The Banu Qaynuqa
Muhammad's first target was the Banu Qaynuqa ⁵, who were skilled goldsmiths, blacksmiths, and other craftsmen. Muhammad assembled them in the market and said to them, "O Jews, beware lest God bring upon you the vengeance that He brought upon the Quraysh [at Badr] and become Muslims." They replied, "Do not decieve yourself because you encountered a people [the Quraysh] with no knowledge of war and got the better of them; for by God if we fight you, you will find that we are real men!"

Maududi's introduction to surah 59 - Al Hashr (exile, banishment) ⁶ - states that, somehow, this was in clear words a declaration of war, and Ishaq relates that their reply to Muhammad's warning made the Qaynuqa the first of the Jews to break their agreement with the apostle and go to war, even though there was nothing in the Medina Chater that required Jews (or any other non-Muslims) to become Muslims. Muhammad besieged them for about two weeks, and eventually the Qaynuqa surrendered unconditionally. Muhammad exiled them from Yathrib, ordering them to leave their properties, armour and tools of trade behind.

The Banu Nadr
Muhammad then turned his attention to the Banu Nadr. According to Maududi's introduction to surah 59, the Nadr were distressed by Muhammad's victory over the Quraysh at Badr. Kab b. al-Ashraf, chief of the Banu Nadr tribe, consulted with the Quraysh and composed amatory verses of an insulting nature about Muslim women ⁷, for which he was ordered killed by Muhammad. While he was visiting the Banu Nadr to collect a bloodwit owed to the Banu Amir, a group of Jews supposedly saw a chance to kill Muhammad and save themselves the fate of the Qaynuqa. Ishaq relates that as a man of the Nadr went to a rooftop to throw a rock upon Muhammad's head, "news came to him from heaven" about the plot, and Muhammad returned to Medina to rouse his army. Muhammad laid seige to their fort, cutting down and burning their palm trees, and the Nadr surrendered with the condition that they be allowed to leave Yathrib with whatever possessions they could fit on camels ⁸. Though, if these surely biased Muslim accounts are to believed, the Nadr did far more to deserve their punishment than the Banu Qaynuqa, objective readers will surely agree that the punishment, in both cases, far exceeded the crime.

Genocide: The Banu Qurayza
Muhammad had only to wipe out the Banu Qurayza, surely his most heinous and disgraceful act, and Yathrib would be clear of the hated Jews. Though their punishment was by far the most harsh, the justifications for this crime were by far the most lame. Muslim sources relate that certain Jewish tribes aligned with the Quraysh and laid seige to Yathrib in the Battle of the Ditch, but the Qurayza were not among them. As more evidence refuting apologetics that Muhammad's message was non-aggressive, Ishaq relates that, in the sparks given off by his pick striking a rock, Muhammad saw that Allah had opened up to him Yemen (to the south), Syria and the West (Palestine), and the East (Persia) ⁹. Qurayza's fortress, at the rear of Yathrib, was so massive and fortified that the trench was not needed to protect that part of the city.

Because of this, a man of the exiled Banu Nadr tribe, Huyayy b. Akhtab al-Nadri, went to speak to the head of the Banu Qurayza, Ka'b b. Asad al-Qurazi, but found the door of their fort shut in his face. Ka'b was extremely relectant to even speak with Huyayy, but eventually, after much persuasion, including the promise that their army would not depart until Muhammad was killed, Ka'b supposedly relented and agreed that, if they could not overcome the trench, the Quraysh would let them in through their fortress. The factual basis for this seems sketchy at best, since it is never related how Muhammad actually recieved word of this, or from whom. Regardless, Muhammad sent two men to assess the situation, and they apparently found the situation worse than was previously believed, as the Quraysh supposedly spoke disparagingly of Muhammad, saying, "Who is the apostle of God? We have no agreement or undertaking with Muhammad." Given what Muhammad had done to the Banu Qaynuqa and the Banu Nadr, this should be of little surprise. Muhammad continued to insist that the Medina Charter be recognized by the Jews, while in turn making clear that he would not honor it himself. Indeed, the attitude of the Qurayza delighted Muhammad, who said, "Allahu Akbar! Be of good cheer, you Muslims."

The battle itself wasn't much of a battle, since the ditch prevented the Meccans from attacking the city with their calvalry, and the infantry had probably marched to war under the impression the calvalry would do the bulk of the fighting and were disheartened by the sight of it. For nearly a month the only fighting that took place was the exchanging of arrows.

The real struggle was diplomatic, as the forces of the Quraysh continued to try to convince the Qurayza to allow them access to Yathrib through their gates. Despite the contention that the Qurayza had agreed to allow the Quraysh access, they never fulfilled their promise. This regardless was a constant source of anxiety for Muhammad, since the seige was beginning to go bad for him; food was running scarce, and his men began openly complaining that, though Muhammad had promised them the treasures of Chosroes (the king of Persia) and Caesar, they could not feel safe even in their own city. Muhammad began sending emissaries to the various tribes aligned with the Quraysh, offering, for example, the leaders of Ghatafan a third of the dates from Medina if they would stand down. His men became angry that such a gift was offered to the polytheists, swaring to give them nothing but the sword and that God would decide between them. The offer was thus renegged ¹⁰. Fortunately for the Muslims, the Quraysh were not given access to the fortress of the Banu Qurayza, and they could not overcome the ditch. Abu Sufyan's horses soon ran out of food, as the Muslims had harvested all of their barley and dates in anticipation of the seige, and his men were weary. Finally they were afflicted by a sandstorm and went home.

Just one day after the Meccan coalition went home, the angel Gabriel admonished Muhammad for not finishing his enemies off. But the Voice wasn't talking about the Meccans. "God commands you, Muhammad, to go to B. Qurayza. I am about to go to them to shake their stronghold." ¹¹

Again it should be noted that this was all based on rumor, and should be especially noted that, the Quraysh having never stepped foot in Yathrib, the Qurayza obviously never fulfilled their promise to them, if in fact the promise was ever made. In fact, Ishaq relates that the Qurayza were extremely reluctant to join with the Quraysh, because they lacked the strength to fight the Muslims should the Quraysh be put to flight. Ishaq relates that Abu Sufyan, leader of the Quraysh coalition, said, "O Quraysh, we are not in a permanent camp; the horses and camels are dying; the B. Qurayza have broken their word to us and we have heard disquieting reports of them ¹².

As Muhammad approached their forts he called out to them, "You brothers of monkeys, has God disgraced you and brought His vengeance upon you?" Brothers or descendants of apes and pigs is a common label given to Jews by Muslims, and besides the Qur'an itself ¹³ we see another example of where this originates from. "O Abu'l-Qasim [Muhammad]," they replied, "You are not a barbarous person." They were mistaken. Muhammad laid seige to their village for 25 nights, despite the steadfast denials of the Quraysh that they had conspired with Abu Sufyan against the prophet, which, the evidence shows, they didn't. Eventually they surrendered with the hope that Muhammad would show "mercy" and allow them to leave unharmed, as he had allowed the Banu Qaynuqa and Banu Nadr. Muhammad sent an emissary to the Qurayza who revealed Muhammad's intentions to them by pointing to his throat, signifying slaughter as their fate if they did not submit to Muhammad's judgement.

The next morning a man named al-Aus protested that the Qurayza deserved mercy, considering how Muhammad had treated the Qaynuqa and Nadr. Muhammad agreed to delegate the matter to a man who was of al-Aus' people, Sa'd b. Mu'adh. This was a disasterous choice for the Qurayza. Sa'd was a devoted companion of Muhammad, among those who protested the deal made with the Ghatafan, and who, after being mortally-wounded by an arrow during the seige, asked God not to make him a martyr before he had seen his desire upon the Banu Qurayza ¹⁴. Sa'd declared that, "The time has come for Sa'd in the cause of God, not to care for any man's censure." He ruled that "the men should be killed, the property divided, and the women and children taken as captives." Muhammad told him, "You have given the judgement of Allah above the seven heavens."

Trenches were dug in the market of Medina, and all males above the age of puberty ¹⁵ - anywhere between 600 and 900 "men" - were beheaded and tossed inside them ¹⁶. Solidifying the scriptural authenticity of this story, which, because its main source is the Sirat Rasul Allah, a favorite target for apologists, it is also cited by Bukhari ¹⁷. Captivity was not a pleasant fate for the women ¹⁸. Allah had made lawful those whom their right hand possesses ¹⁹, and no logical, objective observer could possibly assume the sexual relations Muslims had with these women, who had just witnessed the beheading of their sons, brothers, and husbands at the hands of these animals, were consentual. Muhammad himself took one of the women, Rayhana 'Amr b. Khunafa, who remained in his power until he died, refusing to marry him ²⁰. And, as had become by now typical, the ethnic cleansing and genocide of the Jews of Medina was subsequently absolved by a revelation from God, who said it was the fault of the Jews for aiding the disbelievers ²¹.

The above stories, taken from authentic Muslim texts, present a crystal-clear example of deductive reasoning that, if only people were to educate themselves about true Islam and the nature of its prophet, as well as putting aside our ingrained conceptions on the moral relevancy of all religious ideologies, makes the truth so easy to see: if the prophet of Islam was a psychotic maniac, a criminal against humanity, and the Qur'an says that he did not err, was an inspiration inspired ²², and was a good example [also interpretted to mean 'beautiful pattern' or 'an excellent exemplar'] to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allah ²³, then why should it surprise us that Islam has a disturbing tendancy of churning out followers of the same nature? Not only should this not surprise us, but such an outcome should be expected.

The nature of Muhammad, apostle of God, is likely the greatest obstacle to reforming Islam. How do you reform a religion created by a deranged lunatic, whom the god he fabricated said was essentially a divine, perfect individual?