| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
At Hudaibiyya in the year 628, Muhammad concluded a disadvantageous treaty with the pagan Quraysh. Then, when he was in a position of strength, he broke that treaty. This has become the pattern for treaty-making in Islamic jurisprudence. Treaty of Hudaibiyya Alert: "Three killed in Thai Muslim south after ceasefire,'" from Israel National News, July 20 (thanks to Twostellas):
Militants fired on an army outpost and killed three villagers in separate attacks in Thailand's restive Muslim south, police said on Sunday, days after an unknown rebel group declared a ceasefire....
Posted by Robert at July 20, 2008 12:23 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
"Restive"
Using that word over and over with S. Thailand proves what talentless hacks the mainstream media is
Without reading the article I know the word Jihad isn't used and Muslim used only once if at all
Posted by: dennisw![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 20, 2008 12:38 PM
How can any sensible and knowledgeable person not conclude that treaties with Muslims are really not worth the paper they're printed on? From Mohammed onwards a Muslim's word means diddly squat.
Posted by: Wellington at July 20, 2008 1:50 PM
Reading this, does anyone really think that Dan Pipes is being realistic when he talks about the distinction between the "Islamist" ideology and traditional, peaceful Islam? I guess this obscure rebel group hasn't quite grasped the nettle. Furthermore, given the widespread ignorance about Islam among non-Moslems in general, the notion that immigration authorities or others in sensitive security posts can discern the difference, as Pipes has suggested they should, is really absurd. Don't get me wrong, I have great esteem for Pipes, but like many intellectuals, he can be very unrealistic at times.
at July 20, 2008 4:00 PM
Well, pffftt! It's obvious; the emergency-rush order of ammunition was delivered, and the Muslims could start shooting again.
Besides, these "shadowy resistance groups" make it easy for a given group of Muslim fighters to say "Oh, that shooting wasn't from us; we've kept our ceasefire. You're looking for that OTHER rebel group, Mujahedin al-illah al-Swamp. WE currently call ourselves Mujahedin al-illah al-Sewer."
Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at July 20, 2008 10:19 PM
jewdog: For what's it's worth, I'm very sympathetic to your line of reasoning here. Dr. Pipes, good man that he is, proposes a distinction that is too subtle by half. I don't buy it.
Posted by: Wellington at July 20, 2008 11:10 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.)