| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
The Christian Science Monitor reports today on a strange phenomenon: the increase in the number of terror attacks since the beginning of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month.
Why would any Muslim devote his energy to killing people during a period when he should be spending his time increasing his religious fervor? Precisely because jihad is, in the classic Muslim view, an act of piety. This comes out several times in the article:
"Ramadan is a month of commitment and renewal to their faith and also to their cause, whether by military or nonmilitary jihad," says Prof. Nizar Hamzeh, a specialist on political Islam at the American University of Beirut. "It is a month of martyrdom and commitment to one's Islamic ideology."Throughout Islamic history, Ramadan has been seen as a time of victory for Muslim armies - and a period when those who are martyred have a greater assurance of a place in paradise."
. . . Similarly, Saudi Arabia's King Fahd and Crown Prince Abdullah reminded Muslims that Ramadan is a time for good deeds. And the kingdom's highest religious authority told citizens to avoid violence. "Seeking to disturb security or subject Muslim countries to instability is forbidden, and a Muslim must not seek to do so," Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul-Aziz al-Sheikh said this week.
What about non-Muslim countries?
Sheikh Maher Hammoud, a prominent Sunni cleric in Sidon, in south Lebanon, says that Ramadan is perceived by all Muslims as "the month of jihad." "It is not the Islamic way to bomb places like the Red Cross or Iraqi police. But in principle, Ramadan is a blessed month and known as a month for jihad."But he adds that Muslims have different interpretations of what constitutes legitimate jihad. "For example, shooting an Israeli soldier will be viewed by moderate Muslims as falling under the title of jihad," Sheikh Hammoud says. "But blowing up a cafe in Tel Aviv may not be viewed by moderate Muslims as jihad. Attacks on military targets are legitimate, according to moderates, but anything against civilians is not."
These "moderates," then, evidently dissent from traditional Islamic legal rulings that sanction the killing of non-combatants who are viewed as in some way aiding the war effort.
Hammoud says occupation should be met with resistance. "So in Iraq, shooting a US soldier on Iraqi soil might be seen as jihad," he says, "but shooting an American worker, businessman, or journalist - anything other than military - is not jihad. For the most part, I agree with that."
"For the most part?" Those four words from this learned cleric are another illustration of the prevalence of supposedly "extreme," "non-mainstream" ideas in the Islamic world.
Posted by Robert at October 30, 2003 3:10 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
Announce to the world that each terrorist attack committed by a Muslim will result in the detonation of a nuclear weapon in the middle of an Arab city.
Continue this policy until the Arab cities are destroyed or the attacks stop.
Why don't we have balls anymore?
Posted by: Infidel#11 at October 31, 2003 10:53 PMAgain: Mr. Infidel, I am leaving your comments here for now, but I must emphasize: it is absolutely wrong to nuke an "Arab city" or to attack anywhere in the Muslim world without a valid military objective. If we start considering all Muslims to be enemy combatants, we have sunk to the level of Osama.
Posted by: Robert Spencer at October 31, 2003 11:31 PMThis single threat would be enough of a deterrent to stop future terrorist attack. If we had to use this, using it once, would be enough to deter all future attacks. It is not wrong to protect our citizens.
You claim to understand the Muslim mindset, so answer me this. Do Muslims or do Muslims not consider an opponent who does not use all resources to fight a war weak or strong. You and I both know they consider this a sign of weakness.
Not all Nazi's killed Jews. Am I therefore unable to refer to all Nazi's as Jew haters?
Are you suggesting that we can’t use the official position of all 22 Arab Muslim governments as representative of Arab-Muslim positions. All 22 Muslim Arab govts with two exceptions, Kuwait and Iraq, espouse feverish anti-western and Jew hatred as well as terrorism in one way or another as official state policy. You have been unable to list even 1 moderate Muslim leader or public figure who espouses messages of peace and tolerance for non Muslims, yet you tell me that most Muslims are not represented by their govt. Why should I believe you? You need to prove that moderates are out there, I can’t seem to find any evidence that they do.
I voted for President Bush and will, again, in 2004. There is only one major belief he holds, publicly, that I totally disagree with – that Islam is a religion of peace.
And, the Muslims just proved that their religion is a religion of HATE with their attack against innocent civilians during the Red Cross bombing in Iraq this week. But, it’s not just that this was an attack to kill but the simple fact that MUSLIMS KILLED FELLOW MUSLIMS which is a big NO NO during Ramadan (or anytime for that matter).
What amazes me is that Muslims must think infidels are really stupid. I can’t think of any other reason to explain why they would preach peace amongst their own people while bombing baby Muslims at the same time.
Keep up the good work, Mr. Spencer and keep bringing us this information.
Thanks,
Bob
I believe that one of your sources does not know what Ramadan is. I will not mention his name, but being a christian, I'm truly offended by his statement of holy month. Since their is nothing holy about this man.
Posted by: shockershah at November 25, 2003 3:28 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)