| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Now wait a minute. Just a week ago Ahmed Yousef, "a senior adviser to the Palestinian prime minister, Ismail Haniya," published an op-ed in the New York Times calling for a truce between Hamas and Israel. It is clear in that essay that Yousef is unaware of any truce already being in effect. And now here's Khaled Mashaal saying the truce is over.
It's all just more sleight-of-hand. Most people who hear this from Mashaal will assume there must have been a truce, and that the Israelis have broken it. But Hamas has been fighting all the while. You have to give them this: the Palestinian propaganda machine is very sophisticated. And Western analysts like Mark LeVine, as well as the Western media, fall for it hook, line, and sinker, every time.
From AP:
DAMASCUS, Syria - Hamas chief Khaled Mashaal said Wednesday that a truce with Israel is finished and his group's militants can resume fighting following an Israeli tank attack that killed 18 Palestinians.Militants will answer the deaths with "deeds, not words," Mashaal told a news conference in the Syrian capital.
"The truce (with Israel) ended at the end of 2005," Mashaal said. "The armed struggle is free to resume, and the resistance is dictated by local circumstances."
The truce formally ended last year but had remained in effect.
It ended, but it didn't end. Thanks, AP.
Posted by Robert at November 8, 2006 10:51 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
What a joke. Like Hamas EVER puts down its weapons. That's why Gaza is a cesspool-always fighting, never building. At least now Israel can wipe up the desert with this scum.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 8, 2006 11:07 AM
When is a truce not a truce, whenever Islam is involved...
Posted by: Daffersd at November 8, 2006 11:28 AM
And of course, the AP coverage says nothing about the rocket attacks against israel that instigated the tank operations. I had to go to Fox News for that part (big shock).
Posted by: Clive at November 8, 2006 11:34 AM
And of course, the AP coverage says nothing about the rocket attacks against Israel that instigated the tank operations. I had to go to Fox News for that part (big shock).
Posted by: Clive at November 8, 2006 11:35 AM
The "hudna" that Muslims make with non-Muslims can never be more than temporary, and is entered into only because the Muslim side feels it is too weak to conduct open warfare, and would benefit from a respite from open hostilities. The Muslim side is then not merely allowed, but required, whenever it feels strong enough, to re-engage in open hostilities, and of course all during the period of the "hudna" it may conduct whatever operations, not involving combat, that it is capable of, including economic boycotts, diplomatic offensives, and suchlike -- exactly what all Muslim states do engage in, to weaken Israel, whether or not they are still in an official state of war, or have signed, as have Egypt and Jordan, so-called "peace treaties."
This is not imagined. This is not a fabrication. This can be found by looking in any text of Muslim Law of War and Peace. It can be found, for example, by looking at Majid Khadduri's authoritative text War and Peace in Islam. Fouad Ajami is the "Majid Khadduri Professor." Yet Fouad Ajami has perhaps never understood, never cared to investigate, the Law of War and Peace in Islam about which Majid Khadduri (and a thousand others) wrote.
Why not? Why doesn't the very fluent, and mediagenic, Fouad Ajami, recipient of Bradley Foundation prize money and a dozen other similar emoluments, who can appear whenever he wants in the pages of the Wall Street Journal, or on the Charlie Rose show, discuss -- openly, soberly -- the Muslim law governing all agreements and treaties with Infidels. Why doesn't he simply quote Majid Khadduri, and explain that, as with so much in Islam, the relevant and governing model for such treaties is that made by Muhammad with the Meccans in 628 A.D., that agreement known by the name of the place where Muhammad and his followers stopped -- the Treaty of Al-Hudaibiyya.
If Ajami were to do that, or if someone -- anyone -- in the entire American government could be found to bring that to the attention of those who have spent their lives so fruitlessly (unless they were indifferent or even hostile to Israel, as Brzezinski and Carter and William Odom and Scowcroft and James Baker all so clearly were and are) trying to engage in this "peace process" which has, after Kissinger Plans, and Rogers Plans, and silly Dennis Ross to-ing and fro-ing, and Clinton having Arafat as his most frequent foreign guest, after the "Camp David Accords" that had Israel giving up tangibles -- territory, infrastructure, oil fields, airbases, strategic depth -- in return for promises almost immediately broken, led finally to its current version, the Two-State Solution (and as I never tire of saying, it must be a solution because otherwise they wouldn't have called it a solution, now would they?).
And if that were understood, if the role of Islam in defining and determining the beliefs, the attitudes, the atmospherics that outlast eve in those who cease to believe -- then a good deal of wasted motion, and squandering of efforts, and not only in regard to the Lesser Jihad against Israel, might end -- and attention focused, as it must be, clearly and exclusively not on pressuring other Infidel states (whether it be India, or a European country that might choose to deal more severely with the threats within) based on an ignorance, at times almost willful, of Islam.
Fouad Ajami could begin to discuss Islam. But he won't. He can't. And so his usefulness toward the construction of an intelligent policy, which once seemed far greater (he is, after all, merely a "cultural Muslim" himself, which is to say a "Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only" Muslim, but he cannot bring himself to announce that openly, and cannot bring himself to fully enlighten the American public, or those who are his admirers, on the One Big Subject. So his usefulness for the making of policy diminishes day by day.
Posted by: Hugh at November 8, 2006 11:49 AM
Not finishing the fight after a declaration of hudna is like refusing to treat/scratch a snake bite. Israel, next time it happens, finish the job.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity
Posted by: squire at November 8, 2006 12:36 PM
As I said over on FreeRepublic.com "HAHAHAHA- there was a truce?- oh those silly Hammas really kill me- literally" Squire- I agree- Israel has warned Lebanon thouhg "The next time we are forced to come after you- it won't be tempered like it was the last time" Hopefully they understand that Israel means business this time- Hopefully they and Hammas understand that Israel will not buckle under ot the anti-semitic U.N next time!
Christian news and commentary at: sacredscoop.com ...
Posted by: CottShop at November 8, 2006 1:14 PM
Yes, that Palestinians victim-whinge propaganda machine. Why, oh why, can't the Israelis get their PR sorted out???
Posted by: Lili at November 8, 2006 2:14 PM
When as many innocent Israeli's are murdered in a pizza parlor, the Arabs hand out sweets to celebrate their "victory" but when an artillery round goes awry and kills.....whooa..DEATH TO AMERICA!!!
Posted by: pismopal at November 9, 2006 12:04 PM
Exactyl pismopal- The religion of eternal outrage- Getting real sick of their faux rage-
Christian news and commentary at: sacredscoop.com ...
Posted by: CottShop at November 9, 2006 1:28 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(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.)