Question:
Are Muslims permitted to lie?



Summary Answer:
Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should generally be t***hful to each other, unless the purpose of lying is to "smooth over differences."

There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam - in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.



The Qur'an:
Qur'an (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell a lie.

Qur'an (3:28) - This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to "guard themselves" against danger, meaning that there are times when a Muslim may appear friendly to non-Muslims, though they should not feel that way..

Qur'an (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..." The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.

Qur'an (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who must "hide his faith" among those who are not believers.

Qur'an (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts" The context of this remark is marriage, which explains why Sharia allows spouses to lie to each other for the greater good.

Qur'an (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means 'deceit'. If Allah is supremely deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose.



From the Hadith:

Bukhari (52:269) - "The Prophet said, 'War is deceit.'" The context of this is thought to be the murder of Usayr ibn Zarim and his thirty unarmed men by Muhammad's men after he "guaranteed" them safe passage (see Additional Notes below).

Bukhari (49:857) - "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar." Lying is permitted when the end justifies the means.

Bukhari (84:64-65) - Speaking from a position of power at the time, Ali confirms that lying is permissible in order to deceive an "enemy."

Muslim (32:6303) - "...he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them)."

Bukhari (50:369) - Recounts the murder of a poet, Ka'b bin al-Ashraf, at Muhammad's insistence. The men who volunteered for the assassination used dishonesty to gain Ka'b's trust, pretending that they had turned against Muhammad. This drew the victim out of his fortress, whereupon he was brutally slaughtered despite putting up a ferocious struggle for his life.

From Islamic Law:

Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746 - 8.2) - "Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the t***h and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the t***h, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory... it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression...

"One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the t***h, and if the consequences of telling the t***h are more damaging, one is entitled to lie.



Additional Notes:

Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:

Taqiyya - Saying something that isn't true.

Kitman - Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone k**ls "it shall be as if he had k**led all mankind") while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of "corruption" and "mischief."

Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later, and some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.

Another example of lying is when Muhammad used deception to trick his personal enemies into letting down their guard and exposing themselves to slaughter by pretending to seek peace. This happened in the case of Ka'b bin al-Ashraf (as previously noted) and again later against Usayr ibn Zarim, a surviving leader of the Banu Nadir tribe, which had been evicted from their home in Medina by the Muslims.

At the time, Usayr ibn Zarim was attempting to gather an armed force against the Muslims from among a tribe allied with the Quraish (against which Muhammad had already declared war). Muhammad's "emissaries" went to ibn Zarim and persuaded him to leave his safe haven on the pretext of meeting with the prophet of Islam in Medina to discuss peace. Once vulnerable, the leader and his thirty companions were massacred by the Muslims with ease, belying the probability that they were mostly unarmed, having been given a guarantee of safe passage (Ibn Ishaq 981).

Such was the reputation of Muslims for lying and then k*****g that even those who "accepted Islam" did not feel entirely safe. The fate of the Jadhima is tragic evidence for this. When Muslim "missionaries" approached their tribe one of the members insisted that they would be slaughtered even though they had already "converted" to Islam to avoid just such a demise. However, the others were convinced that they could trust the Muslim leader's promise that they would not be harmed if they simply offered no resistance. (After convincing the skeptic to lay down his arms, the unarmed men of the tribe were quickly tied up and beheaded - Ibn Ishaq 834 & 837).

Today's Muslims often try to justify Muhammad's murder of poets and others who criticized him at Medina by saying that they broke a treaty by their actions. Yet, these same apologists place little value on treaties broken by Muslims. From Muhammad to Saddam Hussein, promises made to non-Muslim are distinctly non-binding in the Muslim mindset.

Leaders in the Arab world routinely say one thing to English-speaking audiences and then something entirely different to their own people in Arabic. Yassir Arafat was famous for telling Western newspapers about his desire for peace with Israel, then turning right around and whipping Palestinians into a h**eful and violent frenzy against Jews.

The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad. This effort worked so well, in fact, that even weeks after 9/11, John Walsh, the host of a popular American television show, said that their bar trips were evidence of 'hypocrisy.'

The t***smission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is "a bomb on board" but that everyone will "be safe" as long as "their demands are met." Obviously none of these things were true, but these men, who were so intensely dev**ed to Islam that they were willing to "slay and be slain for the cause of Allah" (as the Qur'an puts it) saw nothing wrong with employing Taqiyya in order to facilitate their mission of mass murder.

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) insists that it "has not now or ever been involved with the Muslim Brotherhood, or supported any covert, illegal, or terrorist activity or organization." In fact, it was created by the Muslim Brotherhood and has bankrolled Hamas. At least nine founders or board members of ISNA have been accused by prosecutors of supporting terrorism.

Prior to engineering several deadly terror plots, such as the Fort Hood massacre and the attempt to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner, American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was regularly sought out by NPR, PBS and even government leaders to expound on the peaceful nature of Islam.

The Quran says in several places that Allah is the best at deceiving people. An interesting side note is verse 7:99, which says that the only people who feel secure from Allah are actually those who will perish in Hell. Taken literally, this would mean that those Muslims who arrogantly assume that they will enter heaven are in for a rude surprise (such are the hazards of worshipping an all-powerful deceiver).

The near absence of Qur'anic verse and reliable Hadith that encourage t***hfulness is somewhat surprising, given that many Muslims are convinced that their religion teaches honesty. In fact, it is because of this ingrained belief that many Muslims are quite honest. When lying is addressed in the Qur'an, it is nearly always in reference to the "lies against Allah" - referring to the Jews and Christians who rejected Muhammad's claim to being a prophet.

Finally, the circumstances by which Muhammad allowed a believer to lie to a non-spouse are limited to those that either advance the cause of Islam or enable a Muslim to avoid harm to his well-being (and presumably that of other Muslims as well). Although this should be kept very much in mind when dealing with matters of global security, such as Iran's nuclear intentions, it is not grounds for assuming that the Muslim one might personally encounter on the street or in the workplace is any less honest than anyone else.

Obama needs to show us by example what type of hospitality he expects us to show to undocumented refugees. The white house has 132 bedrooms. What greater place to show them hospitality - Obama stylin'! :)

-Stop Terrorist Infiltration of the USA before it is too late!

Go to the middle east for a month and then see if you still whine the same way you did before you went. You are a recipient of constitutional rights , not politically correct, weak-kneed spineless liberal bull crap rights!

President Barack Obama said that ISIS was 'contained' just a day before the terrorist group claimed responsibility for a horrific attack in Paris that k**led 128 people on Friday.
In an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that aired on Friday's broadcast of Good Morning America, Obama declared that he didn't believe ISIS (also known as ISIL) was gaining strength.
'What is true is that from the start, our goal has been first to contain and we have contained them,' Obama said in the interview. 'They have not gained ground in Iraq, and in Syria they’ll come in, they’ll leave, but you don’t see this systemic march by ISIL across the terrain.'
Since Friday's attacks in Paris, several social media users, including Republican p**********l candidate Donald Trump, have criticized the comments made by Obama, who set off for the two-day Group of 20 summit in Antalya, Turkey, on Saturday.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3318751/Obama-fire-saying-ISIS-contained-hours-Paris-attack-heads-Turkey-G-20-Summit.html#ixzz3rWd3UFRg
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The world now knows why University of Missouri activists needed “muscle” to remove inquisitive reporters from their “safe space” on Monday: Their leaders love to run with unsubstantiated rumors.

Concerned Student 1950, which helped bring down the university system’s president Timothy Wolfe, has not fared well since its protest victory. Media professor Melissa Click has resigned her courtesy appointment after threatening school photographers, Student Body President Payton Head had to apologize for a false Ku Klux Klan sighting and there appears to be no evidence a “feces swastika” was smeared in a campus dormitory bathroom.

The group’s name, Concerned Student 1950, stands for the year the university enrolled its first black student.

“I’m sorry about the misinformation that I have shared through social media. In a state of alarm, I was concerned for all students of the University of Missouri and wanted to ensure that everyone was safe. I received and shared information from multiple incorrect sources, which I deeply regret,” Head wrote on Facebook Tuesday. He told students earlier in the day to stay away from windows as he worked with police and the National Guard to deal with a KKK sighting.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/mizzou-fraud-fest-kkk-alerts-poo-swastika-tales-implode/#6eYPT1Rt4R3JvV9d.99

One rule, however, does require the Obama administration to give Congress at least 90 days notice from when negotiations are completed to when it signs the pact and submits implementing legislation to Congress for a v**e. That means the TPP can’t be considered by Congress until the first months of 2016 at the earliest — the heart of p**********l e******n season.

Already candidates Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Martin O’Malley have spoken out against the TPP on the Democratic side. Just as significantly, Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee, and Rand Paul have done so on the Republican side. This, coupled with the fact that it’s also a congressional e******n year, may change the political calculus on the pact.

Fast track just squeaked through the House of Representatives by a 218–208 v**e. With e******n year accountability politics, and potentially with access to actual TPP texts this time around, the broad, cross-sector coalition opposed to the pact has a better than expected shot of stopping it. The key will be making the TPP as politically toxic as possible over the weeks and months to come.

How Senator Sessions Exposed the T***h about TPP

Breitbart has written two articles on Sessions’ revelations. In “Critical Alert: Jeff Sessions Warns America Against Potentially Disastrous Obama Trade Deal,” they report:

“’Congress has the responsibility to ensure that any international trade agreement entered into by the United States must serve the national interest, not merely the interests of those crafting the proposal in secret,’ Sessions’ team writes in a document that lays out the top five concerns with the Obama trade deal. ‘It must improve the quality of life, the earnings, and the per-capita wealth of everyday working Americans. The sustained long-term loss of middle class jobs and incomes should compel all lawmakers to apply added scrutiny to a ‘fast-track’ procedure wherein Congress would yield its legislative powers and allow the White House to implement one of largest global financial agreements in our history—comprising at least 12 nations and nearly 40 percent of the world’s GDP.’ . . .

“The Sessions document then goes point-by-point for five full pages through the TPA trade deal, laying out why it wouldn’t help Americans—rather, it would likely hurt American workers—and why the deal doesn’t in fact provide Congress with more power over trade despite talking points from the Obama trade deal’s proponents . . .”

The second article in Breitbart, “Only Two Republicans Admit They Have Actually Read Secret Obama Trade Deal – Both Unsupportive” reports on a survey they did of Senate Republicans where they asked three questions: (1) Have you read the TPP, specifically the ‘living agreement’ in the trade deal that allows the deal to be changed and countries added without congressional review? (2) Does the Senator agree with Sen. Sessions’ call to make the TPP available to the public? And, (3) Will the Senator v**e for fast track Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) if the TPP hasn’t been stripped of the ‘living agreement’ section that would allow countries to amend the deal without Congressional approval, and to even add countries (like China, if they wanted to) to the deal without Congressional approval?

Breitbart reports that one additional Senator, James Lankford (R-OK) was scheduled to read the TPP on Friday, May 16. Interestingly, the Oklahoma legislature recently passed a resolution urging their federal representatives to v**e against fast track trade authority.

While the US Trade Representative has threatened members of Congress with criminal prosecution for telling others what is in the TPP, they have made no threat to Senator Sessions. No doubt if they did so, fast track and the TPP would be dead because the years of work by the Obama administration to move this forward in secret would be over, and as the first trade representative in the Obama administration, Ambassador Ron Kirk, told the media “if the American people knew what was in this agreement it would never become law.”

The T***h About Trade is Needed Right Now

We are in the critical phase of debate about the T***s-Pacific Partnership and other r****d corporate trade agreements. While Speaker of the House, John Boehner (R-OH) has promised to publish all bills before they are v**ed on, he has not even read the TPP and definitely has not required it be made public. While the fast track bill can be read, the TPP is different; elected officials have limited access to it and they are not allowed to discuss what they read. So, the Congress is tying its hands on the TPP and other deals, without knowing what is in them and thereby shirking their constitutional responsibility under the Commerce Clause which directs Congress “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.”

Now, it becomes even more important because President Obama has repeatedly chided members of Congress for being inaccurate about what is in the TPP, even comparing Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) to Sarah Palin talking about death panels. He makes the claim that Congress does not know what it is talking about while keeping the agreement secret and difficult for elected officials and their staff to read. On top of that Obama and his administration consistently put out false and misleading statements about the agreement. One wonders, and I hope the media begins to ask him, whether President Obama has read the agreement? As Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) said in response: “We know exactly what we’re talking about. My concern is that he does not understand what’s in it.”

Obama criticized Warren for claiming that the TPP would undermine federal regulation of banks. If the language of the TPP were released we could see if he is accurate. But, after their argument on this issue, Canadian Finance Minister, Joe Oliver, bolstered Warren’s position by claiming that banking regulation that requires banks to invest with only their own money violates NAFTA.

The president has claimed that his deals are the most progressive trade agreements ever and fix the problems of NAFTA “by making labor and environmental provisions actually enforceable.” Yet, a leak of the environmental chapter actually shows the opposite – there is no environmental enforcement and the protections are weaker than agreements during the George W. Bush era.

The president also makes the claim that “no trade agreement is going to force us to change our laws.” This is an outrageous claim because all previous trade agreements have required the US to harmonize its laws with the agreement. How can they not? The TPP, according to leaks, changes laws around patents and trademarks. How can the TPP say one thing about intellectual property and US law say another? They must be harmonized. Elected officials who have read the text can explain differences between US law and the TPP – what laws will have to change? For example will popular laws favoring buying American products survive the TPP? The Finance Committee refused to approve an amendment that would protect Buy America.

Certainly President Obama knows that his Organizing For America is being completely misleading when in an email: “argued that the term ‘fast track’ for TPA was a misnomer because TPA would have to go through Congress like any other bill.” OFA and Obama know the debate is not whether fast track has to go through Congress in the normal fashion but whether trade agreements will be fast tracked. Why would the president and OFA be so obviously misleading? Are they desperate?

Ralph Nader has suggested that President Obama debate Senator Warren on the TPP. This would be one way to get to the t***h, hear both sides debate in public so we can all decide for ourselves whether this is an agreement that should be fast tracked through Congress outside of the traditional congressional process. But a president that has worked for his entire tenure in office to keep the TPP and other r****d agreements out of the public dialogue will certainly not take up this suggestion.

Congress Is In Position to Expose the TPP

Now, at this key moment in the debate, members of Congress who have taken the time to view the TPP are in a position to get out the t***h.

The debate in the Senate with its open amendment process is an opportunity to tell the t***h about all the issues in the TPP so there can finally be a public debate about trade agreements that will impact every aspect of our lives.

In the House, Republicans should be sharing the comments of Senator Sessions for a solid Republican critique of fast track for the TPP and other agreements. Democrats should be highlighting key senate amendments to their caucus to highlight shortcomings. And those who have read the TPP should share what they learned in order to strengthen opposition to fast track in the face of what will be a massive Obama effort to change their minds.

Those who oppose the TPP have the tools needed to win this debate, stop fast track and stop the TPP and other r****d agreements. If we succeed, we will have the opportunity to rethink global trade in light of two decades of experience with a failed model. It will be an opportunity to develop trade so that it protects the planet and raises the standard of living for people around the world. To achieve that opportunity, the first task is to expose the t***h of what is before us.

Kevin Zeese is co-director of Popular Resistance.

UNITED NATIONS – The Obama administration’s release Thursday of the more than 2,000 pages of the text of the T***s-Pacific Partnership agreement, known more commonly as Obamatrade, has prompted a rash of criticism from both the political left and the right.



Critics charge the pact undermines U.S. sovereignty by establishing a secret, unaccountable T***sPacific Partnership Commission with sweeping regulatory powers over 40 percent of the world’s economy while sending jobs abroad.

“This trade agreement would allow foreign corporations to challenge our health, safety and environmental protections in a foreign tribunal outside our legal system, and it would weaken those bedrock safeguards in the United States,” said Jake Schmidt, international program director at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “While there are some positive conservation measures, the agreement’s substantial shortcomings should lead Congress to reject it.”

Chapter 28 of the TPP agreement, titled “Dispute Settlement,” specifies that trade disputes will be adjudicated by a three-person panel in accordance with international law, including any World Trade Organization obligations that have been written into the various sections of the TPP agreement.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obamatrade-condemned-by-both-left-right/#6b3gRhUpTz83lgbf.99

They are all Democrats! What do you expect? Only 4 senators that are republican out of the Senate is not bad when you consider all the dems are kkk supporters.

30 years ago , if a young boy thought he was a girl, he was sent to a psychiatrist, not the girls showers! Nuff said on that.

V**ers in Houston on Tuesday rejected by about a 62 percent to 38 percent margin the outgoing lesbian mayor’s plan to impose a t*********r agenda on the city.



The “Houston Equal Rights Ordinance” would have banned discrimination on a number of fronts, but the most controversial was the fact it would have allowed men who represent themselves as women to enter and use women’s restrooms, locker rooms and other facilities in the city.

Anyone opposing or obstructing them could have been fined $5,000.

The v**e with 273 of 910 precincts reporting was 102,884 against and only 63,513 for the ordinance.

The Associated Press represented it as a done deal, stating the plan “failed to win approval from v**ers.”

The fight is not unique to Houston – several other locales have fought the same battle – but the Houston fight was novel in that it featured the demands of Mayor Annise Parker, a lesbian, that her lawyers subpoena the sermons of local pastors who had argued against the morality of having women in men’s locker rooms and men in women’s.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/houston-v**ers-reject-lesbian-mayors-t*********r-agenda/#OHtKVrOMdcSIa4wo.

While walking down the street one day a Corrupt Senator (that may be redundant) is tragically hit by a car and dies.

His soul arrives in heaven and is met by St. Peter at the entrance.

"Welcome to heaven," says St. Peter. "Before you settle in, it seems there is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we're not sure what to do with you."


"No problem, just let me in," says the Senator.

"Well, I'd like to, but I have orders from the higher ups. What we'll do is have you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you can choose where to spend eternity."

"Really?, I've made up my mind. I want to be in heaven," says the Senator.


"I'm sorry, but we have our rules."


And with that, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell.

The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green golf course.


In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it are all his friends and other politicians who had worked with him.


Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake his hand, and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at the expense of the people.


They played a friendly game of golf and then dined on lobster, caviar and the finest wines and champagne.


Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly guy who is having a good time dancing and telling jokes.


They are all having such a good time that before the Senator realizes it, it is time to go.


Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises.


The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens in heaven where St. Peter is waiting for him, "Now it's time to visit heaven...”


So, 24 hours passed with the Senator joining a group of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing. They have a good time and, before he realizes it, the 24 hours have gone by and St. Peter returns.


"Well, then, you've spent a day in hell and another in heaven. Now choose your eternity."


The Senator reflects for a minute, then he answers: "Well, I would never have said it before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but I think I would be better off in hell."


So St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell...


Now the doors of the elevator open and he's in the middle of a barren land covered with waste and garbage.

He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting it in black bags as more trash falls to the ground.


The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his shoulders.


"I don't understand," stammers the Senator. "Yesterday I was here and there was a golf course and clubhouse, and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, and danced and had a great time. Now there's just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable. What happened?"


The devil smiles at him and says,
"Yesterday we were campaigning,

Today, you v**ed."


V**e wisely in November!!!

John Boehner, Mitch Mconnell, Harry Reid and John Boehner are teaming up again in the name of their god, Barrack Hussein Obama to saddle our children and grandchildren with more debt so they can finance another drunken spending spree for the Illegal politicians who hide in the sanctuary city of Washington DC. Call your representatives so they can lie to you some more!

These people swore to uphold the law in the US and they have backslid!
Keep Guantanamo open so Hillary and Barrack will have some company with the rest of these senatorial felons. :)

God’s Wrath Against Sinful Humanity - Romans 1
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the t***h by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.