Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : World Affairs Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (444)	7/15/2002 3:01:30 PM
From: lorne	Respond to of 3959

Chinu. You said....." Is that what you speculate or is there some incidents that you can recall to back up your claim."..... It would be what I speculate at this point. I guess based on what I have read here and elsewhere. I suppose I could see what I could find in the way of proof. No time now got to go cut hay.

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (444)	7/15/2002 3:33:49 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3959

>>after all they have no problem breaking any treaty with any nation of unbelievers. Is that what you speculate or is there some incidents that you can recall to back up your claim. The model that Muslims cite is the Treaty of Hudaibiyah. Mohammed made this ten year treaty with the unbelieving Qureish, then two years later, when he was in a stronger position, he unilaterally broke the treaty and destroyed the Qureish. Muslims cite the treaty as an example from the Prophet himself of how Muslims may make tactical treaties with infidels, but strategic alliances are forbidden -- and breaking the treaty if your position allows is also kosher, to mix a metaphor. Arafat cited the Treaty of Hudaibiyah in a big speech he gave (in Arabic) in South Africa, right after he had signed the Oslo Accords. The Americans and Israelis pretended not to hear the message.