3 days ago.

Just a sampling of some of the murals in Iran…

Tawriya: Islamic Doctrine Permits “Creative Lying”

Perhaps you have heard of taqiyya, the Muslim doctrine that allows lying in certain circumstances, primarily when Muslim minorities live under infidel authority. Now meet tawriya, a doctrine that allows lying in virtually all circumstances—including to fellow Muslims and by swearing to Allah—provided the liar is creative enough to articulate his deceit in a way that is true to him.

The authoritative Hans Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary defines tawriya as, “hiding, concealment; dissemblance, dissimulation, hypocrisy; equivocation, ambiguity, double-entendre, allusion.” Conjugates of the trilateral root of the word, w-r-y, appear in the Quran in the context of hiding or concealing something (e.g., 5:31, 7:26).

As a doctrine, “double-entendre” best describes tawriya’s function. According to past and present Muslim scholars (several documented below), tawriya is when a speaker says something that means one thing to the listener, though the speaker means something else, and his words technically support this alternate meaning.

For example, if someone declares “I don’t have a penny in my pocket,” most listeners will assume the speaker has no money on him—though he might have dollar bills, just literally no pennies. Likewise, say a friend asks you, “Do you know where Mike is?” You do, but prefer not to divulge. So you say “No, I don’t know”—but you keep in mind another Mike, whose whereabouts you really do not know.

All these are legitimate according to Sharia law and do not constitute “lying,” which is otherwise forbidden in Islam, except in three cases: lying in war, lying to one’s spouse, and lying in order to reconcile people. For these, Sharia permits Muslims to lie freely, without the strictures of tawriya, that is, without the need for creativity.

As for all other instances, in the words of Sheikh Muhammad Salih al-Munajid (based on scholarly consensus): “Tawriya is permissible under two conditions: 1) that the words used fit the hidden meaning; 2) that it does not lead to an injustice” (“injustice” as defined by Sharia, of course, not Western standards). Otherwise, it is permissible even for a Muslim to swear when lying through tawriya. Munajid, for example, cites a man who swears to Allah that he can only sleep under a roof (saqf); when the man is caught sleeping atop a roof, he exonerates himself by saying “by roof, I meant the open sky.” This is legitimate. “After all,” Munajid adds, “Quran 21:32 refers to the sky as a roof [saqf].”

Here is a recent example of tawriya in action: Because it is a “great sin” for Muslims to acknowledge Christmas, this sheikh counsels Muslims to tell Christians, “I wish you the best,” whereby the latter might “understand it to mean you’re wishing them best in terms of their [Christmas] celebration.” But—here the wily sheikh giggles as he explains—”by saying I wish you the best, you mean in your heart I wish you become a Muslim.”

As with most Muslim practices, tawriya is traced to Islam’s prophet. After insisting Muslims “need” tawriya because it “saves them from lying,” and thus sinning, Sheikh Uthman al-Khamis adds that Muhammad often used it. Indeed, Muhammad is recorded saying “Allah has commanded me to equivocate among the people inasmuch as he has commanded me to establish [religious] obligations”; and “I have been sent with obfuscation”; and “whoever lives his life in dissimulation dies a martyr” (Sami Mukaram, Al Taqiyya Fi Al Islam, London: Mu’assisat al-Turath al-Druzi, 2004, p. 30).

More specifically, in a canonical hadith, Muhammad said: “If any of you ever pass gas or soil yourselves during prayers [breaking wudu], hold your nose and leave” (Sunan Abu Dawud): Holding one’s nose and leaving implies smelling something offensive—which is true—though people will think it was someone else who committed the offense.

Following their prophet’s example, many leading Muslim figures have used tawriya, such as Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal, founder of one of Islam’s four schools of law, practiced in Saudi Arabia. Once when he was conducting class, someone came knocking, asking for one of his students. Imam Ahmed answered, “He’s not here, what would he be doing here?”—all the time pointing at his hand, as if to say “he’s not in my hand.” The caller, who could not see Ahmed, assumed the student was simply not there.

Also, Sufyan al-Thawri, another important Muslim thinker, was once brought to Caliph Mahdi who refused to let him leave, until Thawri swore to return. As he was going out, Thawri left his sandals by the door. After a while, he returned, took his sandals and left for good. When the caliph asked about him, he was told that, yes, Thawri had sworn to come back—and, indeed, he had come back: only to take his sandals and leave.

Lest it seem tawriya is limited to a few colorful anecdotes more befitting the Arabian Nights than the religious law (Sharia) of a billion people, here are some more modern Muslim authorities—Sheikh Muhammad Hassan, the famous cleric who says Islam forbids Muslims from smiling to infidels, except when advantageous, and Dr. Abdullah Shakir—justifying it. They both give the example of someone knocking on your door, you do not wish to see them, so a relative answers the door saying, “He’s not here,” and by “here” they mean the immediate room, which is true, since you will be hiding in another room.

Likewise, on the popular Islam Web, where Muslims submit questions and Islamic authorities respond with a fatwa, a girl poses her moral dilemma: her father has explicitly told her that, whenever the phone rings, she is to answer saying “he’s not here.” The fatwa solves her problem: she is free to lie, but when she says “he’s not here,” she must mean he is not in the same room, or not directly in front of her.

Of course, while all the sheikhs give examples that are innocuous and amount to “white” lies, tawriya can clearly be used to commit terrible, “black” lies, especially where the adversarial non-Muslim infidel is concerned. As Sheikh al-Munajid puts it: “Tawriya is permissible if it is necessary or serves a Sharia interest.” Consider the countless “Sharia interests” that run directly counter to Western civilization and law, from empowering Islam to subjugating infidels. To realize these, Muslims, through tawriya, are given a blank check to lie—a check that surely comes in handy: not just in trivial occasions, like avoiding unwanted callers, but momentous ones, such as at high-level diplomatic meetings where major treaties are forged.

~~~~~~~~

It is utter foolishness and a complete waste of time sending delusional egomaniac fantasist Steve Witkoff to negotiate with anyone from Iran. It will only provide Iran more time to prepare for an attack, more time to move weapons, more time Israel and the West cannot afford to waste.

There has yet to be an American president, an American White House chock full of advisors, the so-called best and brightest who understand Islam and react accordingly to Islam. They all, to a one, arrogantly, vainly believe they are the one to change Islam as no other person ever has been able to.

By what? Charm? Words? Monetary bribes? Threats?

When will there be an American president, an American White House check full of advisors, the so-called best, brightest, and most aware, when will there be a U.S. Congress, statesmen and women who truly understand Islam as practiced by the Iranian regime?

Realizing that whatever anyone from that Iranian regime might say is a lie.

Iran has been permitted to proceed, carte blanche, in nuclear weapons development for many years now. With zero consequences. Allowed to the point they are within weeks of having enough purified uranium to build six nuclear bombs.

With every American Executive Branch asleep at the wheel. Either aiding and abetting Iran’s nuclear work, as the Obama and Biden administrations did, or refusing to understand as they should Islam and the Iranian regime, as the Bush and Trump administrations have and presently do.

You can’t negotiate in good faith with evil. With liars. With people conditioned their whole lives to hate the West, hate Israel, hate America, and indoctrinated in the jihadist/terrorist fundamental edicts of the Qur’an and Islam.

They cannot be cajoled, charmed, or bribed to see things our way. They have no desire to comply, to change, to assimilate, to be accepted by the world.

When will this reality be understood?

Tawriya…

It hasn’t yet. Will it ever be realized by those in positions of authority in Washington, D.C.? Unlikely if history tells us how Islam will be dealt with by American presidents, Congresses, and the West.

A lot of pretend, wasteful efforts. A lot of half-hearted efforts to give the illusion that Islam is understood and its terrorism can and is being dealt with. All just to provide an illusion to the people that something is being done.

All that will resolve this?

Bomb every location in Iran where any hint of nuclear weapons work has been, or is being done. Then bomb it all again.

Because Iran isn’t going to cease their white hot hatred or their years of work and effort to now stop all uranium enrichment, all nuclear weapons work, all ballistic missile work to please an American president and his wishes.

Tawriya…

Think about it. Do you really believe, after all the years, money spent, infrastructure built, research, development and the stockpile of purified, enriched uranium, the ballistic missiles made — so, so close to realizing their many decades long dream of being a nuclear weapons capable country they are going to now agree to stop? To destroy all they have built and put the effort into?

Really?

That’s the Iran and Islam you know?

Hummm…

Tawriya…

Read on…

Ken Pullen, Friday, April 11th, 2025

Trump, Netanyahu, and Iran

April 10, 2025

By Hugh Fitzgerald

Reprinted from Jihad Watch

Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu left Washington without having an assurance from President Trump that the 17% tariff the President placed on Israeli goods would be removed, even though Israel, the day before, had removed all tariffs on American goods. Lowering that tariff will now be the subject of negotiation. But when it came to Gaza, there was no disagreement, no hint of any American dismay with the way the IDF was conducting the war. That was a great relief for the Israelis, who remember the pressures Israel experience during the Biden administration, which tried to direct the IDF’s conduct of its war.

The third item discussed between Trump and Netanyahu was Iran. The Islamic Republic has been racing forward, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, to enrich large quantities of uranium up to 60% purity, which is just one step below weapons-grade. Iran is believed by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s director, Rafael Grossi, to be close to having enough enriched uranium to make six nuclear bombs. While the Iranians keep reassuring the world that they have no intention of making nuclear weapons, the only possible explanation for their enriching uranium to such a level is to use that uranium not in nuclear energy plants, but in weapons. Nuclear energy plants built for civilian use do not require that level of enrichment.

Trump surprised Netanyahu, who kept a poker face but must have been disturbed by the news, by waiting until he arrived in Washington to tell him about his, Trump’s, intention to enter negotiations with the Iranians about their nuclear program. In fact, it was Steve Witkoff who broke the news to Netanyahu when he first settled in at Blair House. The Israelis were not expecting the U.S. to agree to negotiate with Iran; they had expected that Trump would again state that “Iran will never acquire nuclear weapons, no matter what it takes to stop them.” Instead, here was Trump surprising the Israelis with news of American negotiations with Tehran.

More on this development can be found here: “Some Israelis Favor Attacking Iran, Expressing Skepticism About Talks,” by Isabel Kershner, New York Times, April 8, 2025:

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has in the past listed the three main threats facing Israel as “Iran, Iran and Iran.” He has largely staked his career on being Israel’s protector against Iranian nuclear ambitions, has openly confronted Tehran in recent months and is at war with Iran-backed militias around the region.

Many Israelis were therefore surprised when President Trump, with Mr. Netanyahu sitting beside him, announced on Monday that the United States would engage in “direct” negotiations with Iran on Saturday in a last-ditch effort to rein in the country’s nuclear program….

By early evening in Israel, Mr. Netanyahu had issued a video statement before his departure from Washington in which he largely strove to emphasize his close alliance and alignment with the Trump administration.

“We agree that Iran will not have nuclear weapons,” he said, adding that this could be achieved by diplomatic accord. But a negotiated solution, he explained, would have to result in the total destruction of Iran’s vast nuclear program, blowing up facilities and dismantling all equipment, all carried out by the United States.

But should Iran drag out the talks, Mr. Netanyahu said, the second option would be a military one. “Everyone understands that,” he said, adding, “We discussed it at length.”…

Trump has made clear that he will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, repeating that “it’s not going to happen.” But he has said nothing publicly about carrots he might offer to entice Iran to give up its nuclear program, nor has he said that he would not hesitate to use military force if necessary to end Iran’s nuclear program. His silence on this matter worries the Israelis, who want the U.S. to issue a clear threat.

Optimists can point to the fact that the U.S.has just delivered to Israel several THAAD anti-missile systems, the most advanced in the American armory, presumably to intercept Iranian long-range missiles. Furthermore, in another sign of Washington’s preparation for a possible war with Iran, the U.S. now has two naval battle groups in the region, and has pre-positioned 6 B-2 bombers at its airbase on Diego Garcia Island, part of the Chagos Islands, that are capable of carrying the 30,000 pound bunker-buster bombs, or MOPs (Massive Ordnance Penetrators), that would be able to destroy the underground nuclear facility at Natanz and the nuclear facility built inside a mountain at Fordow. The Iranians must surely be thinking that those B-2 bombers can have only one purpose, and that they have been brought to the Middle East to make clear to Iran that the military threat from the Americans is real.

But what if the threat to Iran has no effect? What if the Iranians are merely stalling for time, as they continue to speed up their efforts to manufacture nuclear weapons and the ballistic missiles to deliver them on their warheads? At what point will the Trump administration be willing to break off the negotiations with Iran as fruitless, and instead use those bombers and drop those bunker-buster bombs to destroy the nuclear program that Tehran, it will become clear, never had any intention of giving up?

Iran’s rulers will never willingly give up the nuclear program that their scientists have been working on for decades, and on which they have spent tens of billions of dollars. To allow all of that to be destroyed, and by America, the Great Satan, possibly in collaboration with Israel, the Little Satan, would be too humiliating for the Supreme Leader. It might, in fact, be so humiliating that his rule could be threatened. He and his associates will keep talking to the Americans, hoping to stave off any attack until they have managed to both manufacture a half-dozen nuclear weapons and the ballistic missiles to deliver them. But Trump does not like to be crossed, or tricked, or to be hornswoggled by anyone, but especially by the Iranians.

And what about Trump’s visceral opposition to sending troops to fight a long and colossally wasteful war, like those he witnessed in Iraq and Afghanistan? But there would be no such long war with Iran. The bombers would complete their work not in years or months, but over a few days, hitting every nuclear facility in the country — Mossad has a complete target list ready — and the Iranians, whose defenses were leveled by the Israeli Air Force on October 26, 2024, have no way to stop them.

Filed Under:

Donald Trump