Posted in Interviews / Make a Comment /

from frontpagemagazine.com, June 3, 2008

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Bill Warner, the director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam (CSPI) and spokesman for PoliticalIslam.com.

FP: Bill Warner, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

Warner: Thank you for inviting me.

FP: We’re here today to discuss Islamic charity and how it only goes to Muslims. Tell us about this phenomenon.

Warner: Charity has different forms in Islam, but the most well known is the one mentioned in the Five Pillars—the zakat. Every Muslim is obligated to give the zakat (charity tax) based upon formulas laid out in the Sharia (Islamic law). The zakat is the Islamic charity.

The zakat is to be given to eight categories: the poor, those short of money, administrative costs, those whose hearts are to be reconciled, slaves to buy their freedom, those in debt, jihadists, and travelers who need assistance. A kafir (a non-believer) is forbidden to receive money from the zakat.

So Islam, as a corporate body, does not give charity to kafirs.

FP: Why are kafirs singled out to be forbidden to receive charity?

Warner: This is answered in how Mohammed treated the kafirs about money. Before he became a prophet of Allah, Mohammed was a businessman and made his money by honest labor. Upon becoming a prophet, his method of income changed.

He developed a way to earn money, lots of it—jihad. It took eight attempts, but the Meccan caravan was robbed. Mohammed kept 20% for himself and gave 80% to the jihadists.

If a kafir had money, it could be taken from him in jihad. Allah even gave the rules on how the booty of money and slaves were to be handled.

The other form of cash flow between kafirs and Islam was the jhizya, the tax paid by dhimmis, the conquered people. This tax was taken from jihad conquered countries.

Jihad and jhizya made Islam rich, so Mohammed established the political doctrine about kafirs and money. Islam takes from kafirs. Islam does not give to kafirs.

As an aside: There is a second subtle teaching here in the Sunna. Mohammed started out as an honest businessman. Then after becoming a prophet, he took money by force. What is the difference between jihad and crime? Both involve violence and theft. Crime is personal business. Mohammed’s jihad was community business. So when a Muslim commits a crime against kafirs, crime is jihad by a community of one.

A proper Muslim criminal would then pay the zakat on his earnings, just like Mohammed’s jihadists. That is right, the zakat tax was owed on the booty.

FP: So zakat fuels jihad?

Warner: Yes, and jihad pays the zakat. We do not stop and marvel enough at the absolute brilliance of the unified political doctrine of Islam. We like to think of Islam as producing an intellectual desert. This is far from the truth. What is important is making the kafir submit and Islam dominant. The intellectual doctrine of Islam is not devoted to creativity, but is devoted to making the kafir submit. All intellect must submit to Allah and the Sunna (the divine human prototype of Mohammed). Islamic intellectual doctrine succeeds in the only area it competes in—making others submit to Islam.

In America--the intellectual land of Nobel prizes —we can’t even decide the name to give the enemy. The names we use for Islam are dreadful. Extreme Islam. Moderate Muslim. Terrorist. War-on-Terror. These names are testimonies to a civilizational ignorance and fear.

Not so with Islam. Islam’s intellectual doctrine can compact a thousand pages into one word—kafir, for instance.

When you examine the meaning of kafir, you see how the lack of charity for the kafir is no accident. A kafir is the enemy of Allah. The kafir has committed the mortal sin of denying that Mohammed is the messenger of Allah. The Koran is one testimony of the hatred of Islam for the kafir. About 61% of the Koran (KS Lal gives the figure of 63% in Theory and Practice of Muslim State in India, pg. 4) is devoted to the kafir. In the Sira (Mohammed’s canonical biography) troubles with the kafirs occupied 98% of his life as a prophet. All of the mention of the kafirs in the Hadith is negative and hateful.

Given that Allah hates the kafirs and plots against them, and such a great majority of the Koran, Sira and Hadith is so negative, is it any surprise that the zakat does not go to them? No. Wait. Wait. I can hear someone protesting of some known charity by Islam towards the kafirs. Didn’t Saudi Arabia send money to China to help with the earthquake? Didn’t that Saudi prince offer to give $10 million to New York City during 9/11?

The answer lies in one more fact about Mohammed. On his deathbed, he commanded that neither Jew nor Christian was to be left in Arabia. Then he added that they should keep giving the money to the kafir ambassadors. [Notice how obsessed Mohammed was with anyone who did not agree with him—kafirs. His deathbed orders were totally concerned with kafirs. He was obsessed with kafirs.]

When money goes from Islam to the kafirs, it is to advance Islam, not to help the kafir’s suffering. Mohammed was talking about bribes, corruption and buying influence, just like the Saudis in Washington, DC. When the Saudi prince offered the $10 million to Mayor Guilianni, it was a public relations event. That was not charity. Once you understand the meaning of kafir, you see that generosity towards a kafir is not logical.

FP: Any other ways that Islam allows for help to be given to a kafir?

Warner: Yes, voluntary charity. A person who calls himself or herself a Muslim might offer help to a kafir out of true generosity. But let’s closely examine the psychology of this event. The only way for a Muslim to give freely to a kafir is to not see him as a kafir, but as a fellow human being, an equal deserving compassion and empathy. But a kafir is not ever equal to a Muslim. Seeing humanity as one is contrary to the Islamic doctrine of kafir and believer found in the Koran. Humanity-as-one is a kafir concept, not an Islamic concept.

If a Muslim sees a non-Muslim as an equal and a friend, that is a manifestation of the Golden Rule. Islam denies the Golden Rule, only kafir cultures support the Golden Rule. So if a so-called Muslim truly gives true charity to a kafir then he is a kafir-Muslim, part kafir and part Muslim. (Another hyphenated culture.) Good for a kafir cannot come from Islam. So real good must come from somewhere else—kafir civilization and the Golden Rule.

FP: So in the context of this whole discussion, what is the overall goal of Political Islam?

Warner: Domination and annihilation of kafir civilization. And that goal is integral to Islam. Every neighbor of Mohammed had to submit to Islam. So it is Sunna to weaken the kafir. If it is Sunna to kill, torture, rob and rape kafirs, with the idea of annihilation of their civilization, then why would Islam give a kafir charity? Mohammed took the wealth of the kafirs and harmed them, why would Islam help kafirs? Why would a Muslim give charity to someone Allah hates and plots against? Islamic charity to a kafir is not logical and violates doctrine.

In conclusion, Jamie, if you fully understand the meaning of kafir, just about anything in political Islam can be explained, including Islamic charity. The reason for this ease in understanding is that Islamic doctrine is so well integrated as a thought system. A hologram of a picture has the amazing quality that if you take the smallest part of the hologram, you can still see the entire picture. Islamic doctrine is like that. No matter what part of the doctrine you examine, you can see the entire unified structure reflected in it.

FP: Bill Warner, thank you for joining Frontpage Interview.

Warner: My pleasure.