Killing Prisoners of War
Imagine a so-called religion of peace where the founder himself orders the cold-blooded slaughter of bound, helpless captives—poets for mocking his tales, warriors pleading for their orphaned children, and entire tribes of men beheaded in market ditches. This isn’t ancient barbarism from forgotten empires; this is killing prisoners of war straight from the playbook of Muhammad and early Islam. Drawn from the most authoritative Islamic sources like Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, Sahih al-Bukhari, and Sahih Muslim, these atrocities expose Islam not as divine revelation, but as a satanic fraud masquerading tribal vengeance as holy writ. In 7th-century Arabia’s blood-soaked sands, killing prisoners of war wasn’t a reluctant necessity—it was a deliberate policy of terror, revealing the dark heart of a ideology built on brutality, betrayal, and hypocrisy. We’ll dissect the Battle of Badr’s executions and the Banu Qurayza genocide, proving how Muhammad’s mercy was a myth, and his commands echo the devil’s own strategy: strike fear, silence dissent, and claim God’s sanction.
Historical Context of Killing Prisoners of War in Early Islamic Battles
Before Muhammad’s fever dreams birthed Islam, Arabian tribes lived by the brutal code of lex talionis—an eye for an eye, a life for a life. Slaves, ransoms, or death for captives was the norm in endless feuds. But Islam didn’t civilize this savagery; it sanctified and amplified it. The Battle of Badr in 624 CE, Islam’s first miraculous victory, saw 14 Muslims dead and 70 Meccan Quraysh captured. While apologists crow about ransoms or literacy lessons for freedom, the ugly truth is selective killing prisoners of war for personal grudges.
Quran 5:45 nods to this eye-for-eye justice, but Muhammad twisted it into a license for vengeance. Islamic historians like Ibn Ishaq revel in detailing how the Prophet handpicked victims, executing them not for battlefield valor, but for past insults. This wasn’t strategy; it was score-settling by a man who claimed angelic visitations yet acted like a tribal warlord with a god complex. Killing prisoners of war here set the tone: Islam’s compassion applied only to believers, while unbelievers faced the sword—or worse, Hellfire taunts. These acts weren’t relics of the age; they were Muhammad’s innovation, embedding bloodlust into Sharia’s foundations and proving Islam’s fraudulence from day one.
The Executions After the Battle of Badr: Vengeance Masquerading as Justice
Al-Nadr ibn al-Harith: Silencing the Mocking Poet Through Killing Prisoners of War
Al-Nadr ibn al-Harith, a silver-tongued Meccan poet and noble, dared to lampoon Muhammad’s revelations in Mecca’s bustling markets. He compared the Quran’s ramblings to hoary Persian legends of Rustam—second-rate fairy tales, not divine truth. In a society where poetry could rally armies or topple tyrants, Al-Nadr’s barbs were daggers to Muhammad’s ego. Captured at Badr, this high-value prisoner begged for ransom, but Muhammad’s hatred burned hotter than any offer of gold.
Ibn Ishaq and Sahih al-Bukhari record the Prophet’s command: behead him. No trial, no repentance—just swift steel. Why? Because Al-Nadr exposed the Quran’s plagiarism, a truth Islam’s guardians have buried under taqiyya ever since. This killing prisoners of war wasn’t deterrence; it was the satanic silencing of truth-tellers. Muhammad, the merciful, chose death over dialogue, revealing Islam as a cult intolerant of critique. Today, echoes ring in fatwas against cartoonists and bloggers—same fraud, different century.
Uqbah ibn Abi Mu’ayt: The Fire!—A Chilling Snapshot of Killing Prisoners of War
Uqbah ibn Abi Mu’ayt’s end is even more grotesque, a Hadith horror show preserved in Sunan Abi Dawud and beyond. This Quraysh fighter had spat on Muhammad, shoved him, and mocked his prophethood in Mecca. Captured alive at Badr, hands tied like a sacrificial lamb, Uqbah wailed: Who will care for my little children? Muhammad’s reply? The Fire!—dooming the man’s family to eternal torment while his head rolled.
Picture the scene: a bound man, family man, begging mercy, met with hellish prophecy and the sword. This wasn’t justice; it was sadism sanctified. Contrast this with the mercy shown to Muhammad’s son-in-law Abu al-As, ransomed later—nepotism over piety. Killing prisoners of war like Uqbah exposes Islam’s core: selective slaughter for those who crossed the Messenger. Apologists whimper context, but the sources scream vendetta. Muhammad’s god sounds suspiciously like his insecurities, a satanic scam peddled as salvation.
These Badr beheadings weren’t outliers; they were previews. Of the 70 captives, only two mocked voices were silenced this way, but the message was clear: mock Islam, die. No Geneva Conventions here—just Quran 47:4’s half-hearted nod to ransom, ignored when convenient.
The Banu Qurayza Massacre: Mass Killing Prisoners of War in Medina’s Trenches
Fast-forward to 627 CE, the Battle of the Trench (Ahzab). Mecca’s Quraysh and allies besiege Medina, but a clever ditch thwarts them. Enter the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe, sworn Muslim allies via treaty. In treachery’s shadow, they schemed to betray: open the gates, assassinate Muhammad, hand Medina to the enemy. A providential storm scatters the invaders, but the Jews’ duplicity demands blood.
After 25 days of siege in their forts, Banu Qurayza surrendered unconditionally. They begged for Muhammad’s mercy or arbitration by their ally Sa’d ibn Mu’adh, a grievously wounded Muslim. Sa’d, invoking the Torah’s Deuteronomy 20:10-15—rules Jews knew intimately—decreed: combatant males executed, women and children enslaved, goods seized. Muhammad nodded approval, then orchestrated the horror.
Ibn Ishaq tallies 600-900 men marched to Medina’s market, heads shaved like the condemned, beheaded in dug trenches over one day. Women wailed as Rayhana bint Zayd, whose husband, father, and brothers fell, was enslaved—later married into concubinage. Modern minimizers claim 400, but Sahih Muslim and Quran 33:26-27 gloat: Allah cast terror into their hearts… He caused you to inherit their land. Divine justice? Or genocidal land-grab?
This mass killing prisoners of war stunned even 7th-century Arabs. No ransom, no mercy—just industrial slaughter. Apologists bleat treason, but where’s the trial? The evidence? Muhammad’s arbitrator was his puppet, and Deuteronomy was twisted—Toraic law spared surrendering cities if compliant. This was satanic retribution for Qurayza’s rejection of Islam, mirroring Muhammad’s Badr grudges on steroids. Islam’s fraud shines: claiming Abrahamic continuity while outdoing pagan cruelty.
Modern Implications and the Satanic Legacy of Killing Prisoners of War
These bloodbaths birthed Islamic warfare ethics—merciful in theory (Quran 47:4), barbaric in practice. The Ridda Wars and conquests phased out mass executions under Abu Bakr, favoring ransoms, but the precedent lingers. Sharia still debates captive fates, with jihadists citing Badr and Qurayza for beheadings today—from ISIS trenches to Afghan Taliban dens.
Geneva Conventions ban killing prisoners of war, branding it a war crime, yet Islam’s sacred texts celebrate it. This hypocrisy unmasks the fraud: Muhammad’s revelations weren’t from Gabriel, but Gehenna. Defenders cry historical context, but why venerate barbarism? Why teach kids these tales? From Hamas hostages to Yazidi sex slaves, the Banu Qurayza playbook endures, proving Islam’s satanic DNA.
Critics like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Robert Spencer highlight how these Hadiths fuel endless jihad. Peaceful Muslims? Sure, but the texts demand obedience to Muhammad’s model—killing prisoners of war included.
Conclusion: Exposing the Fraud Behind Killing Prisoners of War
Killing prisoners of war—from Badr’s poetic purge to Qurayza’s trench of horrors—strips Islam bare. No angelic mercy, just a warlord’s wrath sanctified as prophecy. Al-Nadr’s mockery, Uqbah’s plea, hundreds of Jewish heads: these aren’t triumphs of faith, but testimonies to a satanic deception. In an age of existential threats, survival justified savagery? Perhaps—but enshrining it as divine sets humanity back millennia.
Islam’s defenders dodge with nuance, but the sources indict eternally. This legacy of bound men’s screams isn’t complex heritage; it’s a clarion call to reject the fraud. Muhammad wasn’t God’s final prophet—he was a tribal butcher whose peace reeked of blood. Time to bury killing prisoners of war with the perfect religion that birthed it.
(Word count: 1,248)
