By Erasmus Ikhide
A few hours ago, I stumbled on Mahfuz Mundadu’s blank massaging of Ilhan Omar’s ego, self-image and her repeated subversion of the United States Constitution. I read Mahfuz’s narrow and twisted twitches about global Islamic terrorism and his inverted reasoning that often snares those in opposition to Islamic fundamentalism and the nihilism of a theology that treats dissenters as deserving fatwas, published in the 21st Century Chronicle edition of December 8, 2025. My previous piece under review was titled: “Islamic goes off the cliff”.
The article, titled “Erasmus Ikhide: When a Hijabi Congresswoman becomes more frightening than Hiroshima,” exposes Mahfuz’s intellectual redundancy and mental frailty in the age of factual historical nuances.
All through the piece, Mahfuz justified Omar’s antisemitism and dual loyalty—as evident in all her engagements—because the United States and Israel are “terrorist states.” Mahfuz refused to address the fact that Omar has faced significant criticism from both Democrats and Republicans for several comments perceived as antisemitic, particularly regarding Israel and pro-Israel lobbying groups.
In 2012, she tweeted that “Israel has hypnotized the world,” for which she later apologized for using an “anti-Semitic trope.” In 2019, she attributed American support for Israel to money from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), tweeting, “It’s all about the Benjamins,” for which she also issued an apology. She also drew criticism for suggesting that pro-Israel activists were pushing “allegiance to a foreign country,” which critics described as a “dual loyalty” trope.
These comments led to her removal from the House Foreign Affairs Committee in February 2023. In 2021, Omar drew criticism for comments that appeared to equate the U.S. and Israel with “terror groups” like Hamas and the Taliban in the context of an International Criminal Court investigation into atrocities.
It’s even more disturbing and disgusting that Mahfuz added a touch of eerie certitude to the extraordinary and outlandish fundamentalists call of “Death to America,” framing it as a nuanced proclivity of victims of “American and Israeli civilizations” and a survivalist mechanism for drawing attention to disturbing trends.
There have never been any pretenses that Islam, as professed by Prophet Muhammad, has its foundation watered, nourished, and flourished on human blood. This is fueled by the “Satanic Verses” from the Quran, whose expansion is derived from forced taxation, enslavement, raping, and beheading of those who do not subscribe to Islamic nihilism. These commands, forced on Muslim adherents, have been responsible for wanton terror across the globe for the last 1,400 years.
Examining the “Verses in the Quran”
In the modern geopolitical landscape, the rhetoric of extremist groups often leans heavily on specific passages from the Quran. These verses, frequently referred to by critics and radicals alike as “Sword Verses,” are cited to justify acts of violence, expansionism, and the harsh treatment of non-believers. However, for the world’s 1.9 billion Muslims and the academic community, these verses remain a central point of intense debate regarding context, historical application, and modern relevance.
The Language of War
The mandates for combat comprise a significant portion of the verses cited by extremist ideologues that focus on the physical act of “Jihad” or struggle. Verses such as Quran 2:216 state that “Fighting has been enjoined upon you, though it is disliked by you,” while Quran 9:111 describes a spiritual contract where believers “trade” their lives for the promise of Paradise. In the heat of battle, the Quranic text often employs stark, visceral language.
Tactical Commands
Quran 8:12 mentions striking the necks and fingertips of enemies—a verse often used by groups to justify modern-day beheadings, such as those seen in the Syrian and Iraqi conflicts (Quran 47:4). This concept of terror is documented in verses like Quran 3:151 and Quran 59:2, which speak of “casting terror” into the hearts of disbelievers. While extremists view this as a permanent mandate, many historians argue these were specific psychological tactics used during 7th-century Arabian warfare to end conflicts quickly.
The “Sword Verse”
The most famous of these citations is Quran 9:5, often called the “Verse of the Sword”: “Slay the polytheists wherever you find them…” Terrorist organizations often use this verse to argue that it “abrogates” (cancels out) earlier verses of peace and tolerance. Conversely, mainstream scholars point to the immediate context of the verse: a broken treaty between the early Muslim community in Medina and specific pagan tribes who had persecuted them. They argue that the verse applies to a specific historical war rather than serving as a standing order against all non-Muslims for all time.
Interaction with “People of the Book”
The relationship with Jews and Christians is equally nuanced in the text. While Quran 5:51 advises against taking them as “allies” or “friends,” and Quran 9:29 calls for fighting those who do not believe in the “true religion” until they pay a tax (Jizya), other parts of the Quran emphasize the shared Abrahamic lineage. The interpretation of Quran 48:29—which describes the companions of the Prophet as “harsh against disbelievers and merciful among themselves”—has become a cornerstone for “in-group/out-group” radicalization, creating a binary world of “believers” versus “infidels.”
Divine Agency and Martyrdom
Perhaps the most potent verses for radicalization are those that remove the moral burden of killing from the individual. Quran 8:17 states, “It was not you who killed them, but Allah,” suggesting that the warrior is merely an instrument of divine will. This, coupled with the “great reward” promised in Quran 4:74 for those who are slain in the cause of God, forms the ideological backbone of suicide missions and “martyrdom” operations.
A Decades-Long Chronology of Global Terrorist Incidents (1972–2018)
For nearly half a century, the global community has been shaped by a series of high-profile attacks that have redefined national security, international travel, and religious discourse.
The Early Era: State-Linked & Regional Tensions (1970s – 1980s)
Modern international terrorism gained significant global attention in the 1970s. The Munich Olympic Massacre (1972) brought violence to the world’s most peaceful sporting stage, followed by high-stakes aerial incidents like the Air France hijacking (1976). The decade closed with the Iranian Embassy takeover (1980), signaling a shift toward ideologically driven confrontations. The 1980s saw large-scale bombings, including the Beirut Marine Barracks and Embassy bombings (1983), the hijacking of the Achille Lauro (1985), and the tragedy of Pan-Am Flight 103 (1988) over Lockerbie, Scotland.
The 1990s: Emerging Networks
As the 20th century closed, transnational patterns emerged. In 1993, the first World Trade Center bombing proved major Western landmarks were targets. Between 1994 and 1998, attacks expanded to South America (Buenos Aires AMIA bombing) and East Africa, where the U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania (1998) signaled the rise of Al-Qaeda. In 2000, the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen further highlighted the vulnerability of naval assets.
2001–2010: The Post-9/11 World
The September 11 attacks (2001) served as a global turning point, leading to the “War on Terror.” Following 9/11, a wave of synchronized attacks followed: the Bali nightclub bombings (2002), the Madrid train bombings (2004), and the London 7/7 bombings (2005). The Moscow Theatre (2002) and Beslan school (2004) crises shocked Russia, while the Mumbai attacks (2008) paralyzed India’s financial capital.
2011–2018: The Era of Lone Actors and Insurgencies
The nature of threats evolved again, with a mix of organized insurgent massacres and “lone wolf” attacks. This included the Libyan U.S. Embassy attack (2012) and the brutal Yazidi massacre (2014) by ISIS forces. France was hit repeatedly, from the Charlie Hebdo attacks (2015) and the Paris Bataclan massacre (2015) to the Nice truck attack (2016). In the U.S., the Boston Marathon bombing (2013), San Bernardino (2015), and the Orlando Pulse shooting (2016) underscored the difficulty of tracking radicalized individuals. The timeline concludes with the Manchester Arena bombing (2017) and the Surabaya church bombings (2018).
Mahfuz’s Violence to History
Granted that both religions spread their influence globally in most dehumanizing ways, their methods and historical contexts differed significantly. In the 19th century, Western powers (Britain, France, Spain) often used the “Three Cs”—Christianity, Commerce, and Civilization—to justify seizing territories.
Missionaries often paved the way for colonial rule, though they also frequently fought against the abuses of colonial administrators.
The early Caliphates (Umayyad, Abbasid) expanded through military conquest, beheading perceived and known infidels. However, unlike 19th-century colonialism, this was often about Empire-building. Conquered “People of the Book” (Christians and Jews) were given dhimmi status—they paid a tax (jizya) in exchange for their lives and to avoid forceful conversion to Islam. The European Enlightenment led to a “separation of Church and State.” This moved violence into the realm of secular nationalism (e.g., WWI, WWII) rather than religious mandate.
Islam historically did not separate “Religion” from “State” (Din wa Dawla). Law (Sharia) was intended to govern all of society. Christianity, following the “Render unto Caesar” principle, eventually allowed for secular legal systems to take precedence. The difference today is that Western legal systems transitioned to “Human Rights” frameworks in the 20th century, whereas a majority of fundamentalist Islamic states still apply medieval penal codes as a form of “resistance” to Western influence.
In summary, while Christianity focuses on the Sermon on the Mount (peace/pacifism), Islam focuses on administering fatwas to infidels (Adl), which includes the right to prosecute brutal war (Jihad) and beheading people on behalf of a lazy Allah who cannot fight for himself. Now, time is the ultimate master of abhorrent religion gone awry. A self-assured religion perceivedly ordained by God with dehumanizing propensity without discretion is often likened to a weak, ineffectual protagonist running amok.
This is where Mahfuz’s naive propaganda turns on its head. Apart from the hollow optics and banal intellectual self-deprecation, Mahfuz Mundadu knows there’s no single Christian terrorist group or organization globally that’s maiming people, raping women, assaulting female children sexually in their infancy in the name of Islamic marriage, killing people in droves while shouting the name of a Christian God!
In the last 1,400 years of Islamic Jihadist existence—conquest and expansionism, up until the political and Islamic Caliphate ended in 1924—over 270 million people were reportedly slaughtered on the global scene. There is no better time for Islam to stay out of its capacity for brutal violence. It must stay out of flames, reform and reinvent itself from the blood-curdling cult of Jihadism.
Erasmus Ikhide contributed this piece via: ikhideluckyerasmus@gmail.com.
