| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Steven Stalinsky in Jewish World Review (thanks to Ruth King) chronicles how Muslim leaders today live out Muhammad's dictum that "war is deceit."
The annual United Nations General Assembly serves as an opportunity for world leaders and diverse groups to meet. One such meeting this year includes Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, reaching out to American Jewish groups.On September 19, 2001, Mr. Musharraf made a televised message to the Pakistan people to explain how his nation would respond to September 11. Referring to "the first six years of the history of Islam," Mr. Musharraf said: "Mohammed himself went from Mecca to Medina to save Islam ... when the prophet reached Medina, then he entered a friendship treaty with his enemies, the Jews...because of the peace treaty with Jews, he was able to fight the infidels of Mecca. After six years, the Jews noticed that Islam was becoming stronger. They got very irritated."
Mr. Musharraf then explained why Mohammed was willing to sign a peace agreement with the infidels even if its temporarily made Muslims look weak." There was a battle between Muslims and Jews, and of course by the grace of G-d, Muslims won the battle ... Mecca was conquered. What lesson do we derive with this incident? ... On this occasion, a strategic decision is to be taken...if you are facing two problems and you have to choose one, then it is better to take the lesser evil...."
The temporary good relations between Mohammed and the Jewish tribes of Arabia (Qurayza, Khaybar, Khaynuqa, and Nadhir) who were wiped out by Muslims is well-known in the contemporary Muslim world, as it is often mentioned in textbooks, sermons, and TV shows. Yasser Arafat frequently referred to the concept of a temporary truce in justifying the Oslo Accords with Israel. Other Arab and Muslim leaders also frequently refer to this.
For example, following threats to bomb Los Angeles, Egyptian labor party head Magdi Ahmad Hussein appeared on Al-Jazeera on October 17, 2004, explaining that "600 to 700 prisoners were killed in the raid on the Qurayza tribe. Why do they conceal this? Why do they hide the fact that the Prophet gave the order to assassinate some poets - to assassinate! Not in military operations, but rather by individual assassination. Why did he order the assassination of K'ab Ibn Ashraf, the Jew, leader of Khaybar ... As a result, the Jews became fearful and terrified."
If a non-Muslim said that, he would immediately be charged with "Islamophobia." But of course Magdi Ahmad Hussein is correct, as I show from Islamic sources in my book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades).
Syrian legislator Mohammed Habash appeared on Syrian TV on July 29, 2005, discussing the characteristics of the Jewish tribes of Arabia. He explained that the Jews smelled so bad it "made people sick" and that "when the Prophet's companions reached Al-Madina, they all contracted fever because of the filthy environment.""Stories From Before the Verses Came Down" was a Jordanian-produced series that ran on Saudi Iqra TV in February 2005; which was based on the Jews of the time of Mohammed. The series portrayed the Jews as despicable "pigs" scheming against Mohammed.
This is in accord with the Qur'an: 2:62-65, 5:59-60, and 7:166.
Part of the plot included Jews altering the Torah to hide the fact that Mohammed was a true prophet; how early Jews planned "a very long war" against the decedents of Muslims and Jews depicted as having "joined forces with Satan." One episode showed Jews engaged in voodoo, creating a doll of Mohammed and sticking it with needles in his head, liver, and eyes.Sheik Yousuf Al-Qaradhawi, one of Sunni Islam's most prominent scholars, explained on his Al-Jazeera show on January 19 this year: "One of the first things the Prophet Mohammed did when he went to Al-Madina was to make a pact with the Jews ... The problem started because of the Jews. They were the ones who were treacherous and violated the pact." Mr. Al-Qaradhawi added, "The problem with the Jews is not one of faith or religious laws. The problem is the covetous aspirations that have characterized their attitude since the days of the Prophet Mohammed, that brought this position toward them since the days of Mohammed, and later on in our times."
Posted by Robert at September 15, 2005 6:59 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
The basis for Western treaties is pacta sunt servanda -- treaties (agreements) are to be obeyed. To us this idea, which was not at all obvious, seems obvious. But it has long been part of Western jurisprudence. And the Western world has not distinguished on the basis of the nature of the parties making such a treaty.
The basis of Islamic jurisprudence dealing with treaties (agreements) is quite different. Any agreement between Muslims and non-Muslims is subject to the rules that were established in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira. And it is the Sira, the biography of Muhammad, that Model for All Time, that guides Muslims in their treaty-making with Infidels. When in 628 A. D. Muhammad made a treaty of peace -- really, a "treaty of truce" --with the Meccans, it was to last 10 years. Within 18 months, as he felt his forces had become stronger, Muhammad broke the treaty. That he did so deliberately, that he found a pretext, that he regarded this as the proper way to behave, is clear from all the telling and re-telling of this story. It was regarded as a splendid example of Muhammad's conduct of war against his enemies -- in this case, the Meccans who had refused to become followers of Muhammad, and of his still-developing (the Qur'an itself was dictated by the Angel Gabriel over 23 years) creed.
This is not an imaginary charge. It is laid out by all the relevant Muslim scholars. If CAIR or some group of Arab diplomats insists that this is all a product of perfervid Infidel imaginations, then simiply direct them to, inter alia, "The Law of War and Peace in Islam" by the celebrated scholar Majid Khadduri (who gave his name to a chair now comfortably occupied by the noticeably-reticent-on-Islam Fouad Ajami).
Unless the basis of Islamic jurisprudence with Infidels is understood, the Infidel peoples and polities will be constantly disappointed -- and worse, they will be always at a disadvantage. They cannot rely on such treaties. There is not a single agreement signed between Israel and any of its Arab (or partly-Arab, for most of Lebanon's Christians are Arabic-speaking, not Arab) neighbors that has not been violated by the Muslim side, in ways little and big. Yet the Israelis will not learn, or have not learned, from their experience.
That is their problem. But the rest of the Infidel world can learn from Israel's unhappy experience with such treaties -- for the benefit of that larger Infidel world, if not for that of trusting, ever-hopeful, diplomatically awkward and tongue-tied Israel.
Posted by: Hugh![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 15, 2005 9:44 AM
We need to learn from the old "Dutch jihad diplomacy" on how to deal with hudnas in a non-dhimmi fashion:
"In 1622 the Dutch entered into a treaty with the pasha of Algiers in which payments to the pasha would “buy the peace” and Dutch merchant vessels would be allowed to pass in the Mediterranean unmolested. By 1624 the depredations of the Algerian corsairs on Dutch ships returned to the pre-treaty levels. The Algerians would capture the Dutch ships, seize their cargo as war booty and return to Algiers with the Dutch crews who would then be sold into slavery throughout the Islamic empire. All of which of course is sanctioned by the Islamic canon that enjoins jihad upon the non-Muslims wherever they may be encountered.
"The Dutch leaders had their fill of the unprovoked jihad and so dispatched a squadron of warships under the command of Admiral Lambert Hendrickszoon (”Mooy Lambert”) to deal with the pasha. Admiral Lambert soon arrived at the mouth of the Algerian harbor with several Algerian corsairs in tow that he had captured along his way. He anchored his squadron in the harbor and sent word to the pasha that he demanded the immediate release of all Dutch citizens and return of their ships and cargo. If the pasha did not comply, the admiral would hang all of the Algerian officers and crewman in his possession. The pasha refused, believing that Lambert was bluffing. Lambert promptly turned his squadron out to sea with every one of the Algerian captives hanging from the spars as the Dutch squadron disappeared over the horizon.
"The spectre horrified the Algerian populace and the city convulsed with wailing crowds and tumultuous clamor at the gates of the pasha’s palace. There was no time for the pasha and his officers to fully ponder the implications of the event as soon they beheld the return of Lambert’s squadron with a fresh collection of captured corsairs and their crews. Lambert again anchored in the harbor and repeated his demands with the same threat if they were not met. The pasha relented immediately, all the Dutch captives in the city were freed and their property restored. Admiral Lambert turned to sea and returned to Holland."
[From: "Dutch Jihad Diplomacy", McDonough Heritage Group,
http://www.mcdonough-heritage.com/?p=23 ]
Joel Català,
from the land of James I the Conqueror (1208-1276), King of Aragon-Catalonia, who started the liberation of the Iberian peninsula from the Muslims.
at September 15, 2005 10:43 AM
Beautiful article. Let's hope the people in charge of our foreign relations are fully aware of this tactic when dealing with our Muslim "allies".
Posted by: helox at September 15, 2005 12:00 PM
In case anyone is unaware, Musharraf's motives in making nice with Israel have to do with the warming relations between India and Israel, so the reference he makes to the first six years Mohammed spent in relative peace with the Jews of the Hejaz should be most illuminating to anyone who knows a bit of [unbiased, unspun] Islamic history as opposed to the account presented in the Qu'ran.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at September 15, 2005 12:51 PM
As I read and re-read this article, I'm a little lost as to the point Stalinsky was trying to make, or perhaps how he was trying to make it.
First he cites Egyptian labor party head Magdi Ahmad Hussein seemed to be acknowledging the violence and aggression against Jews and other non-combatants. Then he cites the more typical examples, Syrian legislator Mohammed Habash's ugly characterizations, the Jordanian TV production with "despicable pig Jews" "scheming against Mohammed" and lastly, dear old Sheik Qaradawi, who is well-known to all of us for his approval of terrorism against Israeli citizens.
Am I alone in being confused?
Posted by: waterdragon52 at September 15, 2005 5:14 PM
(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.)