The Cancer of Civilization Jihad

Is there an Islamic social norm requiring a Hijrah (Migration) to Western Civilizations?

When I started to have a clue as to what was happening in respect to Civilization Jihad, I was struck by one comment recorded by the FBI. “Stage 1 is complete, we are here.”

For a long time, the reasoning behind this statement caused me to be curious. Then I began to read about the hijrah. Sam Solomon, was one of the first authors I read on this topic, in his book Modern Day Trojan Horse: Al-Hijra, the Islamic Doctrine of Immigration, Accepting Freedom or Imposing Islam? After reading this work, I looked deeper into the concept of the hijrah and began to ask my own questions.

If the hijrah is an Islamic doctrine, do governments know and acknowledge this?

If the hijrah is real there must be examples throughout history – what are they?

If hijrahs have been historically documented and acknowledged before jihads, what is the reason we do not seem to have this information at our fingertips today?

While I had many questions, these three seemed to grab my attention the most. Is this true, that the hijrah (Immigration) is an Islamic doctrine? This question seemed to scream to me: if this is true, how stupid are we taking in Muslims who seek to conquer us?!

Simple, right? How we do find the real answer to that first question? Especially, if the knowledge has been hidden? What do we have to do to learn the truth? These basic simplicities evolved into an acceptance that somehow, some way, we have been lied to. Who did the lying seemed unimportant at first? The importance was finding the truth regardless of who was hiding it.

I began by looking at the “Islam Question & Answer” website, an online resource where Muslims and non-Muslims ask questions about Islam that are supposed to be answered by knowledgeable Islamic clerics. I found they had answered the question: “Can Muslims settle in kaafir countries for the sake of a better life?”

Interestingly they start their answer by condemning those Muslims who live amongst non-Muslims:

In the Sunnah, the Prophet (PBUH) said: “I disown every Muslim who settles among the mushrikeen” [non-Muslims]. (Narrated by Abu Dawood, 2645; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.)1 

According to this manner of thought living in Dar al-Harb is not only wrong for Muslims it was not acceptable to live in non-Islamic communities in Muslim lands, according to their prophet. However, the author of this document does make an exception. 

Rather we should say that each Muslim has his own unique set of circumstances and his own ruling that applies to him, and each person is accountable for himself. If he is able to practice his religion in the Muslim country in which he lives more than he can in a kaafir country, then it is not permissible for him to settle in a kaafir country.  

But if it is the other way round, then it is permissible for him to settle in a kaafir country, subject to the condition that he is confident that he can resist the desires and temptations to be found there by taking the precautionary measures prescribed in sharee’ah.  

Zakriya al-Ansaari al-Shafa’ia said in his book Asna al-Mataalib (4/207):  

It is obligatory to migrate from the kaafir lands to the Muslim lands for those who are able to do that, if they are unable to practice their religion openly.”2

So why are Muslims coming to non-Muslim countries, what they call Dar al-Harb if it is forbidden? Is this merely a smoke screen? Are these very words quoted above only for a select few? It makes little sense that they could not practice what they believe in an Islamic country. Or is this a screening out policy? A doctrinal statement that insists Muslims not strong in their faith must stay in an Islamic country. What then of those who hold their Islamic faith with strength? 

Two Hadith passages state that Muhammad said answer this question.

I charge you five of what Allah has charged me with: to assemble, to listen, to obey, to immigrate and to wage jihad for the sake Allah. (Hadith no. 2863 Kitab al Amthael reported by Timri, also reported by Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbel as Hadith no 17344)

This wording implies that migration for the purpose of jihad is not only okay, it is commissioned by the prophet of Islam. But is this the only citation of such a statement? 

Sura 2:218  “Surely those who believed and those who emigrated and performed jihad.” 

Sura 8:72    “Surely those who believed and those who emigrated and performed jihad with their money and their lives for the sake Allah, and those who gave asylum…”  

Sura 8:74    “And those who believed and emigrated and performed jihad for the sake of Allah, and those who gave asylum and help [gave you victory], those are the true believers, they will receive forgiveness and generous provisions.   

Sura 8:75   ““And those who believed afterward and emigrated and performed jihad with you, so those are of you. 

The Hadiths also solidify the purpose of Muslim migration to non-Islamic lands (Dar al-Harb) is for the sole purpose of jihad, war against the infidel. Who is the infidel? Any non-Muslim!

'A'isha reported that the Messenger of Allah was asked about migration, whereupon he said: There is no migration after the Conquest (of Mecca), but Jihad and sincere intention. When you are asked to set out (for the cause of Islam), you should set out, (Sahih Muslim 1864, Book 20, Hadith 4599) 

  Doesn’t this information make you question why non-Muslim countries would accept any Muslims inside their borders? But there is more on this:

Narrated Mu'awiyah: I heard the Messenger of Allah say: Migration will not end until repentance ends, and repentance will not end until the sun rises in the west. (Sunan Abi Dawud 2479, Book 14, Hadith 2473) 

Clearly the meaning of “until repentance ends” means when all have turned to Allah. Migration after the conquest of Mecca, if to a non-Muslim land is for the sole-purpose of conquest! Whether it be an Islamic army crossing a border to wage war, or an individual.

As you can see, the Hadiths and the Koran provide several examples showing the purpose of migration (al-Hijrah) is to accomplish jihad. Shouldn’t Western governments be aware of this? Why aren’t they? The US government spends hundreds of millions of dollars researching “violent extremism” trying to determine why some persons become terrorists. Is it really that hard to accept that people who hold devout Islamic beliefs will migrate to wage a war? Even if doing so subversively since they are outnumbered?

Khalid Masud wrote “The obligation to migrate: The doctrine of hijra in Islamic law” which is a chapter in Muslim Travellers edited by Dale Eickelman and James Piscatori in 1990. Masud states:

From the Qur’anic texts the following significant points about hijra can be inferred: (1) It was an obligation of physical movement towards self-definition in the nascent Muslim society; (2) hijra was closely associated with jihad; and (3) hijra established a bond of relationship among Muslims, particularly with the ansar.3 

Masud’s point on hijra being closely associated with jihad has great significance because what is defined today as Islamic terrorism is often classified as Islamic jihad (holy war) against non-Muslims. Masud did share that there were differing opinions by scholars on whether hijra remained obligatory and shared those who do not consider it obligatory, believed that after the death of their prophet Muhammad hijra ended. But according to Masud, many scholars considered it an important and relevant teaching.

Abu Sulayman Hamid b. Muhammad Khattabi al Busti (AD 931-96/9), a scholar of hadith, … argued that hijra was actually meant to support and strengthen dar al-Islam in its nascent days. After the conquests dar al-Islam was so strong and established that migration was no longer required. The hijra would be required again only and whenever the conditions so demanded (Ibn Hajar 1959; vi, 378)4 

Masud uses a quick historical examination of the time period of the first few Caliphs to look at the truth of this matter. Masud notes that in the cases of opposing Muslim groups (631-632 AD) justified their war, “most often the ruling group in the centre - in terms of jihad. It was therefore necessary to strengthen their camp by asking their followers to migrate from enemy territories.”5   

Masud provides the example of the Khawarij who justified their jihad and hijra by stating:

all territories were dar al-kufr until they were brought into the fold of Islam. A territory could turn again into dar al-kufr if its rulers denied the sovereignty of Allah, or committed a major sin, whereby they became kafirs. In these circumstances, hijra from such a territory and jihad against it become obligatory.6  

This created reasoning for one group of Muslims to declare an opposing Muslim entity to be mushriks (polytheists), justifying a hijra for the purposes of strengthening their camp before a jihad. There are several historical examples of this. William Hunter recorded examples of hijrahs used by Muslim leaders against other Muslim leaders in The Indian Mussulmans (1871).

Masud quotes Ibn Hanbal as offering a “parallel to the famous five pillars of Islam: ‘I convey the following five commandments given by Allah: attention (sawm’), obedience (ta’a), migration (hijrah), struggle (jihad), and organization (jama’a).’”

This quote is actually very important in that it refers to the four things that happen when Muslims do migrate to non-Muslim lands. 1) Communal prayers are instituted sometimes to show strength. 2) Obedience can be a reference to remaining separate from the non-Muslims. 3) Jihad used as “struggle” keeping the hate of the infidel in the heart, which the last caliph defined as the lowest level of jihad in the 1915 fatwa. 4) Organization, this communal obligation to organize encourages the Muslims in their non-integration of their community into their new homeland. This creates a division and separation of cultures and laws.

It’s time to step back and analyze what is happening around the globe in light of massive Muslim migration. Are Muslims making a hijrah today in accordance with Islamic scholars? If so, these massive migration are only for one purpose….Islamic conquest.

Organization

Perhaps we simply need to listen to what Muslims are saying to other Muslims. Dr. Ismail al-Faruqi gave a talk to the UK Islamic Mission in 1986. He said:

We are here to stay, we are here to plant Islam in this part of the world and we must utilize everything in our power to make the word of Allah supreme…In the presence of living here, we can become ambassadors of Islam… Allah … has carved out a vocation for you, a new mission, and this mission is to save the West, to save the humanity of the West, by converting that humanity to Islam… we want to live henceforth as if we were muhajjirs, Companions of Muhammad from Makka to Madina … And so let us invest our Hijra with this new meaning, let us appoint ourselves as ambassadors of Islam in this country and let us begin a pramme, a programme of real action.7

Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo, wrote the report, Islam in Britain, in 2005. In this he identified two major problems with Islamic immigration: self-imposed segregation or separation from the native culture of the new country and the Islamic requirement to organize. In the USA there had not been enough Muslims outside of major cities to identify self-imposed segregating groups. However, there has been evidence of organization since the Muslim Brotherhood’s first legal organized entity. The Muslim Student Association began in 1963 and was founded by documented members of the Muslim Brotherhood.

In the United Kingdom this self-imposed segregation and organization revealed a definitive goal and plan. Srdja Trifkovic wrote in 2002 of a 1982 Declaration by the Islamic Foundation in Leicester, that claimed the Islamic movement:

… is an organised struggle to change the existing society into an Islamic society based on the Qur’an and the Sunna and make Islam, which is a code for entire life, supreme and dominant, especially in the socio-political spheres. …that the ultimate objective of the Islamic movement shall not be realized unless the struggle is made by locals. For it is only they who have the power to change the society into an Islamic society.8

This statement reveals that Muslims, who appeared to come to the UK in the 1960s and 1970s “for a better life”9 actually came with the intention of making the United Kingdom into an Islamic country. This is subversive. It is seditious. It is a hijrah.

Dr. Sookhdeo states that “because of Islam’s history of political dominance during most of which shari’a was enforced, and Because of its theology based on political power, Muslims have difficulty adapting to life as minorities in a non-Muslim environment. Traditionalists develop strategies to help Muslims maintain their Muslim identity and resist secular temptations.”10

The organization of Muslims is seen as a religious obligation. Dr. Sookhdeo noted that Islamic scholar Mawdudi, whom Jihadists refer to often, talked about da’wa and its inability to be effective if there is no organization. He said this about a Muslims duty to organize.

These aims cannot be realized so long as power and leadership in society are in the hands of the disbelieving rulers and so long as the followers of Islam confine themselves to worship rites … Only when power is in the hands of the Believers and the righteous, can the objectives of Islam be realized. It is therefore the primary duty of all those who aspire to please Allah to launch an organized struggle, sparing neither life, nor property, for this purpose. The importance of securing power for the righteous is so fundamental that, neglecting this struggle, one has no means left to please Allah.11

Dr. Sookhdeo also observed that Professor H. Ali Kettani, believed that organization was the key to Muslim Minority group’s survival:

The secret of the Muslim communities which have been able to survive across the centuries and generations lies in one word: organization. Islam cannot survive if individual Muslims believe it is a personal affair… When a group of Muslims is formed the first thing they should do to keep Islam among themselves is to organize themselves on an Islamic basis. To keep Islam alive from one generation to another, they should establish two basic Islamic Institutions: the mosque and the school.12

With this point of view that organization is required and needed for the faith structure to survive in a non-Muslim land it is not surprising that the first organization are mosques and schools in most countries. It is interesting that both Mawdudi and Kettani express a belief that Islam alone is not able to keep a Muslim from straying. He needs to be organized into resistance to his new country and its government. That organization will not be viewed as successful until the day the government submits to Islam as its authority alone.

These organizations have helped create the possibility of parallel lives rather than assimilation into a new host country. Muslims in the UK can be born into a Muslim family, go to a Muslim school, go to Muslim Community Centers and then work in exclusively Muslim work environments. These organizations allow and encourage the Muslim to remain separate from the Christians and Jews

Is immigration a national security threat?

Because there are some who do not see a threat from the first stage of Civilization Jihad, it is time to look at Islamic immigration as in terms of it posing a possible threat to our national security. Immigration in the United States of America, has been studied in light of being a national security threat for a long time. This study is much broader than a singular view of Islam alone. Leo Lucassen wrote The Immigrant Threat in 2005. His book addresses immigrants that come in large numbers, “hundreds of thousands rather than tens of thousands.” His book sees an immigration threat of such large groups existing on three levels: religious, national, and social. But let’s not forget the most important. Intentional infiltration and take over massive overpopulation through migration and child rearing.

Dr. Patrick Sookhdeo states in his book, Dawa: The Islamic Strategy for Reshaping the Modern World, (2014) that “most Muslim countries regard their large populations as a political weapon and are glad to send their citizens to settle in Europe, America, Canada, Australia, Latin America, Japan, South Korea and other Non-Muslim countries.”13

Recent news events have shown that this is more than true. On October 10th of 2019, Erdogan threatened to open the Turkish border into Europe. Only a month earlier on September 5th Bild.de reported a new threat from Turkey’s president Erdogan. He was demanding even more money than the willing European Union had already agreed to pay. According to Bilder, the EU had paid out €5,600,000,000 ($6.21 billion) out of an agreed €6 billion ($6.65 billion). Erdogan wanted an additional amount immediately to build housing facilities not in Turkey, but 30 miles into Syria, or else!