| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
A classic dhimmi editorial from the Daily Star, with thanks to Designnut:
When asked whether the simultaneous bombings across London yesterday were the work of Islamic terrorists, London's metropolitan police commissioner responded that there was not enough information yet to point fingers, but that the culprits certainly were not Islamic terrorists, because Islam and terrorism simply don't go together. He could not have been more accurate in his response. And such a fair and objective answer was especially welcome after Prime Minister Tony Blair said that the terrorists had acted "in the name of Islam," (although Blair admitted - almost as an afterthought - that most Muslims around the world would "deplore this act of terrorism.")The truth is that no religion - including Islam - condones the killing of innocent people.
Sure, but the jihadists do not consider them innocent.
Already, Muslim clerics and leaders as well as countless Islamic groups around the world have condemned the London attacks on moral, humanitarian and religious grounds. All agree that there is nothing Islamic about killing ordinary civilians taking the subway or bus to work or school. And there is nothing in the Koran or the Hadiths that could possibly condone such a deplorable and calculated murder. In fact, Islamic texts clearly condemn the killing of innocents. Such acts of terrorism are both morally reprehensible and in direct violation of Islamic teachings.
Why distort or dissemble? Mawardi in al-Akham as-Sultaniyyah (4.2) allows for the killing of women and children who are perceived as aiding the war effort against the Muslims (cf. 'Umdat al-Salik o9.10) -- in other words, non-combatants.
Posted by Robert at July 12, 2005 8:27 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Who wrote this? It sounds more like Rami Khouri, the Christian or islamochristian with the plummy voice often called upon by NPR's Robert Siegel (sp.?) to give us the skinny on the Middle East, and of course, this self-described "Jordanian Palestinian" (you see, "Jordan" is a place, so "Jordanian" is a geographic adjective, whereas "Palestine" is apparently much more than a place, so that the "Palestinian" part of Rami Khouri's identity will be with him always, and form the essential undeniable core of his being, and of course we all know how very dissimilar in every way "Jordanians" (Arabs from "Palestine" east of the Jordan River) and "Palestinians" (Arabs from Palestine west of the Jordan River) are from one another.
So was it this "Jordanian Palestinian" who happens to live and work in Lebanon (which could not possibly supply his identity, now could it?), the author of this absurd attempt to deflect attention, attraction, blame from those who, prompted by passages in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, and from the attitudes and atmospherics to which those passages, if heeded, naturally give rise, who wrote it?
Youth wants to know.
Posted by: Hugh![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 12, 2005 8:58 AM
Of course, the bombings aren't the work of islamic terroristi. They're the work of mainstream islamists, you see....
Posted by: voletti at July 12, 2005 11:03 AM
I maintain, a "terrorist" by any other name is still, a terrorist! Sorry to be so simple-minded here, folks, but really: this is simple!
Posted by: JW gal at July 12, 2005 12:06 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.)