The response has several aspects:

First: This is among the most blatant lies. All the people pledged allegiance to ‘Uthmān in Medina and throughout the provincial cities. Not even two people disagreed over his caliphate (1), and no one withheld allegiance. Hence Imam Ahmad and others said that his caliphate was more firmly established than the others (2), because they unanimously agreed upon it.

As for those who killed him, they were a small band. Ibn al-Zubayr said, condemning ‘Uthmān’s killers:

“They rose against him like thieves coming from beyond the town. Allah caused them to be slain in every manner, while those who escaped did so beneath the stars.”

He meant that they fled by night.

It is known through numerous independent reports that the inhabitants of the provincial cities did not witness his killing. Thus, those who killed him were nowhere near as numerous as those who pledged allegiance to him. Most of the people of Medina did not kill him, nor did any of the earliest Muslims participate in his killing as they had participated in pledging allegiance to him. Indeed, his killers numbered less than one hundredth of those who pledged allegiance to him. How, then, can it be claimed that they were more united in agreeing to kill him than in agreeing to pledge allegiance to him?! Only someone utterly ignorant of their circumstances and exceptionally deliberate in lying about them would say this.

Second: It may be said that those who condemned ‘Alī and fought him were far more numerous than those who condemned ‘Uthmān and killed him. Those who fought ‘Alī outnumbered ‘Uthmān’s killers many times over. Many men in his own army broke with him: they rebelled against him, declared him an unbeliever, and said:

“You have apostatized from Islam. We will not obey you again until you return to Islam.”