Elsayed: Suicide Bombers are In-House Business

Shaker El-Sayed is the imam of Dar al Hijrah, a Falls Church mosque that has been a place of worship for notable terrorists and extremists including Abdurahman Alamoudi, who attended the mosque before his September 2003 indictment for illegal financial dealings with Libya, and Hamas political leader Mousa Abu Marzook, who attended the mosque while living in the United States. Here, at a joint conference sponsored by the Muslim American Society (MAS) and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) in December 2002, he justifies suicide bombing:

Transcript:

El-Sayed (Arabic): And about the subject unfairly named suicide bombers, homicide bombers, or murderers, or killers. Our answer to this issue is simple. To decide that this man is a martyr or not a martyr, it is a pure religious matter. Nobody who is not Muslim has any right to decide for us, we the Muslims, whose is a martyr or another. We as Muslims will decide that. It is in-house business.

[...]

The Islamic scholars said if there is an attack on the land of Islam or they occupy the land of Islam, or the honor of the Muslims has been violated, the Jihad is a must on every man, every child and every woman, [They have to make Jihad] with every tool that they can get in their hand. Anything that they can get in their hand they should fight with it. And if they don't have a weapon in their hands, then [they will fight] unarmed.

Reader comments on this item

TAQIYYA?

Submitted by Bubbababy, Sep 30, 2010 16:31

How does one know when a muslims is telling the truth, given that their koran promotes deceit, concealment of one's true beliefs, lying? This practice is promoted and applauded by muslims. So how does one know? WE DON'T!

Re: Be Fair to US communities

Submitted by Ian, Nov 15, 2009 16:03

"In this video two pieces are put together."

This is clear from the transcript. In English, when a writer is quoting someone and she wants to quote two different parts of the same speech, book, essay or what have you, she writes this "[...]". The Investigative Project was not hiding anything and everyone reading this knows that it was two pieces put together. It doesn't change the fact that Mr. El-Sayed is engaging in apologetics in favor of murderers of kids. As decent human beings, we reserve the right to call killers whatever we want. People who kill themselves in the act of bombing are suicide bombers, it's as simple as that.

Three points regarding your last two paragraphs. First: the Palestinians were offered a state in 1937, 1947, and 2000. The first suicide bombing occured during the Oslo negotiations, when the Palestinians had alternative to violence. The objective of suicide bombers is the destruction of Israel, not the liberation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Second: if the "honor of the people are violated" (whatever chavanistic, macho definition you have for "honor") it is no excuse for killing noncombatants, including kids. People across history have suffered much worse than the Palestinians and did not resort to such inhumane brutality. Even people fighting just wars must follow international law. Finally: the vast majority of houses demolished did not have people inside them. Most of these homes are used to smuggle in weapons used to kill both Israelis and Palestinians. These weapons banned by the Oslo Occords. If the PA wants to lessen the instances of house demolitions it must simply stop the flow of arms.

Be Fair to US communities

Submitted by James, Sep 19, 2009 19:22

In this video two pieces are put together. Look at around (00:20)

I happen to speak 5 languages and learning new one. The man said that the decision of whether to label a person as martyr or not is up to the Muslims and did not say what the title is implying!! If the definition of a martyr according to Islam is defined for them in the Koran, then an outsider cannot come interpret it or redefine it for them. Makes complete sense.
Second point: If a nation (regardless of Islamic or not) is attacked, or the honor of the people are violated, that nation had to fight back with all means. Hummm! Makes sense to me especially that he is talking about self defense. For those soles we lost on 9/11 we are still killing and fighting and we are willing to go further than that. Is this the right of some nations but not others?

I met Mr. Shaker and disagreed with him on several points but I have no doubts he is against the killing of the innocent people, whether our people here in 9/11, or their people overseas unjustly occupied and killed by the Israeli bulldozers. Please post out of fairness.

Comment on this item