Muhammad - War Is Deceipt

Topic locked
  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 05, 2010
We've already been over this - the leader of the Muslim contingent was the guy who assassinated another one of Muhammad's opponents.

Credible historians know this, that is why they correctly term the group of Muslims as 'assassins', 'murderers', 'thugs', etc.

Produce the evidence (as opposed to the spin or 'opinion') or we'll have another case of All Mouth, No Trousers.


Right after you produce the evidence that the Jewish contingent were armed and attacked the Muslims.

event horizon
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5503

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 05, 2010
So, yet another quaint belief that the military commander and his armed guards were civilian diplomats.

I simply asked whether you had any evidence that the full account I quoted is a fabrication - but we only get your beliefs.

Cheers
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13442

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 06, 2010
perhaps you're once again confused - you have not provided any primary source to show that the Jews were 'armed' guards. The sources say, as do modern historians, that the Jews were on a diplomatic mission to Medina.

It was at least one of the Muslims, hand picked by Muhammad (who married a six year old girl), who an assassin and also the leader of the Muslim delegation.

In fact, according to Arab custom, it would have been the Muslims who would have acted as the 'armed guards'.
event horizon
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5503

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 06, 2010
Thanks for sharing your belief about what happened - however I can't see what evidence you have that the full account of the incident where a military commander and his armed guardslost a fight with an equal number of Musli$ soldiers.

It appears you really, really, really want to believe that selective readings of history are true.

However I note with amusement that the full quote exposes the spin that some have put on the incident.

Cheers
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13442

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 06, 2010
Please post the source showing that the Jewish men, on a diplomatic mission to Medina, were armed and, indeed, attacked their Muslim travelers.

Strange enough, your 'fuller' account does not once mention that the leader of the Muslim group just so happened to also be an assassin.

Odd.
event horizon
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5503

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 06, 2010
Just because you want to believe that the military commander and his soldiers were unarmed civilians does not make it so.

I gave you a full quote and linked to the book. You have only given accounts which give less detail and spin the story differently.

Cheers
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13442

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 06, 2010
We already been over this - neither Tabari nor Ibn Ishaq mention that the Jews were 'armed soldiers' nor that they attacked the Muslim convoy.

Hey, I'm just trying to remain consistent here. You made a stink because only one ancient historian said that 7,000 Caesareans were massacred.

By my count, that's more than the zero early historians you have provided, but please correct me if my arithmetic is wrong here.

Anyways, regarding 'spin' - it's funny how at least four historians I quoted are influenced by some sort of spin.

Funnier, your author does not mention that the leader of the Muslim delegation just so happened to be an assassin hand picked by Muhammad.

I would think leaving that type of fact out would be considered spin. But what do you think? Do you think it's important to know that the Muslim delegation Muhammad sent were assassins?






* I underlined the main points of my post so I can get an answer to them.
event horizon
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5503

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 06, 2010
Just to be pedandtic - assassins as a word did not exist in those times, it derives from Ishmaeli crack troops who killed surrepticiously. Bernard Lewis has a good book about the assassins.

Now, coming to your question about whether I have a problem with the Prophet, pbuh, sending out soldiers to accompany and military commander and his soldiers back to Medina for talks. No, I think it was quite sensible (and not to mention normal) to send soldiers to do this task. Events proved that this decision was wise indeed.

Cheers,
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13442

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 06, 2010
shafique wrote:Just to be pedandtic - assassins as a word did not exist in those times, it derives from Ishmaeli crack troops who killed surrepticiously. Bernard Lewis has a good book about the assassins.

Now, coming to your question about whether I have a problem with the Prophet, pbuh, sending out soldiers to accompany and military commander and his soldiers back to Medina for talks. No, I think it was quite sensible (and not to mention normal) to send soldiers to do this task. Events proved that this decision was wise indeed.

Cheers,
Shafique


Do you have some type of comprehension disorder that explains why you misunderstand posts and respond to questions asked that have not nothing to do with the post you are addressing?
event horizon
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5503

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 07, 2010
event horizon wrote:
shafique wrote:Just to be pedandtic - assassins as a word did not exist in those times, it derives from Ishmaeli crack troops who killed surrepticiously. Bernard Lewis has a good book about the assassins.

Now, coming to your question about whether I have a problem with the Prophet, pbuh, sending out soldiers to accompany and military commander and his soldiers back to Medina for talks. No, I think it was quite sensible (and not to mention normal) to send soldiers to do this task. Events proved that this decision was wise indeed.

Cheers,
Shafique


Do you have some type of comprehension disorder that explains why you misunderstand posts and respond to questions asked that have not nothing to do with the post you are addressing?


No, I don't think so.

I was just being pedantic about the use of the term assassins - and addressed your question about whether it was sensible or not to send soldiers to accompany a military commander and his entourage of armed men. What was unclear about my answer?

Cheers,
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13442

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 07, 2010
shafique wrote:
event horizon wrote:
shafique wrote:Just to be pedandtic - assassins as a word did not exist in those times, it derives from Ishmaeli crack troops who killed surrepticiously. Bernard Lewis has a good book about the assassins.

Now, coming to your question about whether I have a problem with the Prophet, pbuh, sending out soldiers to accompany and military commander and his soldiers back to Medina for talks. No, I think it was quite sensible (and not to mention normal) to send soldiers to do this task. Events proved that this decision was wise indeed.

Cheers,
Shafique


Do you have some type of comprehension disorder that explains why you misunderstand posts and respond to questions asked that have not nothing to do with the post you are addressing?


No, I don't think so.

I was just being pedantic about the use of the term assassins - and addressed your question about whether it was sensible or not to send soldiers to accompany a military commander and his entourage of armed men. What was unclear about my answer?

Cheers,
Shafique


This is a tough one.

Please quote the question you were answering.

My question from my last post was:

Do you think it's important to know that the Muslim delegation Muhammad sent were assassins


I didn't ask you if it was sensible to send killers to escort thirty unarmed Jews on a diplomatic mission - just whether it would be important for a historian to mention this in his account.

Your 'fuller' account given by an apologist writer fails to include this detail. I'm wondering if you agree with me that this is an instance of 'spin' for not not including all of the facts - that the men handpicked by Muhammad were killers.

Your other unanswered questions are in regard to your author's source that the Jews were armed and that they attacked the Muslims - Tabari and Ibn Ishaq do not say they were armed nor that they (the Jews) attacked the Muslim delegation - did he make it up or did he get actually get it from a primary source.

The last question, then, is that since neither Tabari nor Ishaq mention this in their accounts, then why should we trust your apologetic author's claims that the Jews were armed and attacked the Muslims - especially when you made such a stink over Theophanes' account?

Are you sure you don't have reading comprehension problems?
event horizon
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5503

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 07, 2010
So, you are complaining that Muhammad, pbuh, sent a competent contingent of 30 soldiers to escort the equal number of soldiers accompanying the military commander?

Perhaps the issue is that the military commander underestimated the military prowess of the Muslims and was unwise to have attacked them as described in the full account?

It seems like an eminently wise decision to send out competent soldiers. The last time I looked, soldiers who are well trained and are successful in battles against other soldiers are congratulated for doing their jobs.

Cheers,
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13442

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 07, 2010
Just out of curiosity, but did you pass high school? middle school?

Do you realize your posts have nothing to do with what I'm actually typing?

For instance, I write:

event horizon wrote:I would think leaving that type of fact out would be considered spin. But what do you think? Do you think it's important to know that the Muslim delegation Muhammad sent were assassins?


You 'respond':

shafique wrote:Now, coming to your question about whether I have a problem with the Prophet, pbuh, sending out soldiers to accompany and military commander and his soldiers back to Medina for talks. No, I think it was quite sensible (and not to mention normal) to send soldiers to do this task. Events proved that this decision was wise indeed.


NO. That wasn't *my* question.

!!!!

This was my question:

I would think leaving that type of fact out would be considered spin. But what do you think? Do you think it's important to know that the Muslim delegation Muhammad sent were assassins?


and again

I would think leaving that type of fact out would be considered spin. But what do you think? Do you think it's important to know that the Muslim delegation Muhammad sent were assassins?


and again

I would think leaving that type of fact out would be considered spin. But what do you think? Do you think it's important to know that the Muslim delegation Muhammad sent were assassins?


You are seriously the dumbest poster, hands down, I have ever come across. I asked you if leaving certain details out of an account was considered spin - that had nothing to with whether you thought it was 'sensible' to send killers to escort thirty unarmed diplomats.

You even repeated your claim that you answered my question in a later post:

shafique wrote:I was just being pedantic about the use of the term assassins - and addressed your question about whether it was sensible or not to send soldiers to accompany a military commander and his entourage of armed men. What was unclear about my answer?


Dumbest. Member. Ever.

I even took the time in my last post to explain to you what the actual question was:

event horizon wrote:I didn't ask you if it was sensible to send killers to escort thirty unarmed Jews on a diplomatic mission - just whether it would be important for a historian to mention this in his account


Then you respond:

shafique wrote:So, you are complaining that Muhammad, pbuh, sent a competent contingent of 30 soldiers to escort the equal number of soldiers accompanying the military commander?


Dumbest. Member. Ever.
event horizon
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5503

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 07, 2010
I really don't see why you are getting your knickers in such a twist.

The fullest account of the incident shows that a group of soldiers accompanying a military commander and his soldiers successfully thwarted an attack that you are characterising as an assassination of unarmed diplomats. I have stated a few times now that your quotes are less detailed and just spin the incident into something it wasn't.

I haven't asked you to believe the true version of events, I've only presented the quote in full and linked to the book itself.

I guess next you'll start quoting wikipedia in your defence?

Cheers,
Shafique
shafique
Dubai Shadow Wolf
User avatar
Posts: 13442

  • Reply
Re: Muhammad - war is deceipt Feb 07, 2010
Does someone have to turn your computer on for you or do you do that all by yourself?
event horizon
UAE, Dubai Forums Lord of the posts
User avatar
Posts: 5503

posting in Philosophy and Religion ForumsForum Rules

Return to Philosophy and Religion Forums