammad’s duty was only to preach the Divine Message, not enforce it. The people had the choice to accept or reject the Message. The disbelievers not only rejected the Divine Message they militated against it. What would you do if someone without justification (and even with justification) tries to kill you? Will you let him kill you and/or incite/mobilize others to kill you?

From the beginning of his ministry the Prophet was a target of annihilation attempts. For twenty-three grueling years Moham-mad was persecuted, besieged, under threat of the assassin’s blade, forced into exile, pursued, and warred upon.      

   There was tacit warfare by some of his opponents. By intriguing against his life and openly reviling the Prophet these opponents identified themselves as “enemy combatants” and were subjected to reprisals –even today and in “civilized” society during times of tension “free speech,” which may even express the truth, may be viewed as an incitement to unrest against the State, and be subjected to reprisals. People are targeted for opposing authority. People who are mere suspects are routed and even tortured or killed.

   Unlike rogue leaders, the Prophet Mohammad was no tyrant, no occupier, no oppressor, and no exploiter.Had the enemies of Mohammad not become physical, Mohammad would not have retaliated.

   Whereas the critics revile Mohammad, even in modern times people are imprisoned for way less than incitement; just ask world-famous peace activist Jaggie Singh, and anti-apartheid icon Nelson Mandela and his late brother-in-cause Steve Biko; as well as those Muslims jailed or held under detention under mere suspicion or without any kind of charge.

   And these Twentieth-century jailers crown themselves as “civilized” and “democratic.” Imagine then the punishment(s) that would have been meted out to peace-activists and freedom-fighters if they had castigated or incited against their leaders, as was done against Mohammad.

   -Palestinian author and writer, whose lands were stolen, have been assassinated by their occupiers merely for writing about the injustice committed against them

   -Palestinians were/are slaughtered because of their race/ religion because Jews covet their land –Palestinians were subjected to “large-scale intimidation; laying siege to and bombarding villages and population centres; setting fire to homes, properties and goods; expulsion; demolition; and finally, planting mines among the rubble to prevent any of the expelled inhabitants from returning;”and that at the end of Jewish’s “six months” onslaught “more than half of Palestine’s native population, close to 800,000 people, had been uprooted, 531 villages had been destroyed, and eleven urban neighborhoods emptied of their inhabitants”2 and subjected to obscene humiliation by Jews: “These included regular exercises of humiliation, such as forcing Araboushim to urinate and excrete on one another and crawl on the ground while they call out “Long Live the State of Israel” or lick the earth; or on Holocaust day, to write numbers on their own hands “in memory of Jews in the extermination camps.”” 3 And for more than six torturous decades now are still suffering under Jewish jackboots.

   -“Six million” Jews were slaughtered because of their race.

   -America and Allies devastated Iraq because of alleged weapons of mass destruction –more like coveting Muslims oil– (and Saddam Hussein did not transgress against America and Allies).

   -America is traveling thousands of miles from her soil to Afghanistan and Pakistan to kill Talibans (and Talibans did not transgress against America; and compared to Mohammad whose enemies were on his own soil);

   -America is traveling thousands of miles to Yemen to kill “enemies” and even those who incite “terrorism” against her (compared to Mohammad whose enemies were on his own soil);    

   -China marshaled combat tanks against demonstrators at Tiananmen Square.

   -Nineteen-ninety-two Los Angeles demonstrators were “beaten” just for protesting the building of a roadway.

   -People can be charged/jailed merely for uttering death threats.

   -People can be charged/jailed for denying the “Holocaust.”

   -America and so-called “Israel” are sounding war drums against Iran’s uranium enrichment program (and it is Iran’s inalienable and Sovereign right to enrich whatever it likes and for whatever purpose).

   -People who are “suspects” of terrorism or supporters of “terrorism” are jailed/tortured.

   -The BBC apologized to Queen Elizabeth for its disclosure that the Queen was upset over the presence of a “radical” Muslim cleric in London. (Contrasted to ridicule/incitement and militancy against Mohammad).

   -A French court ruled against a magazine for publicizing “bare-breasted” pictures of her royalness Kate Middleton; and imposed a daily fine for refusal to remove the pictures from its website. (Contrasted to ridicule/incitement and militancy against Mohammad).

-The British tabloid, Sun, was censured for showing a nude Prince Harry. (Contrasted to ridicule/incitement and militancy against Mohammad).

 -A Toronto Blue Jays player was pounded by management and media for wearing the word “maricon (faggot)” on his face. (Contrasted to ridicule/incitement and militancy against Mohammad).

   -In India, the so-called “largest democracy” in the world, a cartoonist was jailed for depicting the Indian parliament as a “fly-infested” bathroom. (Contrasted to ridicule/incitement and militancy against Mohammad).

   -That Mohammad made “pre-emptive” attacks on his enemies. In 1967 “Israel” in a “surprise attack” went and destroyed Syrian and Egyptian air-forces on the ground. Contrasted to Mohammad strike against those on his own soil; and Mohammad was no occupier, usurper, or oppressor.

   -In 1981 “Israel” went and destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear station. Contrasted to Mohammad strike against those on his own soil; and Mohammad was no occupier, usurper, or oppressor.

   -In 2007 “Israel” destroyed Syria’s “suspected” nuclear facility. Contrasted to Mohammad strike against those on his own soil; and Mohammad was no occupier, usurper, or oppressor.

   -In 1998 America went thousands of miles and bombed Sudan’s pharmaceutical plant “suspected” of manufacturing armaments and of Sudan’s “alleged” link to Osama bib Laden. Contrasted to Mohammad who was no transgressor.

   And whereas Mohammad killed only his enemies, in contrast modern nations not only jail/fine cartoonist and publisher and jail/torture suspects and kill enemies and perceived enemies but also kill –mangle, incinerate and obliterate– thousands of innocent Muslims with bombs and missiles.

   But for Mohammad’s trees of self-defense the critics of Mohammad cannot see (or have blinded themselves to) the non-Muslim’s forests of aggressions.

   And on the theological front. Whereas Mohammad struggled for survival against only those who sought to annihilate him:

   -Moses killed even the innocent women and young males and took their “virgin” little girls as sex slaves: And Moses said unto them…Now therefore kill every MALE among the LITTLE ONES (of the captives), and kill EVERY WOMANwho hath known man by lying with him, but ALL THE WOMEN CHILDREN, that have not known a man by lying with him (virgin girls) KEEP ALIVE FOR YOURSELVES…And the BOOTY…of WOMEN that had not known man by lying with him (virgin girls), were 32,000 …And of the congregation’s half portion of these 16,000 virgin girls, 320 were given to the Levite priests…And the LORD’S TRIBUTE (was)…32 persons….the men of war had taken SPOIL (BOOTY), EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF”–(Numbers 31:1-53).

   -Joshua slaughtered even dumb animals: “and Joshua called for all the men of Israel…Come near, put your feet upon the necks of these kings…And afterward Joshua smote them, and slew them, and hanged them on five trees.” “So Joshua smote all the country of the hills, and of the south, and of the vale, and of the springs, and all their kings: he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded…And all these kings and their land did Joshua take at one time, because the Lord God of Israel fought for Israel;” “And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword”–(Josh. 10:19, 24, 26, 40-42; 6:21. Read Josh. chs. 10-12; Num. 21:24, 35; 31:17-18; Deut. 20:16-17; 1 Sam. 15:2-3, for slaughters by Joshua, Moses, and Saul).

   -David had Uriah killed just because he coveted Uriah’s wife–(2 Samuel 11:3-5, 14-17, 26-27).

   -Jesus commanded that his enemies opposed to his rule be slain: “But those mine enemies, which would not that I should rule over them, bring hither, and slay them before me”–(Luke 19:27; even though the enemies might not militate against him. While there is no evidence that such enemies were slain; this verse along with Jesus’ equally absurd “He that is not with me is against me”–(Matt. 12:30; and a person can be neutral), must be the ones that gave birth to the murderous Crusades. As M. H. Haykal notes:

“From the dawn of Christianity until today every country of the world has been soaked with blood in the name of Jesus Christ. The Romans and the Byzantines of old as well as the European peoples of modern times are guilty of shedding blood in religious causes. The Crusades were launched and their fires fanned by Christians, not by Muslims. For hundreds of years, one army after another rolled out of Europe in the direction of the Muslim Orient to fight, to destroy, and to shed blood. In every case, the popes who claimed to be the vicars of Jesus Christ, blessed and encouraged these armies and hurried them to Jerusalem and other destinations.”

   Interestingly M. H. also notes that in response to the Crusades: “The (Christian) missionaries rejoin, “Those were the Middle Ages, ages of darkness, unfit as evidence against Christianity.” If this is an argument on which they pin some hope, let us then turn to the twentieth century in which we now live and which they call “the century of the highest human civilization.” This century has indeed seen the same darkness as did the Middle Ages. Lord Allenby, representing the allied forces of England, France, Italy, Rumania, and America, stopped in Jerusalem in 1918 after his conquest of that city toward the end of the first World War and said: “Today the Crusades have come to an end.””4

(Regarding the Christian’s defense that the Crusades were the “ages of darkness.” The first Crusade against Muslims was launched in 1095 by Pope Urban II. If the Christian Middle-Ages were the “ages of darkness,” as Christian the apologists’ claim then the preceding ages were even “darker.” Why then crab at Mohammad (570-632) who preceded these Crusading “ages of darkness” by more than four centuries; and who was supposed to be a “barbarian” as Ibn Warraq charged? For a comment on Ibn Warraq’s fanciful book see Why I am not a Muslim).

   That Mohammad held no rancor against the disbelievers and only sought an end to their injustice is evidenced from the fact that Mohammad prayed for his dead enemy, saying: “if I knew that if I asked forgiveness for him more than seventy times, he would be forgiven, I would ask it for more times than that”–(Qur’an 9:84, 113. Bokhari Vol. 6, #193, 194).

   And upon his triumph at Makkah he forgave his rabid enemies of twenty-three grueling years: “It is related that the Prophet took hold of the two sides of the gate of the Ka’ba on the day of the conquest of Makkah and said to the Quraish: How do you think I should treat you? They said: We hope for good, a noble brother and the son of a noble brother. Then he said: I say as my brother Joseph said: “No reproof be against you this day”(Rz)”5   No inquisition. No incrimination. No confession. No rancor. Only lofty words of benevolence and nobility–”No reproof be against you this day.”Such was the expanse of the mercy and benevolence of this wonderful man, Mohammad.

   Mohammad even forgave the horrid Hind. The woman who is said to have cut open the body of his uncle, Hamza, as he lay dying on the battlefield and ripped out his liver and chewed it.  

   Given the inhuman manner in which suspects are held, and even tortured, by unjust powers, it is hardly credible that a leader whose all determination is to eliminate his opponents would, upon his victory over his most horrid enemies not slaughter them, but would grant them amnesty to roam his kingdom, as Muhammad did, leaving himself open to the possibility of these enemies later rising in insurrection against him and completely destroying him.

   Mohammad’s mercy is a beacon for the world to behold. Mohammad was no butcher; Mohammad was a savior: Mohammad was, as Allāh our God says, “a mercy for all creatures”–(Qur’an 21:107).

   Mohammad’s act of forgiveness has given “to all mankind and all the generations the most perfect example of goodness, of truthfulness, of nobility and magnanimity.”6

   And as Prof. Abdul Ahad Dawud –“the former Reverend David Benjamin Keldani, B.D., a Ro-man Catholic priest of the Uniate-Chaldean sect”– states in his revealing book Muhummed in the Bible that

all the blood shed in the wars of Badr, Ohud, and other campaigns led personally by the Prophet Muhammad, could not exceed one-hundredth of the blood shed by Joshua. Yet not a single instance of cruelty or injustice can be proved against the Apostle of Allāh. He was clement, noble, magnanimous, and forgiving.”

Whatever measures Mohammad took to secure the welfare of himself and followers, and on his own soil, Mohammad was fully justified. The critics of Mohammad would do the same and even more for less than self-defense. The Bible and Twentieth-century records are evidence to this!  


Muhammad Ali has refuted charges against Islam. No Muslim home should be without a copy of his translation of the Qur’an, and no Muslim student’s computer should be without an electronic copy. His translation of the Qur’an with text, notes, and commentaries can be viewed online:



1. Taken from the Internet, art. Ibn Hisham, from an answer given to an inquirer about the authenticity of reports by Ibn Ishaq/Ibn Hisham.

2. Ilan Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, pp. xii, xiii.

3. Prof. Noam Chomsky, Pirates and Emperors, Old And New, International Terrorism in the Real World, p. 9.

4. Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life Of Muhammad, p. 213.

5. Muhammad Ali, comm. Qur’an 12:92. That four persons were executed upon the Prophet’s triumph at Makkah compared to the thousands that were forgiven is hardly any blot on Mohammad’s mercy. Of these four individuals, as M.H. Haykal notes in his The Life of Muhammad, p; 411, two were Muslims guilty of murder before apostatizing; al Huwayrith for tempting the Prophet’s daughter, Zaynab; and a slave woman of Ibn Khatal for castigating the Prophet in song; which castigating may have inspired or encouraged others to militate against the Prophet.

6. Muhammad Husayn Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, p. 408.