I770 A Meccan named Al Hajjaj became a Muslim and took part in the
capture of Khaybar. After the conquest he asked Mohammed’s permission
to go to Mecca and finish up his affairs and collect his debts. He then asked
Mohammed if he could tell lies to get his money. The prophet of Allah
said, “Tell them.” So he set out for Mecca. When he got there the Meccans
were asking for news from Khaybar. They did not know that the man had
converted and so trusted him. He told them the Muslims had lost and that
Mohammed had been captured. He said the Jews of Khaybar were going
to bring Mohammed to Mecca so they could kill him.
I771 The Meccans were elated. He then asked them to help him collect
his debts so he could return to Khaybar and profit from the confusion
there. In good spirits they helped him collect the debts. He had been gone
three days when they found out the truth of Khaybar and the fact that he
was now a Muslim.
Once again we see the example of Mohammed, allowing his followers to deceive Kaffirs to gain advantage over them. This was one of his favourite tactics and is described repeatedly in his biographies. To this day it remains a central pillar of Jihad and even has a name. In Arabic it is known as Taquiya, or sacred deceit.
I774 There were a total of eighteen hundred people who divided up the wealth taken from the Jews of Khaybar. A cavalry man got three shares; a foot soldier got one share. Mohammed appointed eighteen chiefs to divide the loot. Mohammed got his fifth before it was distributed.
Mohammed was not interested in an opulent lifestyle. Even his wives complained of the lowly conditions they lived in whilst he was so wealthy. His main motivation seems to have been his desire to be worshipped by all.
Most of his wealth was spent on weapons and supplies for Jihad, or in the payment of monies to settle disputes amongst his followers (blood money). In the later part of his life, Mohammed’s all consuming passion was the conquest of the Kaffirs. It is also a major component of the religion he created.
In the previous chapter we looked at the influence of Islam on Western Governments, in this one we will look at how it influences another institution.
Islamic Influence in Universities
Most universities are run by Governments. Islam therefore has a means to influence them through its degree of control over government decisions. Wealthy Muslims also donate huge sums of money to universities around the Western world, giving them the potential to influence decisions and policies. Leaders in most fields pass through university. The information which is disseminated in them is therefore of great importance for the future of our societies.
In March 2008, Alwaleed Bin Talal had donated £8m to build an Islamic studies centre (to bear his name) at Cambridge University. A few months later, on 8 May 2008, he gave £ 16m to Edinburgh University to fund the "centre for the study of Islam in the contemporary world." In April 2009, Al Waleed donated $20 million to Harvard University, one of its 25 largest donations. He also donated the same amount to Georgetown University.
His donation and others coming from Islamic sources have not been always welcomed due to their effects on academic objectivity and security concerns.
Muslims are obliged to give to a percentage of their income to charity; however money given to Kaffirs does not count. When six out of ten Muslims worldwide are illiterate, it seems strange that Muslims are pouring such huge sums of money into Western universities.
It is hard to imagine that such generosity doesn’t come with conditions. Perhaps this is why universities are so reluctant to criticize Islam. Instead, they produce documents roundly endorsing Islam. These offer sanitized, airbrushed accounts of Islamic history and achievements which bear little resemblance to the truth.
This may also be why Middle Eastern studies courses never examine Islamic Doctrine or Jihad. This seems strange given the undeniably huge influence that Islam has on the Middle East. In fact, Islamic Doctrine is not studied in any Western university period. Whether this influence extends beyond Middle Eastern studies, into broader history and social studies generally is hard to know. Circumstantial evidence suggests however, that it does.
For instance, we all learn about Africans being taken to America as slaves by Europeans. Why then do we not learn about the Barbary (North African Muslim) Pirates? For centuries, they raided shipping and coastal villages around Europe.
They reached as far as the UK and took more than a million Europeans back to sell as slaves in North Africa and the Middle East. Huge swathes of European coastline had to be abandoned for fear of these African slavers. Their trade was finally stopped in 1830 when the French invaded Algeria.
(By comparison, detailed shipping records exist, showing a total of 388,000 African slaves were shipped to the USA prior to 1798 when the trade was voluntarily abolished).
How many people today are aware of the constant attacks which for centuries were launched against Eastern Europe by the Ottoman Turks? They took so many European slaves back to the Middle East that the word “Slave” is derived from the word “Slav.”
Why do we not learn of the 1400 years of Islamic slave trading in Africa, but only of the 200 years of European slave trading?
There is no reason not to examine the many instances of wrong doing by Western societies in the past. It is in fact one of the great strengths of Western society, that we can admit to and learn from our mistakes. To pretend however that Europeans were the only wrong doers in the entire world’s history and that all current problems can be traced to past evils of Western/Christian nations, seems suspiciously like the attitude of a dhimmi.
Whether these two pieces of information (Islamic financing of universities and academic self-blame) are connected or not is hard to say, but they seem to fit pretty neatly in with the rest of the jigsaw.
At the very least, it seems remarkable that the UK could be at war with Muslims in two different Islamic countries, (Iraq/Afghanistan) and yet the only study of the enemy’s doctrine/philosophy/motivation is being conducted by Muslims. Some call this political correctness, in the long term it sounds more like political suicide.
From “The Australian” Newspaper Letters Page, September 19, 2012
Your editorial calls for an open, frank and ongoing discussion in the battle of ideas about contemporary Islam. Tragically, such open discussion is not possible in our universities, as I have discovered to my cost.
My refusal to adopt a pro-Islamist terrorist and anti-American position in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks led to a concerted campaign of vilification against me that lasted for several years and only subsided when I won a Work Cover case against my employer.
Moreover, over the past decade there have been many demands that I be sacked for publishing my views on Islamist extremism and I have also been threatened several times with legal action. One of the persons who made such threats - and also demanded my dismissal - is a senior academic who teaches at Australia's premier defence academy. Another holds a leadership position in a national centre of excellence in Islamic studies.
Unfortunately, this prolonged series of attacks on me for engaging in public debate about Islam and Islamist extremism has seriously damaged my health and has now led to my early retirement. Such is the price of academic discussion of Islam in this country.
Mervyn F. Bendle, Townsville, Qld
 For example: Learning from One Another: Bringing Muslim perspectives into Australian schools by Hassim and Cole-Adams
National Centre of Excellence for Islamic Studies, University of Melbourne http://www.nceis.unimelb.edu.au