ISLAM AND JIHAD 229Throughout Persia, forced conversions from the sixteenth century to the
beginning of the twentieth century decimated the Christian and, even
more, the Jewish communities.
The forced conversion of Jews was only part of the story. Forced con-
versions of Christians, Hindus, Zoroastrians and others occurred on a more
massive scale.
With the institution of thedhimmis,discrimination was institutionalized
within Islamic law and practice. It was a permanent and necessary part of
the system by which the Islamic conquerors of the Middle East controlled
those conquered races that were under their heel.
How then were thedhimmisto be controlled? The first phase of con-
trolling them was in the conquest where thousands were ruthlessly slaugh-
tered. The terror inflicted on them by their Muslim conquerors began with
the ruthless butchering of thousands of surrendered male captives.
There is a phrase from English history that describes this well. An
English admiral named Byng failed to defeat the French fleet of Mallorca
in 1756. He was not defeated, he just failed to win. He was court-martialed
and shot for his failure,“pour encouragez les autres”(to encourage the
others). In the same sense, the slaughter of thousands of captives would
impress on the group psyche of a conquered people that their conquerors
were absolutely ruthless and had no qualms about butchering anyone who
opposed them. It was intended to “encourage the others” to remain docile
and obedient. This imposition of terror, as we have already said, was their
lot in the afterlife, and why did it matter if the Islamic overlords imposed
it on them prior to their death? In addition, terror has historically been the
principal method used by conquering nations to suppress their victims.
The process of control by terrorizing thedhimmiscontinued under Is-
lamic institutions because any Muslim could perpetrate any act he might
wish against adhimmiswithout fear of any retribution. Thedhimmishad
no recourse under Islamic law.
In all litigation between a Muslim and adhimmi,the validity of the
oath or testimony of thedhimmiwas not recognized. In other words,
because adhimmiwas not allowed to give evidence against a Muslim, his
Muslim opponent always got off. Thedhimmiwas forced to bribe his way
out of the accusations.
Accusations of blasphemy againstdhimmiswere quite frequent, and the
penalty was capital punishment. With his testimony not accepted in court,
thedhimmiwas forced to convert to save his life.
Adhimmiwould often be sentenced to death if he dared raise his hand
against a Muslim, even in legitimate self-defense. The accidental killing
of a Muslim could condemn the whole non-Muslim community to death