Islamic Terrorism - Is It A New Threat?

[Nahapetian Zhanna]

ISLAMIC TERRORISM - IS IT A NEW THREAT?
M.A. Khan

Global Politician, NY
http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=2 825&cid=11&sid=109
May 17 2007

In recent times, overshadowing the relative calm of the past few
decades, there has been a sudden surge in violence and terrorist
activities by the Islamic fanatics. Hence, there is a debate as
to why Muslims did not indulge in terror and violence during the
past decades and centuries. There might be some consolation in the
thought that Islamic violence was not so evident during the early
20th century. However, there is also a general impression amongst
both Muslims and the non-Muslims that there was never any Islamic
violence and terrorism until the last 2-3 decades. One respected
moderate Muslim columnist, Tanveer Jaffri, in his recent column,
Terror and Terrorism in the World: The Remedy, wrote: "Obviously,
in the life of Hazrat Mohammad, taking his relations with the Islam,
there is no incident showing terror or terrorism. Even Hazrat Mohammad
himself never fought against anyone, in his lifetime."

Presuming Mr. Jafri a good-hearted and honest person, I believe
that his verdict on Prophet Muhammad's non-involvement in any
kind of violence in his life-time is his honest opinion. Not only
Mr. Jafri, but most of the moderate Muslims also bear such a thought
about the Prophet of Islam. Yet, such thought, even if born out of
honest opinion, is thoroughly erroneous and is the result of utter
ignorance. Instead of being a nonviolent person, Muhammad's life is
a testament of ceaseless raids and plundering expeditions of highway
caravans and waging wars against the infidel (non-Muslims). He himself
had orchestrated more than one hundred raids, plundering expeditions
and wars. Even just before his death, he was in the planning of
organizing an expedition, but he fell sick suddenly, from which he
never recovered. By this time, he had already extirpated all the Jewish
settlements around Medina by means of mass slaughter and enslavement
(Banu Quraiza) and mass exile (Banu Nadir and Banu Qainuqa). He had
also launched expeditions against the Jewish tribes in far-flung
places, namely the prosperous Jewish settlement of Khaybar. In his
death bed one of his last wishes was: "Let there be no other religion
except Islam". This wish was carried out to fruition by his immediate
successors, notably Caliph Abu Bakar and Omar.

The fact is: the kind of terror and violence perpetrated by Prophet
Muhammad have little or no parallel amongst the terrorism and
violence of today's Islamic terrorists. The extermination of the
Jews from Medina requires another mention here. Consider the case of
Muhammad's raiding the Jewish enclave of Banu Quraiza, because they
did not join the Muslim army when the Meccans attacked the Muslims
in the famous battle of the Trench, which, the Quraiza tribe was
allegedly obligated to do because of a covenant of mutual protection
signed years earlier. The first reason of unwillingness of the Quraiza
people to join the battle that Muhammad started was that the Jewish
people were sick and tired of such violent activities and blood-baths,
raiding and plundering expeditions and fighting wars one after another,
which became the prominent feature of the Medina citizens' life once
Muslims became powerful. Secondly, the Mecca army in this battle
was too powerful to ensure a decisive victory, had it not been for
the trenches Muhammad had dug - thanks to idea given to Muhammad by
Salman the Persian from his Persian experience of war.

After a 25-day seize of the Jewish enclave the Muslims, the Quraiza
tribe surrendered unconditionally and pleaded with Muhammad to let
them go into exile. Instead, Muhammad decided to slaughter all the
males of weapon-bearing age, around 600 to 900 in numbers, captured
their women and children as slaves and took possession of their homes,
properties and farms as spoils of war and distributed them amongst
the Muslims who had participated in this genocide. The world is yet to
witness an example of similar barbaric atrocity perpetrated by today's
Islamic terrorists, though we can be absolutely certain that today's
Islamist jihadists ardently crave to match their Prophet's examples.

Another incidence which requires mentioning again here is Muhammad's
victorious entry into the city of Mecca, his paternal hometown. Upon
his entry into the city, he destroyed all the temples and deities
which his ancestors had worshipped for centuries. Soon after his
invasion of Mecca, the Prophet sent his general Khalid bin Walid to
destroy all the pagan temples of the neighboring tribes of Mecca.

Khalid reached the Jazima tribe and asked them to say, "We are
Muslims". But they said, "We are Sabians" - whereupon Khalid
slaughtered the whole tribe. The Jazima tribe people had never given
any troubles to the Muslims. Is there a parallel of such utter
barbarity amongst terror acts of today's Muslim extremists? No,
there isn't. The truth is: by the end of his 22 years of religious
campaign, Muhammad had depopulated the entire Southern Arabia of
the infidel pagans, Jews, Christians and Sabians etc. through mass
slaughter, enslavement and forced conversion and mass exile. These
acts of violence, cruelty and barbarity of the Prophet have no
parallel amongst violent acts of today's Islamic terrorists. Of
course, throughout the Islamic world, there are scattered incidences
of violence and attacks on non-Muslims' homes, churches and temples
and incidences of raping the infidel women. But there is no incidence
in which women of an entire community being captured as sex-slaves,
all weapon-bearing males of a community put to summary execution or
an entire village or community of the Kaffirs sent to exile.

The acts of violence and terrorism did not just disappear with the
death of the Prophet but was redoubled by his immediate successors;
namely, Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman et al. who were Muhammad's closest
friends. By the time of third Caliph Othman's rule, all remaining Jews
and Christians of entire Arabian peninsula were forcibly converted,
expelled or slain which fulfilled Prophet's death-bed wish that no
second religion remain in the holy land of Arabia.

Immediately after Muhammad's death, many Muslims who were forced to
accept Islam wanted to leave Islam. Prophet's first biographer, ibn
Ishak writes, "When the apostle was dead, most of the Muslims thought
of withdrawing from Islam and had made up their mind to do". Many
tribes rose in rejection of Islam, turned to their tribal leaders
and refused to pay taxes. The immediate task of the first Caliph,
Abu Bakr, was to bring these fierce and intractable tribes into
submission. Under the command of fierce Khalid ibn Walid, a bitter
and sanguinary battle, termed the Wars of the Apostasy (ridda)
followed. The revolt was cruelly suppressed and the recalcitrant
tribes were forced back to the fold of Islam.

The fanaticism and barbarity associated with these conquering
expeditions need a sampling here. The kind of fierce intolerance and
fanaticism being inspired by Prophet Muhammad amongst his followers
have no parallel in the annals of any other religion. Under his
command, his followers were ready to kill even their own fathers
and brothers, if given approval by the Prophet. Prophet's biographer
Hisahm al-Kalbi notes that the son of the great hypocrite Abduallah
ibn Obayi had begged for prophet's permission to kill his own father
and bring the head to the prophet. But Abdullah was an influential
man and the prophet didn't dare. According to Ibn-Ishak, in July 624,
being increasingly exasperated with the Jews, the prophet ordered:
"Kill any Jew whoever falls into your power." Thereupon a Muslim
convert named Muhaysa fell upon a rich Jewish merchant who happened to
be on the same way and killed him, despite the fact that he belonged
to his own tribe. When his elder brother, still a Jew, scolded him
for killing someone of his own tribe, Muhaysa replied, "By Allah,
if Muhammad commanded me to kill you also, I would have cut off your
head". So impressed was the Jewish man by his brother's conviction to
Islam that he immediately converted to Islam. The prophet's fanatic
inspiration to intolerance and violence compelled Voltaire to comment:
Such conducts cannot be defended by any person, 'unless superstition
has choked all the light of reason from him.'

The violent fanaticism, inspired by the Prophet, was carried forward
with ruthless zeal by his immediate followers. Khalid ibn Walid,
who fought on the enemy side in the battle of Ohud but later embraced
Islam, became one of the most blood-thirsty and brutal of conquerors,
if judged even by the standard of his day. Yet his cruelty and rapacity
were and still are greatly extolled by the Muslims, honoring him with
the title of "the Sword of Allah" (Sayif Allah).

The utter barbarity of Khalid was displayed in May, 633, when he
defeated the Zoroastrian Persians at the Battle of Olayis in Southern
Iraq (between Hira and Basra). For two days, his soldiers rounded up
the great multitude of prisoners and fugitives, who were then herded
on to a dry river bed and were butchered until it became a crimson
stream. The place thereafter proudly bore the title of 'the River of
Blood'. Abu Bakr, the caliph was overjoyed when the news of victory
and massacre reached him.

On the barbarity of Khalid, Benjamin Walker writes: "A wine-lover and
lustful debaucher, Khalid took sickly sadistic delight in beheading a
defeated chieftain on the battle-field, selecting his wife (if young)
or daughter and celebrating his nuptials with her on the spot soaked
with the blood of the victim (father/husband of the bride)." [Walker,
Foundations of Islam, p. 316]

Before Muslims conquered Jerusalem, the scattered communities of Jews
and pagans lived in harmony along with the Christians. When Caliph Omar
conquered Jerusalem, much venerated in the Koran and a holy place in
Islam, in 637 - the Jewish temples and Christian Churches were razed
to the ground and widespread looting and pillaging was unleashed. The
Patriarch Sophronius of Jerusalem (634-638), who witnessed spread
of Islam in the Arabia and the fall of Jerusalem with his own eyes,
described the Muslim invaders as "godless barbarians" who "burnt
churches, destroyed monasteries, profaned the Crosses and blasphemed
against Christ and the church." The following year, thousands died
of famine resulting from the destruction and pillage by the Muslim
conquerors of Jerusalem. [Ibn Warraq, Why I am not a Muslim, p. 219]

The invading Muslims destroyed the main Jewish temple (Solomon Temple)
and Omar laid, in its place, the foundation of the prestigious
al-Aqsa mosque with his own hands. He declared a decree that Jews
and Christians could practice religion only in the confines of their
churches and homes. No new churches would be built, no conversion
should be made, crosses should not be exhibited in their churches
and no public display of their faith should be made. These rather
benevolent treatments were accorded to the Jews and Christians under
the privileged term of the Dhimmis (Zimmis) as accorded to the people
of the Book in the Koran. Yet, repression and discrimination, attacks
on pilgrims, raid and ransacking of the monasteries and the destruction
of the places of worship of the non-Muslims continued.

The barbaric tradition of atrocity set in motion by the Prophet in the
form a command for incessant Jihad against the Kaffirs in the Koran,
continued well into the late period of the Ottoman caliphate.

Even the highly magnanimous caliphs, like Harun-ur-Rashid and his son
al-Mamun were thoroughly brutal in dealing with the Jews, Christians
and pagans. The great caliph al-Mamun of the golden age of Islam, who
instituted the heretic rationalistic Mutazili doctrine and non-divine
nature of the Koran as state policy, too, was extremely harsh when
it comes to dealing with the non-Muslim subjects. Under his rule in
the 9th century, the pagans of Harran had to choose between Islam
and death. Such barbaric tools of forced conversion of the infidels
continued well into the late Ottoman period. Tavernier, the 17th
century French traveler, describes how in Anatolia "Everyday there
are numerous Greeks forced to become Turks".

Certain Western authors and historians believe that after an early
onslaught of Islamic conquests lasting until about the mid-eighth
century, violence subsided and relative calm and peace prevailed
throughout the Islamic world for the subsequent centuries [Saunders,
J.J. A History of Medieval Islam. London: Routledge, 1965; p79]. In
truth, such claims of existence of centuries of peace fly in the face
of it. In reality, no period of the Islamic domination did ensure a
peaceful life to the non-Muslims subjects - thanks to Muslims' Jihadi
campaigns in various forms, either by the state or by the Muslim
mobs. Yet, some desperate minority of Muslim rulers were tolerant
towards non-Muslim subjects in defiance of the Islamic injunctions.

Islamic terror, as was unleashed by the Prophet, comprised of
unprovoked attack on the unwarned and unprepared infidel territories,
exiling or killing the adult male prisoners, taking the females and
children as captives (beautiful and young women were used in the harem
as sex-slaves, children for raising as Muslims and older females for
sale), looting and plundering the infidels of their valuable properties
and assets, imposing Jiziyah and of course, destroying the infidels'
religious institutions. Ibn Warraq, in "Why I am not a Muslims"
[p. 219-240] has listed the Islamic atrocities and violence against
the infidels of various sorts which I will summarized here.

7th Century

After Prophet Muhammad's emigration from Mecca to Medina in 622,
the exiling and extermination of 3 major Jewish tribes of Medina by
628, has been described above. In 630, Muhammad marched into Mecca,
mercilessly captured, destroyed the most sacred pagan temple of Ka'ba
and established the Islamic rule there. The pagan inhabitants were
given a choice between death and Islam. To save lives, the pagans
had no choice but to accept Islam. On the same day, Khalid ibn
Walid's massacre of the entire Jezima tribe for not accepting Islam
has already been discussed. Khalid ibn Walid, upon command of Caliph
Abu Bakr, launched the blood-letting wars of the apostasy (Ridda) to
submit those, who deserted Islam immediately after Muhammad's death,
back to the faith. The utter barbarity of Khalid Ibn Walid against the
defeated the Zoroastrian Persians at the Battle of Olayis in Southern
Iraq in May 633, whereby he created what is famously called the River
of Death has been discussed before.

After completing extermination/exiling the Jews of Medina in 628,
Muhammad launched a campaign against the wealthy and prosperous Jewish
community of Khaybar. He ordered his charges to destroy all the Jewish
temples as they came across. Having defeated the community, he tortured
the chief of tribe Kinana by setting fire on his chest to find out the
whereabouts of his treasures. After extracting the location of the
ensconced treasure, Kinana was beheaded, the treasures were looted,
and Kinana's wife Safiyah was rendered as his share of the booty. He
married and took her to bed on the same night her husband's dead body
awaited burial on the next day. Incidentally, Safiyah's father belonged
to the Banu Quraiza tribe of Medina whom Muhammad had beheaded earlier.

In the Muslim campaign of 634, the entire region between Gaza and
Caesarea was devastated and four thousand peasants, comprising of
Christians, Jews and Samaritans, who were simply defending their
lands, were massacred. In 637, the Victorian Muslim army's march
into Jerusalem, with Caliph Omar at the lead, and the accompanying
destruction of the synagogues and burning of the churches, desecration
of the Crosses and setting in the Dhimmi laws of submission to the
Jews and Christians of the Holy Land have already been mentioned. In
the expeditions against Mesopotamia between 635 and 643, monasteries
were sacked, the monks slaughtered and Monophysite Arabs executed or
forced to convert. In Elam, all the people were put to the sword and
at Susa all the dignitaries suffered the same fate.

Details of conquest of Egypt starting with the capture of Alexandria
by Amr Ibn Al-As in 641 comes from the "Chronicle of John" - the
Bishop of Nikiu, written between 693 and 700 CE. As Amr advanced into
Egypt, he captured the city of Behnesa near Fayum, and exterminated
the inhabitants. Nobody was spared, irrespective of surrendered or
captured, Old or Young or Women. Fayum and Aboit suffered the same
fate. At Nikiu, the entire population was put to the sword. The Arabs
took the inhabitants to captivity. In Armenia, the entire population
of Euchaita was wiped out. Seventh century Armenian chronicles recount
how the Arabs decimated the population of Assyria and forced a number
of inhabitants to accept Islam and then wrought havoc in the districts
of Daron, southwest of Lake Van. In 642, it was the turn of the town
of Dvin to suffer. In 643, the Arabs came back with "extermination,
ruin and slavery".

It was the same ghastly spectacle in North Africa, Tripoli was pillaged
in 643; Carthrage was razed to the ground and most of its inhabitants
were slaughtered. Michael the Syrian describes how the first Omayyad
Caliph Muawiya, who took power in 661, sacked and pillaged Cyprus and
then established his domination by a "great massacre". In the capture
of Istakhar (Persia), 40,000 Iranians were slaughtered. Indeed,
Anatolia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Iraq, Iran and wherever Muslims have
marched, were presented with the same spectacle.

8th Century

In 712, Governor of Iraq, Hajjaj, ordered the conquest of Sind
under the commandership of his nephew, Muhammad bin Kasim. He was
instructed to "bring destruction on the unbelievers... [and] to
invite and induce the infidels to accept the true creed, and belief
in the unity of God... and whoever does not submit to Islam, treat
him harshly, and cause injury to him till he submits." According to
Al-Biladuri, after the capturing the port of Debal, the Muslim army
slaughtered the inhabitants over three days and the priests of the
temples were massacred.

After the initial surge of cruelty, Kasim became more tolerant
and allowed the infidels to continue their profession and religious
practice. Learning about this sympathetic treatment, a furious Hajjaj
sent letter condemning Kasim's method of pardoning the infidels. It
read, "... The great god says in the Koran [47:7]: "O True believers,
when you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads." The
above command of the Great God is a great command and must be
respected.... Henceforth, grant pardon to no one of the enemy and
spare none of them.." Kasim quickly obliged to the divinely ordained
command and on his capture of Brahmanabad, he invited the infidel
idol-worshipers to accept Islam. On latter's refusal, he ordered all
adult males be beheaded with swords and their women and the children
were captured as slaves. Eight thousands, some say 26,000, men were put
to the sword. One-fifth of the captured slaves (women and children),
which amounted to 20,000, amongst whom, were the daughters of Sind
Chiefs along with King Dahir's severed head, were sent to Hajjaj as
the share of the states and the remainder were distributed amongst the
soldiers. [Chachanama, Muhammad al-Kufi, trs Kalichbeg, I, 155; Shashi
R Sharma, Caliphs and Sultans, p. 95]. The stream of captured slaves
continued to flow from India to Baghdad ever since Kassim captured Sind
and Hajjaj alone is said to have forwarded 60,000 slaves from India
(~1/5 of total) to the caliph Walid I (705-715 CE). [Chachnama, I, 154]

In 704-705, Caliph Walid I gathered together the nobles of Armenia
in the Church of St. Gregory and in the Church of Xram on the Araxis
and burned them alive. The rest were crucified and their women and
children were captured as slaves. The worse happened to the Armenians
between 852 and 855. Over in Egypt, in 722, the surveyor Usama b.

Zaid, attacked convents and churches but Caliph Hisham later asked
him to leave the Christians alone. Caliph Marwan (ruled 744-750)
looted and destroyed many monasteries in Egypt while fleeing the
Abbasid army. In the sacking of Euphesus in 781, 7,000 Greeks were
taken captives and were deported en masse.

9th century

In 853, Abbassid Caliph Mutawakil ordered all new churches to be
destroyed. In 884, the convent of Kalilshu in Baghdad was destroyed.

Caliph al-Mutasim, known as the Islamic hero, was a great wager of
holy wars against the Christians and heretics. After the capture and
pillage of Amorium in 838, there were so many captive slaves that
Caliph al-Mutasim ordered them to be auctioned in batches of five and
ten. During the rule of caliph al-Mamun - considered the most just
Muslim ruler and harbinger of the so-called "golden age of Islam" -
the pagans of Harran had to choose between Islam and death.

Ruined by the burden of imposition of Jizyah tax, the Coptic Christians
of Lower Egypt revolted in 832. This revolt was ruthlessly suppressed
by the Muslim rulers in which Christian villages, vineyards, gardens
and Churches were burned. There were mass slaughter and those spared
were deported.

10th century

In 924, the Church and convent of Mary in Damascus was plundered and
burned and other churches destroyed. Further destruction occurred in
Ramleh, Ascalon, Tinnis, and Egypt during the invasion of Asad ud
Din Shirkuh. In the capture and sacking of Thessalonica in 903 CE,
22,000 Christian captives were divided amongst the Arab chieftains
or sold into slavery.

There were massacres of the Spanish Christians in and around Seville.

Al-Hakim biamr Illah gave orders that the Churches of his dominions
should be destroyed. A Muslim historian records that over 30,000
churches built by the Greeks in Egypt, Syria and elsewhere were
destroyed, their contents seized and sold in the markets and lands
confiscated. [Tritton AS, The Caliphs and their non-Muslim Subjects.

London, 1970, p. 54].

In Iran, the Zoroastrians faced frequent forced conversion, pressure
to do so and persecution which lead to riots in Shiraz in 979. To
escape persecution, they immigrated to India and live there even
today as a respected community.

11th century

Six thousand Jews were massacred in Fez of Morocco in 1033. Hundreds
of Jews were killed between 1010 and 1013 near Cordoba and other parts
of Muslim Spain and an entire Jewish community of 4000 in Grenada
was annihilated in 1066. Fatimid caliph Hakim's jealous persecution
of non-Muslims and Church demolition resulted in the destruction of
the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem in 1009.

He also banned the pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Both events acted as
the major causes that ignited the Crusades.

In Kairoun (Tunisia), the Jews were persecuted and sent to exile
in 1016, who later returned, only to be expelled again. In Tunis,
they were forced to convert or leave. During subsequent decades,
there were fierce anti-Jewish persecutions throughout Tunisia.

In 1064, the Seljuk Sultan, Alp Arslan, devastated Georgia and
Armenia. Those, whom he did not take captive, were executed. [Ibn
Warraq, pp. 218-238]

Eleventh century also saw the barbaric assault of Sultan Mahmud of
Ghazni on Hindustan starting in 1000 CE. He launched 17 plundering,
looting and slave-taking expeditions to India. Abu Nasr Muhammad Utbi,
Sultan Mahmud's secretary, gloats in his official chronicle that after
attacking Waihind in November 1001 CE, Mahmud's army slaughtered 15,000
fighting men in "splendid action" before capturing 500,000 men and
women as slaves. In Mahmud's attack of Ninduna and Panjab in 1014,
"slaves were so plentiful that they became very cheap and the men of
respectability in their native land were degraded by becoming slaves of
ordinary shop-keepers (in Ghazni)". The extent of barbarity of Sultan
Mahmud was vividly described by contemporary Muslim historians. In
the attack on Thanesar, "the blood of the infidels flowed so
copiously that the stream was discolored and the people were unable
to drink it". Similarly in the slaughter of Sirsawa near Saharanpur,
"the Musalmans paid no regard to the booty till they had satiated
themselves with the slaughter of infidels."

[Utbi, Tehrik-i-Yamini, ED, Vol II, pp 41-42, 49-50]. When Mahmud
learned that the famous Hindu temple at Somnath housed a monolith
brought from the temple of Ka'ba, which was destroyed by the Prophet
of Islam in 630 CE, out of jealous piety, he rushed to destroy the
Somnath temple. Hindus in great numbered assembled to protect their
sacred temple and offered Mahmud great booty, which he ignored and
according to Ibn Asir [Kamil-ut-Tawarikh], he massacred 50,000 Hindus
guarding temple and destroyed it.

12th Century

In the 12th century, the Almohads of North Africa spread terror
wherever they went. The Jews in Yemen were given choice of death or
conversion to Islam in 1165. Similar choice was given to the Jews of
Aden in 1198. According to Stillman [The Jews of Arab Lands], there
were forced conversions of Jews under the Almohad caliphs, al-Mumin
(d 1165), Abu Yakub (d 1184) and al-Mansur (d 1199). The Christians
of Grenada were deported to Morocco by the Almoravids rulers in 1126.

In the Indian front, after the scourge of Mahmud Ghazni, there was
a relative calm until Turk Ghaurid Sultan Muhammad Ghauri started
his attacks beginning in 1175. When he became successful in 1192
to defeat Prithviraj Chauhan, he launched a scourge of conquest of
Sirsuti, Samana, Khuhram and Hansi with ruthless slaughter and a
general destruction of temples and their replacement with mosques.

Similar events followed in Ajmer and Delhi later on [KS Lal, Theory
and Practice of Muslim State in India, p. 21].

Muhammad Ghauri's lieutenant Qutbuddin Aibak, succeeded him to become
the first Muslim Sultan in India. He dispatched Ikhtiyaruddin Bakhtiyar
Khalji to the East and himself concentrated in Hindustan proper. He
captured Kol (modern Aligarh) in 1194. There "those of the garrison
who were wise and cute were converted to Islam, but those who stood
by their ancient faith were slain with the sword." [Hasan Nizami,
Taj-ul-Maasir, E.D., H, 222]

In 1195 when Raja Bhim was attacked by Aibak, he captured 20,000
slaves.

13th Century

In Aibak's attack of Kalinjar in 1202, 50,000 slaves were captured.

"The temples were converted into mosques," writes Hasan Nizami,
"and the voices of the summoners to prayer ascended to the highest
heavens, and the very name of idolatry was annihilated." Muhammad
Farishtah specifically mentions that during the capture of Kalinjar
"fifty thousand kaniz va ghulam, having suffered slavery, were rewarded
with the honor of Islam" - which meant that enslaved captives were
forced into conversion to Islam and conversion accelerated the growth
of Muslim population in India.

During Aibak's rule of 20 Lunar years, he captured Hansi, Meerut,
Delhi, Ranthambhor and Kol, which accompanied similar massacres,
destruction and slave-taking. When Sultan Muizzuddin personally
mounted a campaign against Hindustan, Aibak proceeded as far as
Peshawar to meet him, and the two together attacked the Khokhar (Hindu)
stronghold in the Koh-i-Jud or the Salt Range. The Hindus (Khokhars)
fled to the highest in the mountains. They were pursued.

Those that escaped the sword fled to the dense depth of the jungle;
others were massacred or taken captive. The result was a great plunder
and many captives sold as slaves. According to Farishtah 300 to 400
hundred thousand Khokhars were converted to Islam by Muizzuddin.

Under Aibak most of Hindustan from Delhi to Gujarat, Lakhnauti to
Lahore and Bihar to Bengal were brought under the sway of the Turks.

In every attack great many people were killed and large number of
women and children were captured as slaves. In 1202 CE, Ikhtiyaruddin
Bakhtiyar Khalji marched into Bihar and attacked the University centers
at Nalanda, Vikramshila and Uddandpur. The Buddhist monks and Brahmans,
identified by shaved head, taken as idolaters, were massacred and
the common people were captured and enslaved. Ibn Asir says that
Qutbuddin Aibak made 'war against the provinces of Hind. He killed
many, and returned with prisoners and booty." In Banaras, according to
the same author, "the slaughter of the Hindus was immense; none was
spared except women and children". Fakhr-i-Mudabbir informs us that
as a result of the Turkish achievements under Muizzuddin and Aibak,
even poor (Muslim) householder became owner of numerous slaves."

After Aibak, Sultan Iltutmish (rule 1210-1236) continued with his war
against the infidels and revolting territories including Ranthambhor
(1226), Mandor (near Jodhpur), Gwalior and Ujjan (1234-35). According
to contemporary chroniclers Minhaj Shiraj and Muhammad Farishtah,
every campaign lead to general massacres of those who resisted and
the women and children were taken captives and assets of the infidels
were looted.

Minhaj Siraj writes that Ulugh Khan Balban's "taking of captives
and his capture of the dependents of the great Ranas cannot be
recounted". Talking of his war in Avadh against Trailokyavarman of the
Chandela dynasty (Dalaki va Malaki of Minhaj), the chronicler says that
"All the infidels' wives, sons and dependents... and children... fell
into the hands of the victors." In 1253, in his campaign against
Ranthambhor also, Balban enslaved many people. In 1259, in an attack
on Haryana, many women and children were enslaved.

Twice Balban led expeditions against Kampil, Patiali, and Bhojpur,
and in the process enslaved a large number of women and children. In
Katehar, he ordered a general massacre of the male population of over
eight years of age and carried away women and children. In 1260 CE,
Ulugh Khan Balban marched with a large force on a campaign in the
region of Ranthambhor, Mewat and Siwalik. He made a proclamation
that a soldier who brought a live captive would be rewarded with two
silver tankahs and one who brought the head of a dead one would get
one silver tankah. Soon 300-400 living and dead were brought to his
presence everyday.

Like Balban, other commanders of Iltutmish, or the "Shamsia Maliks
of Hind" were marching up and down the Hindustan, raiding towns and
villages and enslaving people. This was the situation prevailing
from Lakhnauti to Lahore and from Ajmer to Ujjain. The Hindus used to
reclaim their lands after the Muslim invaders had passed through them
with fire and sword, and Turkish armies used to repeat their attacks
to regain control of the cities so lost. But the captives once taken
became slaves and then Musalmans for ever. The exact figures of such
slaves have not been mentioned and therefore cannot be computed. All
that is known is that they were captured in droves.

After the Iltutmish Sultans, war against the Hindu infidels and
slave-taking received further momentum under the Khaljis. Sultan
Jalaluddin Khalji (1290-1296) launched ruthless attacks against Hindus
in Katehar, Ranthambhor, Malwa, and Gwalior. According to Amir Khasrau
[Miftah-ul-Fatuh], he sacked temples, took booty and captured slaves
making a "Hell of Paradise".

Next Sultan Alauddin Khalji, a great war maker, sent a large army to
Gujarat in 1299 in which all the major towns were sacked, temples
destroyed, wealth looted and large number of slaves of both sexes
captured [Khwaja AM Isami, Futu-us-Salatin, p. 243 ; Ziauddin Barani,
Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi, pp. 251-52].

Away from the Indian front, the Christians of Damascus were killed
or sold into slavery and their Churches were burned down. Sir Steven
Runciman records that Sultan Baibars had promised the safety of
the garrison of Safed if they surrendered to the Muslims. When they
surrendered, the Muslims fell upon the population and massacred them.

At the capture of Antioch by the Muslims, "Even the Muslim Chroniclers
were shocked by the carnage that followed", says Runciman. The Jews of
Marrakesh were massacred in 1232. Following this, the Jews of Morocco
were persecuted, forced to convert or leave. The Jews of Tabriz were
obliged to convert in 1291 CE [Ibn Warraq; p. 227]

14th Century

The riots of 1321 in Cairo, in which several churches were destroyed,
which in turn, set on destruction of churches throughout Egypt
resulting in desecration of more than 50 churches. The Jews of Tabriz
were again made to convert to Islam in 1318 CE and those of Baghdad
in 1333 and 1344.

Late 14th and the early 15th centuries witnessed the horrible
barbarity of Amir Tamur (aka, Tamurlane). Information about Timur
comes mainly from "Zafer Nama" written during early 15th century
and his own diary, Mulfuzat-i-Timuri, which are full of Koranic
references in justification of his invasions, wars and mass murders
and destructions. He set out on his campaign in 1399 against India
solely because the Muslim rulers were, to him, too lenient towards
the idolater Hindu subjects. By the time, he reached Delhi; he had
gathered around 100,000 pagan captives. A few thousands artisans and
clever mechanics, including builders and stone masons, were taken
back to Samarkhand while the rest were massacred in a single day
[Mulfuzat-i-Timuri, trs ED, III, 447]. He built victory pillars
with the severed heads of the infidels. On his way out of India,
he pillaged Miraj, pulled down the monuments and flayed the Hindu
inhabitants alive. [Why I am Not a Muslim, ibn Warraq, p. 234-235].

In the Indian front, Sultan Allauddin Khaliji (1296-1316) continued his
terrorizing massacre, slave-taking and looting mission in the early
14th century, which made him the greatest rulers of the so-called
Sultanate period (c 1200-1500 CE). In the sack of reconstituted
Somnath temple for a second time, Wassaf recounts that the Muslim
army captured 20,000 women and children as salves.

[Wassaf, Bk IV, p. 448]. In 1301 Ranthambhor was attacked and in 1303,
Chittor. In the Chittor attack 30,000 people were massacred in cold
blood [Khazain, Habib trs p 49], and women and children were taken
captives. Similar things happened in the attack of Malwa, Sevana and
Jalor (1305-1311). According to Shams Shiraj Afif in the days of the
Khaljis, "the Turks, whenever they please, can seize, buy or sell any
Hindu." [Nuh Sephr, trs, in ED III, 561]. No wonder that 50,000 slave
boys were engaged in his personal services and 70,000 slaves worked
continuously in his buildings. Ziauddin Barani describes the continuous
arrival of batches of slaves in the markets of Delhi and elsewhere.

Following the Khaljis, the Tughlaqs ascended to the Sultanate and they
outstripped the notorious Khaljis in making wars against the Hindus
and enslaving them. Shihabuddin Ahmed Abbas writes of Muhammad Tughlaq,
"The Sultan never ceases to show the greatest zeal in making war upon
the infidels... Everyday, thousands of slaves are sold at a very slow
price, so great is the number of prisoners".

[Masalik-ul-Absar, E.D. III, 580]. He subjugated as far as Dwarsamudra,
Malabar, Kampil, Warangal, Lakhnauti, Satgaon, Sonargaon, Nagarkat
and Sambhal amongst the prominent places.

[Qaraunab Turks, 96, 126, 129-30, 173]. He also ruthlessly put down
16 major rebellions. In each campaign, after defeat and massacre
of the opponent, slaves were captured with gusto. The famous Muslim
traveler Ibn Battutah testifies that in the defeat of Halajun rebellion
(of Lahore), the capture of the women of the rebels were sent to the
far-off Gwalior fort whom Battutah had seen there.

[Battutah, p. 123]. The Tughlaqs would capture the Hindu slaves round
the years, convert them to Muslims and on the two Eid-days, he will
marry them off according to the Islamic tradition. [Battutah, p. 63].

Firoz Tughlaq, who ascended to the throne in 1351, outstripped his
father and grandfather in slave-taking by all kind of methods and
means, so much so that he acquired 180,000 of them. Contemporary
Shams Shiraj Afif further testifies that during Firoz Tughlaq "Slaves
became too numerous" and that the institution took root in every
centre of the country. [Afif, pp. 267-273]. Firoz Tughloq was known
to be relatively kind-hearted of the Sultans and yet according to
Afif he killed 180,000 Bengalis in his expedition in Bengal and had
erected a Tower of skulls [Lal, p. 73].

15th Century

Amir Timur's barbarism continued in the 15th century. In 1400, Timur
devastated the country in and around Tifflis. In 1403, he returned
to Tifflis to devastate the country again and destroyed the 700
large villages and minor towns, massacred the inhabitant and razed
the Churches to the ground. Amir Timur thoroughly and systematically
destroyed the Christians and as a result, the Nestorians and Jacobites
of Mesopotamia have never recovered. At Sivas, 4,000 Christians were
buried alive; at Tus, there were 10,000 victims.

Historians estimate the number of dead at Saray to be 100,000;
at Baghdad 90,000 and at Isfahan 70,000 [Why I am Not a Muslim,
Ibn Warraq, pp. 234-235].

Over in Constantinople, Sultan Mehemet unleashed utter barbarism.

When Constantinople fell to the Muslim army, the Sultan allowed his
soldiers to massacre the population for three days. They poured into
the city and slew every men, women and children they met in the streets
[Ruchimen, The Fall of Constantinople, 1453, p. 145].

16th Century

The Muslim Sultanate of India became divided into a few largely
independent territories under different Muslim rulers during much of
the 15th century, although the condition of the Hindus never changed.

War against the Hindu community continued along with capture of slaves
for selling. Then came Zahiruddin Muhammad Babur, a descendent of
the barbaric Amir Timur, who defeated the fanatic Sikandar Lodi in
1526 and instituted the Mogul rule (1525 - 1707) in India. Babur,
an orthodox Muslim, continued the Jihadi wars against the Hindu
dominated regions of India. He continued with the destruction of the
Hindu temples, the prominent example is the much controversial Babri
Mosque in Ayodhya. Babur's determination to exterminate the vestiges of
Hindu idolatry was explicitly narrated in his own diary before battle
against Rana Sanga. Babur wrote in Jihadi zeal, "I made public the
resolution to abstain from wine. My servants... dashed upon the earth,
the flagons and the cups. They dashed them into pieces as God willing,
soon will be dashed, the Gods of the idolaters" [Babur Nama, Vol II,
p. 554-5]. Babur and his soldiers destroyed Hindu temples in many
parts of the country. [Babur Nama, Vol II, p. 340]. After winning
the War against Rana Sangha, Babur ordered the set-up of a Tower of
slaughtered pagan heads as a trophy for the victory. Similar tower
of dead pagan heads was created after the victory at Chanderi against
Medini Rai [Baburnama, pp. 483-84, 596]

However, the misery and persecution of Hindu and other non-Muslims
eased up a little bit after emperor Akbar came to the throne in 1656,
who abolished discrimination, including Jizya, against the Hindus
despite severe displeasure and protests from the Ulema and Muslims in
general. However, persecution against the Hindus continued in various
forms, especially his extreme eagerness and success in capturing the
lands under the non-Muslim control. In the attack of Rana Pratap Singh
in Rajastan; when the news of defeat of the Rajputs reached the palace,
a few hundred noble women set fire on themselves to commit Jauher,
in order to avoid being captured at the hands of Akbar's lustful
soldiers. Akbar accumulated a mind-boggling 5,000 women in his harem
through various means.

17th Century

The Jews of Yemen were forced to choose between death and conversion
in 1678. In 1617 and 1622, the Jews of Persia were declared apostates
and suffered a wave of forced conversion and persecution. During
the reign of Shah Abbas II (1642-1666), all the Jews of Persia were
forced to convert, between 1653 and 1666. Taverniar, the 17th century
French traveler, records as to how in Anatolia, "Everyday there were
numerous Greeks who are forced to become Turks".

Over in Persia, the persecution of the Zoroastrians got worse in the
17th century. Persecutions included levying extra hefty taxes, frequent
looting of their homes and properties, forcing them to wear distinctive
clothing, prohibiting building new houses or repairing old ones.

In the Indian front, following Akbar's death, the semblance of
equality that was instituted, started a reversal by his own son
Jahanghir, which further worsened under Shahjahan. Jahangir writes
that 500-600 thousand people were killed during the rule of Akbar
and Jahangir. However, it was all undone when Akbar's great grandson
Aurangzeb ascended throne in 1658. He instituted Islamic Sharia as the
ruling principle, reintroduced Jizya and launched a Jihadi campaign
of forced conversion of the non-Muslims and destruction of non-Muslim
religious institutions. When the Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur Singh went to
Aurangzeb's palace to inquire about forced conversion of the Hindus
of Kashmir, he was tortured and executed in 1675.

Aurangzeb's rule saw destruction of nearly 10,000 Hindu, Jain and
Buddhist temples. In the campaign of 1679-1680, 123 temples were
destroyed in Udaipur, 63 in Chittor, 66 in Jaipur [Ibn Warraq, p.

224]. After defeating and taking Maratha king Sambhuraj and his
minister Kavikalash prisoner, their eyes were extracted, tongue were
cut off and after a fortnight's torture, their limbs were hacked one
by one and thrown to the dogs (1689). [Lal, p. 75]

18th Century

Persecution of the Zoroastrians continued in the 18th century so much
so that their numbers "declined disastrously due to combined effects
of massacres, forced conversions, and emigration" [Encyclopedia of
Islam, Ed II].

The Jews of Jedda were expelled between 1770 and 1786, who flew to
Yemen. In 1790, Jews were massacred in Tetuan (Morocco).

Aurangzeb's policy of persecution and destruction of temples continued
in the early 18th century until he died in 1707.

19th Century

In Persia, there was forced conversion of Jews in 1839. According
the Bernard Lewis, there was also forced conversion of Persian Jews
in the 1840s.

In 1828, Jews of Baghdad were massacred. In 1834, a cycle of violence
and pillage began against the Jews and their properties in Safed. In
1839, massacre of Jews occurred in Meshed (Iran). The survivors had
to suffer forced conversion. A massacre of the Jews took place in
Barfurush in 1867. In 1840, the Jews of Damascus suffered first in a
series of blood libels, which spread to many cities. Other outbreaks
of violence, murder and pillage of the Jews and their properties
occurred in Morocco, Tunisia, Libya and the Arab countries.

Starting in the 7th century, the Armenian Christians suffered terribly
in the 19th century. The Turks massacred about 250,000 Armenian
Christians in 1894-1896 in a planned and methodical design.

General pillage was unleashed. Villages were burned and hundreds of
Churches were plundered.

The Zoroastrians faced increased persecution too, such that they were
living in complete insecurity and poverty in the 19th century.

20th Century

Massacre of the Armenians continued in the early 20th century. In 1904
and in 1909 CE, about 30,000 Armenians were slaughtered in Adana. The
most horrible mass murder of Armenians occurred in 1915, which can
be rightly described as the first genocide of the 20th century. More
than 1,000,000 (one million) Armenians were systematically massacred
- thousands were shot to death, drowned (included Children), thrown
over the cliffs and the survivors were deported or reduced to slavery
- which served as the model for Hitler's massacre of the Jews in
the WW-II.

There is clear evidence of slavery persisting in Saudi Arabia and the
Yemen even in the 1950s. A report in a French Magazine in the 1990s
gave an estimate of 45,000 Blacks are being kidnapped by the Muslims
to be sold in slavery in the Gulf states and the middle east [L Vie,
no.2562, Oct 6, 1994].

Islam: A legacy of incessant Jihad since it inception

To this long list of Islamic violence, we have to add another major
incidence, termed 'Dewshirme' which was instituted by the Ottoman
Sultan Orkhan in 1330. Following the Prophet's tradition of one-fifth
of the booty captured from the infidels belonging to the State,
Dewshrime consisted of periodic collection of one-fifth of the
Christian children over 7 years of age as the property of the state.

The Christian parents, belonging to Greek aristocracy, the Serbs,
Bulgarians, Armenians, and Albanians, were obligated to surrender 1/5th
of their children to the state every four years. They were converted to
Islam and trained as soldiers so that they can wage war against their
own blood-brothers in their adulthood. Some scholars say 12,000 while
other claim 8,000 children were collected every year under this scheme.

The Jihadi campaign Muhammad had initiated in the 620s until his death
in 632, there was not a single period of let-up ever since until this
day as accounted in the above chronology. The account of violence,
persecution and massacre listed above are only a tip of the iceberg
that has occurred to the non-Muslim subjects under the Muslim conquest
and rule. Only the prominent events were recorded by the contemporary
historians and chroniclers and royal secretaries. While there are
numerous other violent incidences which the chroniclers have cited
with few details and are hard to make a grasp of the extent of death,
destruction and enslavement in those cases.

The Silent Persecution

Another serious form of persecution of the non-Muslims in Muslim
countries has received little attention that requires mention. I
will discuss it in the context of moderate Muslim countries like
Bangladesh and Pakistan which will apply to minorities of all Muslim
countries across the globe. The post-separation Hindu population
in 1947 stood at 15% in Pakistan and 30% in Bangladesh (East Bengal
until 1971). However, the current Hindu population stands at ~1% in
Pakistan and ~10% in Bangladesh. On the other hand, the proportion of
the Muslim population in Hindu-dominated India has increased instead.

This massive exodus of Hindu population from Pakistan and Bangladesh
(East Bengal) represent a very grave and yet unnoticed and uncared
for persecution of the minorities in Muslim countries. In recent
time, multiple reports in news media have given accounts of how the
Hindus and other minorities are being forced to convert to Islam in
Pakistan. Living in the subcontinent Muslim country, I have witnessed
how a Hindu person, having lands and properties next to an influential
Muslim village leader, would be harassed by the latter such that the
latter would be forced to sell the land to the village leader and
leave the country in humiliation. He would not be allowed to sell his
lands to a third party and finally have to surrender the land to the
Muslim leader at highly reduced price than that on the market.

The second form of persecution that leads to exodus of Hindus is the
rape of the Hindu girls and women by the Muslims in the locality.

Indeed, there is a massive rape of Hindu women which is hardly reported
to the media and the law agencies. Of the nearly a dozen good-looking
Hindu women I have known personally from nearby quarters, about 75%
of them were raped by the Muslims - which came to my knowledge from
various confidential sources. Surprisingly, as I was told of these
stories when I was a believing Muslim, such horrible incidences would
not strike our conscience with sadness and guilt but instead would
make raunchy and enjoyable pieces of gossips.

The general attitude is that it is OK to rape Hindu girls or they
deserve to be humiliated by Muslims.

In a conservative society of the subcontinent, the rape of a woman
is seen as a great dishonor and humiliation to the victim's party,
not to the rapist. It invariably brings life-long suffering to
the victim. This social constraint compels most of such rape cases
being kept secret by the victims and their families and relatives if
possible. In cases, where the victims seeks to report them to the
law agency, there are threat of violence and death on the victim
and her family members which further lead to under reporting of
the rapes of the Hindu women in these countries. More importantly,
a respectable father would never like to see his daughter gets raped
and would like to escape the chances at any cost so long there is a
means. Indeed, having been blessed with a beautiful daughter is the
greatest headache of the Hindu parents in these countries, especially
in the countryside. I have seen how the Hindu parents rush to marry
off their daughter at an early age, when the girl is a beautiful
one. In many cases, parents send their beautiful daughters to India
at an early age for studies. The main purpose is to keep them out of
the reach of the Muslims, where they normally get married and never
return to the home country.

The other kind of the persecution is the kidnapping of the young Hindu
girl by Muslim men who like them and rape, forcefully marry and convert
them to Islam (http://www.hinduhumanrights.org/Pakistan/index.ht m). As
a growing-up Muslim, I have witnessed the general notion amongst
the Muslims that if you can convert Hindu (or non-Muslim) to Islam
through marriage or whatsoever means, Allah will grant paradise to
you and your past seven generations in the afterlife. Hence, if there
is a beautiful girl in the neighborhood, there is a general feeling
amongst the young Muslim boys that it will be auspicious to somehow
marry this girl and convert her to Islam to achieve a passport to
paradise for your seven generations. There is no greater way to
serve to your parent, grandparents and so on. This tendency often
encourages Muslim youths to take recourse of kidnapping the Hindu
girls they like with assistance from illegal gangs, marry them under
coercion and convert them to Islam.

These constraints and difficulties keep minorities in a state of
continuous mental persecution, which they can neither complain about,
nor bear with. Those who have nominal means, make a journey across the
border to the other side to India to secure the safer and honorable
future to the subsequent generations. These kinds of silent or soft
persecutions which result in such massive exodus and displacement of
minority population from their ancestral home in silence to wherever
they can to acquire better safety, constitutes a much graver form of
persecution than the much publicized terrorism and suicide bombing.

If we consider that Hindu birthrate is similar as Muslims in
Bangladesh/East Pakistan, a reduction of Hindus from 30% to 10% since
1947 means there have been an effectively displacement of massive
30 million Hindu people from Bangladesh, given current Bangladesh
population stands at 150 millions. And this silent terrorizing and
persecution has never received much attention nor termed terrorism,
which indeed a tactical form of religious terrorism/persecution. And
this kind of persecution continues in Pakistan and Bangladesh without
respite and with increasing zeal.

This kind of soft terrorism occurs on the non-Muslim population in
most Muslim-dominated countries. Given that Pakistan Bangladesh are
considered rather moderate Muslim countries, in more fundamentalist
Islamic countries, this soft-terrorism is likely to be worse.

However, in every country, such persecution does not necessarily
result in exodus of the non-Muslims, since there may not be countries
that are willing to give shelter like India unofficially did to the
Hindus of Pakistan Bangladesh.

It should be fathomed that this kind of grave and yet unnoticed
and unreported soft-terrorism by Muslims continues on such massive
scales even in today's world of justice, massive media reporting,
obligation for respecting human rights, equality of all citizens
and pressures from a whole groups of international bodies, powerful
democratic countries and rights groups. Hence, such soft-terrorism,
persecution and other forms of smaller scale violence against the
non-Muslim subjects have continued incessantly throughout the entire
period of Islamic conquest, domination and rule. The chronological
details of the Islamic violence, terrorism and persecution listed
above would only form a fraction of the real total.

There should not be any doubt by now that since late 620s, the violence
that was initiated by Prophet Muhammad had continued without respite
ever since although there may have been some depressions along the
way. There must have also been changes in the means of carrying
out such terrorism and violence. However, there is one notable
difference. The terrorism perpetrated by the Muslims since the early
days of Islam to until the early 20th century was perpetrated by
the Muslim states. Indeed, it is an obligation of the Islamic state
to uphold and carry on the propagation of Islam through violence or
whatsoever means as was unleashed by Prophet Muhammad as head of a
nascent Islamic state. However, since those much more devastating
terrorism and violence were perpetrated by the Muslims states, they
are not being recognized as terrorism.

However, the state-terrorism of Islam was brought to an end mainly
by the British which came to a virtual end when secular humanist
Kemal Ataturk of Turkey dissolved Islamic caliphate in 1924 and
introduced secularism. Although there has been a lull in the overt
form of terrorism since then for several decades, the soft form of
Islamic terrorism has continued as reflected in the steady decline
of Hindu population in Pakistan and Bangladesh since 1947.

The development on the world stage especially after the WW-II, such
as the formation of UN, various human rights bodies etc. have changed
the ways, means and obligations of individual states. Thus although
many Muslim countries got back their sovereignty after the WW-II from
the former European colonialists, the Governments have been bounded
up with all sorts of obligation and treaties that demands respectable
treatment of the citizens of any states, irrespective of race, religion
and color. Thus the Governments of the Muslim states are unable to
re-launch the same type of overt terrorism and violence against the
non-Muslims as used to be done in India in the days of bin Kasim,
Sultan Mahmud, the Khaljies, the Tughlaqs and the Mughals.

Hardly have the Muslim Governments failed to unleash overt terrorism
to dominate and expand the Islamic religion, it has changed hands
from the state-body to underground fringe groups at the gap of just
3-4 decades. The innovation and easy availability of guns, bombs,
rockets, missiles and other modern weapons and Muslim terrorist groups'
ruthless usages of them have added further prominence to the present
scourge of Islamic violence.

Although Islamic terrorism started a surge in the 1980s in India,
there was little recognition of it as terrorism. But instead, a great
part of the Eastern and Western world recognized it as independence
movement by Kashmiri Muslims. It was a legitimate movement for
self-determination. Then there started terrorism in Chechnya, which
again much of the world recognized as legitimate independence movement
by the Muslims of Chechnya.

Although there have been isolated terror attacks on Western (mainly
US) targets and nationals over the last couple of decades, they have
occurred mainly in overseas location, such as, in Lebanon, Yemen
and Kenya etc. These terrorist acts, despite being of big impact,
did not get its deserving label of Islamic terrorism until the attack
of 9/11 in New York. Further uncovering of terrorist cells all across
the Western world has further heightened concerns and media-hype of
Islamic terrorism over the last few years.

The bottom-line is that Islamic terrorism that we see today is
not a new phenomenon. It has occurred continuously since the 7th
century institution of the Islamic faith. The only difference is that
throughout the Islamic history, the onus of terrorizing the non-Muslims
were undertaken by the Islamic states. The ferocity, destruction and
violation have been of much greater scales in the Islamic rulers'
devastating attacks of innocent infidel territories and out-posts,
slaughtering both military and civilian population (mainly men)
in tens of thousands, enslaving their children and women in great
multitude and destroying their religious institutions and forcing
them to conversion. The present scourge of terrorist atrocity is
virtually negligible as compared to those unleashed by the Islamic
rulers on the infidels throughout the Islamic history. Just because
the tentacles of Islamic terrorism have reached the Western world -
it has become such a hype in the last few years post-9/11.

M.A. Khan is the Editor of Islam-Watch.org.