And although nobody in the media – neither the Jerusalem Post in the report that I shall link, nor any Western media outlet, or so I can fairly safely assume – discusses the Treaty of Hudaybiyya, at least one of those offering Comments to the report, in the Jerusalem Post, nevertheless knows exactly what it is, and provides the information for his fellow commenters and for every casual lurker. Â Word Â – slowly, slowly but surely – is getting out.
Malignant narcissism, rampant megalomania and a totally over-inflated sense of entitlement, thy name is…Islam. – CM
“Channel Two – Hamas demands release of Schalit deal prisoners who were re-arrested (and why were they re-arrested? – because they were caught either attempting to kill or plotting to kill Jews –Â CM), the opening of Gaza border crossingsÂ (suuure…so that Hamas can rearm Â and replace all their materiel that Israel has just managed to destroyÂ – CM).
‘One day after an Egyptian-brokered cease-fire (so-called cease-fireÂ – CM) accepted by Israel but rejected by Hamas fell through, the terrorist organisation (the Jihad terror gangÂ – CM) proposed a 10 year end to hostilities in return for its conditions (really? they are in no position to set conditions? they are acting like they are the victors and Israel has been abjectly defeated…this is insane, and why cannot the non-Muslim members of the UN see that it is insane, and more than insane, evil –Â CM) being met by Israel, Channel 2 reported Wednesday.
‘Hamas’s conditions were the release of re-arrestedÂ PalestinianÂ (sic: local Arab Muslim jihadiÂ – CM) prisoners who were let go in the Schalit deal, the opening of Gaza-Israel border crossings in order to allow citizens and goods to pass through, and international (in other words, Islamintern– CM) supervision of the Gazan seaport in place of the current Israeli blockade.
In other words, they want to be able to regroup and rearm and they want to be able to do it more easily and more quickly.Â – CM
‘Former Balad MK Azmir Bishara presented the group’s conditions on Al Jazeera on Wednesday.
Speaking of Al Jazeera: I am informed that Al Jazeera recently published a list of all those in Gaza who have allegedly been killed to date in the course of Israel’s attempts to take out the rocket launchers and destroy the arsenals in Gaza. Â Names and ages of the “victims” were provided. Â Most of the names were male. Â About 90 percent of those killed were Muslim males of military age – 15-45; of the over-55 males, a good few were identifiable as known Hamas and Islamic Jihad gang bosses. So much for the “innocent Gazan civilians”, those sweet little snow-white lambs that the pro-Islamic western media has been bleating and weeping about, during the past week.Â – CM
‘Bishara, who fled Israel in 2007 after he was accused of aiding Hezbollah during the Second Lebanon War, estimated that the escalation would end within the next two days.
‘He also accused Israel of agreeing to Tuesday’s short-lived cease-fire in order to legitimize further air strikes on Gaza after Hamas rejected the plan.
That sort of “reasoning”, ladies and gentlemen, is a good example of what the astute Martha Gellhorn, visiting and Â interviewing the “Palestinian” Arabs (mostly Muslim) in 1960, called “madhattery”.Â – CM
‘He said that Palestinian (sicÂ – CM) factiions had been in talks with international authorities (who?Â – CM) who would have accepted the terms Hamas has set forth, but the Egyptian initiative, which favoured Israel and ignored the goals of the “Palestinian (sicÂ – CM) resistance”, brought all negotiations to a halt.
‘Bishara, who currently lives in Qatar, contended that Egypt’s shared interests with Israel and conflict of interest with Hamas (yes, Hamas being a wholly-owned subfranchise or offshoot of the Ikhwan or Muslim Brotherhood, which Brotherhood the current Egyptian government led by Al-Sisi has been busy attempting to subdueÂ – CM) prevented it from being an effective negotiator.
‘Instead, Bishara recommended that Turkey and Qatar, along with the US and other Western powers, lead the negotiations between Hamas and Israel.
“Negotiations” between any Islamic entity and any non-Islamic entity are and always have been, in the end, a total waste of time and, worse, a snare and delusion for the non-Islamic entity involved, no matter where, no matter when. Because Muslims are programmed by Islam to hate and despise non-Muslims, and to wish and work them ill. Â Sometimes openly, sometimes covertly, depending on circumstances. –Â CM
‘On Tuesday, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said that the Islamist group had not received an official cease-fire proposal, and he repeated its position that demands it has made (demands that, if granted, would merely enable Hamas to grow strong again, in order to resume its would-be-genocidal jihad assault upon the tiny Jewish state –Â CM) must be met before it lays down its weapons.
‘Hamas’s armed wing, the Kassam Brigades (named after a viciously-Jew-hating and Jew-murdering local Arab Mohammedan who was active during the time of the British Mandate – CM), rejected the reported text of the truce deal, saying, “Our battle with the enemhy continues and will increase in ferocity and intensity”.
Note to all Infidel media: this nonsense about carefully distinguishing the “armed wing” from the “political wing” and so on, as regards assorted jihad entities such as the Hamas and the Fatah, really has to stop. Â All it does is give the various branches of the Ummah, or Mohammedan Mob, plausible deniability. Â Let’s quit being fooled by the goodcop badcop or badcop/ worse cop game they play.Â
The Comments, as I said above, are interesting. Â For the most part, derision is expressed, by Jews and non-Jews, Israelis and those living in assorted countries outside of Israel. Hankin, of Colorado, had some advice for Israel – “Come to think of it, invade now, before Hamas has the time and freedom to import tanks and concerete to support their rat-holes underground. Do it while Israel has the right and might to shove Hamas into the sea!; and in reply to the three demands by Hamas that were reported in the article, the same commenter said flatly, “No, no and no again. Â Give them ten years of unfettered access to weapons from Iran and Syria and who knows whatelse? No and heck no”.
Another commenter, one “ExtremeRC”, said, “Hamas can stuff their demands where the sun don’t shine”.
But the most important comment, the ten-star comment, containing information thatÂ oughtÂ to have been in the reports on the front pages of every infidel-world news outlet the moment Hamas made their “offer” of a ten-year “cease-fire” was this, from one “Mladen Andrijasevic”:
“I bet nobody in the media is explaining why Hamas is looking for a 10 year cease-fire! Â Because that is the definition of a Hudna – an Islamic cease-fire with the infidels which according to Islamic ideology CANNOT last more than 10 years and can be broken at any time if Muslims feel they are strong enough to resume Jihad”.
And so, since that well-informed commenter has mentioned the Hudna, and the 10 year term it traditionally cannot exceed, though it might be renewed if after ten years a Muslim entity still does not feel strong enough to go back in and try for the kill, it’s time to repost a couple of Hugh Fitzgerald classics on the subject of the normative and archetypal “Treaty of Hudaybiyya”.
Waiting for Hudaybiyya
Fitzgerald, Islam, the Treaty of Hudaybiyya and the Two-State Solution
And for those of our readers who may not have time to click, and read (though I do strongly recommend that if you have lobbed in here and have never heard of or read those two essays by our erudite “Hugh Fitzgerald”, that you drop everything you are currently doing, and do just that – click and read), here is the paragraph, from the first article I just linked, that matters above all else, especially right now. Read it and you might understand why Israel should simply tell Hamas “No deal” and go right back in and hit Hamas and keep on hitting them like the hammers of God.
“Treaties may be made with Infidel enemies. But those treaties do not bind the Muslim side. Â They can, whenever they wish, whenever they feel the time is right or ripe, break those treaties. There is no such thing as a permanent “peace” treaty with Infidels. Â All treaties that are called that, in the West, are merely “truce” treaties or hudnas. They are based on the model of the agreement that Muhammad made with his Meccan enemies (because they would not yield to his demands) in 628 AD, at Hudaybiyya, just outside Mecca..”.
And the same material, restated, from the second Hugh Fitzgerald article linked above.
“In the Muslim view, treaties with Infidels are not to be obeyed. They are to be entered into when Muslims feel that they are at the moment too weak to do otherwise, and where they sense that they can gain, in the end, by entering temporarily into a treaty with Infidels. For Muslims, every treaty with Infidels is merely a “truce” treaty, a “hudna”. The very idea that Muslims could recognize the permanence of an Infidel nation-stateÂ (and that means, ofÂ anyÂ Infidel nation stateÂ anywhereÂ in the world; not just of IsraelÂ – CM)Â goes against everything in Islam.
“The basis of Muslim treaty-making with Infidels can be found in the Treaty of Hudaybbiya, that Muhammad made with the Meccans in 628 AD. Finding himself and his followers too weak to take the Meccans on directly, Muhammad made an agreement with them…The treaty was to have lasted for ten years – and ten years,by the way, is the maximum period that a treaty with Infidels can normally last, though some Muslim authorities have said that a treaty can be renewed at the expiration of that ten-year period, if the Muslims need more time to strengthen their forces, and would benefit from a continued “hudna”. The treaty with the Meccans lasted only 18 months, however, when Muhammad decided to find a pretext to attack, and did. And he has been praised ever since in Muslim lore, for his ability to deceive the unwary Meccans and to use the time of that truce to his advantage.
“And Muhammad is the Model of Conduct (uswa hasana) and the Perfect Man (al-insan al-kamil). He is the model in all things. Â Among those things, he provides the model, that transcends his time and is good for all time, for how to make treaties with Infidels.”
ThatÂ is what Israel’s political leaders, and generals, and diplomats need not only to understand, but to publicly explain, over and over again, to their people, and to every other Infidel state in the world. It is what the political leaders and diplomats and generals of every other Infidel state in the world need to know, and to discuss, publicly; and policies must be shaped accordingly – including right down on the ground the battlefield decisions made by Infidel commanders at all levels when engaged in battle with Muslim entities.Â – CM