Jihadists call for France, Spain and the Vatican to be conquered


This doesn’t appear to be a call to “inner spiritual struggle” either. And yet there are still people who refuse to believe that a a violent jihadi agenda even forms a part of the Islamic religion.

As the French people went to the polls to select a president, jihadi members of an al-Qaeda online forum exchanged messages discussing their aspiration to “reinvade France (and convert it into) an Islamic country.”

The internet discussion appeared as Spanish security forces warned that both Spain and France were targets of al-Qaeda terror plots.

A post that appeared on the al-Firdaws jihadi forum, submitted by a user named Faisal al-Baghdadi, contained a lengthy historical account of “the second stop of the Islamic conquest of Europe, France, after Andalusia, Spain.”

The post took a nostalgic look at the battle of Tours in 732, in which Muslim forces, commanded by Rahman al-Ghafiqi, who invaded a portion of France, were repelled by the Frankish general Charles Martel (“the hammer”), and forced to retreat. The battle stemmed the medieval Islamic conquest of Europe …

… “We ask that Allah sends us a genuine Rahman al-Ghafiqi, to finish what he started in Europe, and conquer the Vatican as promised in our beautiful Islamic verses,” the post concluded.

“Allah bless the writer and carrier of the message which recalls the days of glory and honor of Islam,” another user responded …

Here’s a link to the source of the above information:



No muslim will condemn this. They will be angry because you brought it up before they could complete the conquest.


ROFL! How true. And when they attack they’ll call it something like a ‘liberation’, or a ‘retaliation’.

Where were the Moslem apologists when the French foiled a plot to blow people up in their own country? France was against the war in Iraq - so the Moslems couldn’t use that as an excuse.



There are posts on the Catholic Answers Forum calling for the establishment of a Catholic Theocracy (even a fascist Catholic Theocracy with nostalgia for Franco)!:eek:

Should non Catholics be calling on all Catholics to disown these sentiments?



I formally disown any statement in favor of a Catholic theocracy. See, that wasn’t so hard.


One down. About a billion to go.:smiley:


I join cestusdei in disowning any statement calling for Catholic theocracy. I also condemn all the Jihadists and their goal of conquering the West.


Ah but do you refuse to believe that a fascist Catholic theocracy forms part of the Catholic religion?

Hey, I don’t want to push the analogy it’s just that starting a thread based on what some crank has said on a message board is a bit much when you 1) consider the nature of message boards and 2) have a few cranks of your own (don’t we all?).


Ah, but these aren’t just your average run of the mill cranks either are they?


I notice that they did not cite Poland as a place to attack and convert.

Don’t forget September 11, 1683, you jihadists.

My best friend is a US Air Marshal. He has to fly into and out of international airports where there have been terror threats - London, Paris, Germany, and even Hong Kong.

Yet, no threats from Warsaw! Who would have thunk it!


Nice of you to switch the topic of the thread


This is a straw man, since no one disputes that members of Al-Qaeda believe this!

Nor should any reasonable person doubt that Al-Qaeda represents an extreme edge of Islamic opinion. However, that leaves at least three important questions open:

  1. What is the historic mainstream of Islamic opinion (i.e., what have most Islamic scholars held);

  2. What is the dominant view among Muslims today?

  3. What view appears to be gaining ground.

On 1 I think there are some fairly clear answers: as I understand it, jihad has been traditionally defined in terms of warfare (as well as an inner spiritual struggle), including aggressive warfare against non-Muslim governments. However, this has involved strict limitations on the methods that can be used, limitations that Al-Qaeda ignores owing to their typically fundamentalist disregard for tradition. A purely spiritual definition of jihad has always been a minority view among Muslims.

It seems to me that one big issue for Muslims today is whether democratic Western governments should be classed with the “tyrannical” non-Muslim governments faced by early Muslims (such as the Byzantine Empire, which for all its glories was neither democratic nor religiously tolerant). I think that Muslims who accept the authority of the traditions of Islamic law can make the case that a pluralistic, tolerant non-Muslim country is not a fit object for Jihad.

Of course, that doesn’t settle the question. For one thing, even bin Laden did not base his fatwa merely on the fact that the U.S. is not Muslim, but on the alleged American aggression against Muslims both directly and by means of support for Israel. For another, fundamentalists on the one hand and liberals on the other do not necessarily accept the traditions of Islamic legal scholarship as binding. And finally, Islamic fundamentalists typically see Western pluralism and tolerance as a deadly threat in and of themselves.

So it remains very much open to question which way Muslims will go in the future. I think the most important thing to remember is that there are and always have been many different kinds of Islam and that Muslims will never be entirely of one mind on these issues. Therefore, we should not overgeneralize or be hasty to rule out the possibility that peaceful versions of Islam will become dominant–but neither should we assume that peaceful Islam is the “real” Islam and militant Islam is an aberration of a tiny minority.



If this is your roundabout way of referring to the Vatican, it still wouldn’t apply. A “theocracy” by its very nature, is a form of government, and therefore its rules are binding on everyone in its jurisdiction regardless of personal choice. Even if Catholics do submit to the Vatican’s decrees, they do so by their own free will and nobody is forcing them to remain within the group.


Here is the GOOD news. Today a report said only 30% of muslims love bin laden. That’s only about 300,000,000 muslims! Don’t you all feel better?


What report?



Er, no …

I was going through parallel steps in the argument having substituted something outrageous a Catholic had said on this message board for something outrageous a Muslim had said on another message board - I then said I wasn’t intending to push it far as an analogy.

While it’s permanently ‘open season’ on Islam and Muslims, I do wonder whether people haven’t got something more serious to chase than what somebody says on another message board.


weell what else is new?
the religion of peace…is the religion of peace. :smiley:


I’m continually amazed. Just how far are certain people going to go out of their way to defend Islam no matter what? What does it take before people realize that a religion’s teachings are BAD… if evidence that the majority of Muslims support the practice of murdering apostates (much less, that this is orthodox Islamic teaching anyway) is not “serious” enough to warrant attention, then what is?

If there is any hypothetical situation that would finally cause people to get their heads out of the sand and say “you know what, Islam might actually be a PROBLEM!” please tell me what it is. Because so far, I’m thinking they could get away with just about anything and still have their own dhimmitized band of cheerleaders defending everything they do.


So it would seem.


And just what do you think Islam is? It’s a POLITICAL IDEOLOGY akin to Nazism masquerading as a cult!


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.