Donald Trump recently told the world that he would absolutely use torture if he were the next President of the U.S. Actually, he stated that he would “approve more than that.”
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you Donald Trump, the “going beyond torture” candidate for President.
Whenever I think about torture, I turn to the late author Christopher Hitchens. Hitchens approved the U.S./U.K. invasion of Iraq, which by no means makes him a hero among peace activists or sane human beings in general. But in 2008, Hitchens earned a few notches in my book by putting himself through the “waterboarding experiment.” Here is what he wrote in an article for Vanity Fair:
You may have read by now the official lie about [waterboarding], which is that it “simulates” the feeling of drowning. This is not the case. You feel that you are drowning because you are drowning—or, rather, being drowned, albeit slowly and under controlled conditions and at the mercy (or otherwise) of those who are applying the pressure.
Our next potential President – the so-called leader of the “free world” and proponent of human rights – loves the idea of drowning people to death. This is disturbing. The media would never say it, but Trump is acting like ISIS.
I can only imagine the number of Americans who support Trump’s call for torture. I do not have a precise number, but I can guess the number is high, too high, especially among Republicans. Trump and his supporters often rant about “keeping America safe” and “defending the homeland and our allies,” which (to be fair) is all good and fine, but who is to say that torture is in-line with “American values”?
George Washington, the first President of the U.S., would not agree with Trump or his gang on the issue of waterboarding. In a letter dated 14 September 1775 to the Northern Expeditionary Force, Washington ordered his soldiers to treat British prisoners of war “with humanity, and let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren who have fallen into their hands.”
As Commander-in-Chief, Washington refused to lower himself to the wretched actions of his British enemies. He commanded Americans to behave with compassion and justice. It is a far, far cry from Trump, who would use torture with a sense of pride, like he was doing something enjoyable or heroic.
Washington is rolling over in his grave.
And how about Prophet Muhammad? Many Americans (Trump among them) likely associate Muhammad with violence, terrorism, intolerance, and other horrific things, but he, like Washington, rose above the barbarism of torture.
The Prophet of Islam stated: “Prisoners should live in comfort. Muslims should care more for the comfort of their prisoners than for their own.” The key word here is comfort. What a lovely term. According to Muhammad, members of the ummah, or Muslim nation, must rise above inhumanity, even in the most extreme cases like war. Muslims are never to lower their standards to that of their enemies. Just as Americans were told by Washington.
Surely, this may sound crazy to many Americans, but it is true: Trump could learn a thing or two about humanity from the Prophet.
Consider another passage from Muhammad: “If a Muslim commits the sin of ill-treating a prisoner of war, atonement is to be made by releasing the prisoner without ransom.” The Prophet was so insistent on treating prisoners of war with respect and dignity that he demanded Muslims to treat them as they would want to be treated. You see, Muhammad was a follower and believer in Jesus Christ, who centuries earlier called on Christians to “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you.” Ironically, Trump calls himself a “Christian,” even though he loves cruelty far too much for anybody to take his “Christian identity” seriously.
Do you see where I am going with all of this?
Trump wants to use torture. ISIS already uses torture.
Washington did not want to use torture. Neither did Prophet Muhammad.
Trump is like ISIS, and vice versa.
Washington is like Muhammad, and vice versa.
Stereotypes shattered.
craigconsidinetcd.com 
This is very a strange way of assessing Mohammed’s attitude to torture. On the one hand Dr Considine quotes two supposed passages to show Mohammed’s refusal to use torture. Where are they from? We don’t know as he gives no references so we cannot check them out.
On the other hand he ignores two well known passages, one from the Sira and one from the Hadiths, both given here with references. In the first Mohammed has a man tortured in order to gain information. In the second, with nothing to gain, he has some men tortured to death just to make their end as horrible as possible:
Kinana ibn al-Rabi had custody of the treasure of the Banu Nadir, a Jewish tribe raided by Mohammed’s forces. After Kinana refused to tell where it was hidden “The apostle of Allah handed him over to al Zubayr, saying, ‘Torture him until he tells what he knows’, and al Zubayr kindled a fire on his chest so that he almost expired; then the apostle gave him to Muhammad b. Maslama, who struck off his head.” (Ibn Ishaq ch 20)
A group of ‘Uraina tribesmen stole some of Mohammed’s camels and killed their shepherd. They were caught and “The Prophet ordered for some iron pieces to be made red hot, and their eyes were branded with them and their hands and feet were cut off and were not cauterized. Then they were put at a place called Al-Harra, and when they asked for water to drink they were not given till they died.” (Bukhari 8:82:796)
Why on earth does Dr Considine do this? Who is he attempting to deceive, us or himself?
LikeLike
The short time that I’ve heard of Craig Considine and read his articles, there is a lot of questionable information, which he regards as facts. These are his “own” opinions and he should say so. He hides behind his degrees and teaches and preaches leftists ideology.
LikeLike
Basic purpose of Mohammed, Jesus , Moses, Solomon was to bring mankind to one nation who follows divine code of conduct, they never came to kill or destroy world , there first attempt was dialogue to preach their message as they were assigned by God to guide human beings, when mankind was not scientific nor philosophical like us in this age . You can not argue against the will and wisdom of God or prophets, we lack knowledge and acumen to comprehend the whole gamut. Dr c is proponent of Divine will from all ecclesiastical sources he is right in his inferences .
LikeLike