SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1326399)10/27/2021 3:46:09 PM
From: Maple MAGA 2 Recommendations

Recommended By
isopatch
Mick Mørmøny

  Respond to of 1572786
 
On Halloween I identify as a Muslim woman.

G.K. Chesterton on Islam

“Christendom might quite reasonably have been alarmed if it had not been attacked. But as a matter of history it had been attacked. The Crusader would have been quite justified in suspecting the Moslem even if the Moslem had merely been a new stranger; but as a matter of history he was already an old enemy. The critic of the Crusade talks as if it had sought out some inoffensive tribe or temple in the interior of Tibet, which was never discovered until it was invaded. They seem entirely to forget that long before the Crusaders had dreamed of riding to Jerusalem, the Moslems had almost ridden into Paris.”

Dr. Thomas Madden on Islam

“Now put this down in your notebook, because it will be on the test: The crusades were in every way a defensive war. They were the West's belated response to the Muslim conquest of fully two-thirds of the Christian world.”

Piers Paul Read on Islam

“The first point to be made in defense of the Crusades is that they were initially a response to Islamic aggression. Islam, from its inception, had espoused the use of force. Where Jesus had died for his beliefs, the Prophet Mohammed had wielded a sword. Though Christianity was later to be exploited for political ends, the Christian religion as such had, in the first three centuries of its existence, spread peacefully--thriving, in fact, on the blood of its martyrs. I say this not to score a point in favour of Christianity but to emphasize an historical truth: The spread of Islam from the Arabian peninsula to south-western France in the eighth century; and to the gates of Vienna in the seventeenth, came as a result of conquest by Islamic armies.”

Dr. Paul Halsall on Islam

[Dr. Paul Halsall to CNN interviewer Jonathan Mann]” I think there is just as much bad information, for instance, in Christiane's [Amanpour] report or in your previous segment, than is in the film. For instance, the idea that the Muslim world has this memory of the Crusades is very largely incorrect. It is a recovered memory. The idea that Jerusalem is Islam's third holiest place, Islam has many third holiest places. The idea that the capture of Jerusalem in 1099 was particularly horrific. All of these things are truisms repeated repeatedly on television, but they are not in fact correct.”

Dr. William Urban on Islam

“The story we tell about the crusades is that of ambitious nobles and merchants; intolerant Christians who kill innocent Jews, peaceful Arabs, and non-conventional Christians [heretics]; and scheming popes. Most of these villains are half competent fools and knaves who enrich themselves through taxes and trade, excusing their excesses through pious hypocrisy. In these stores the Turks are somehow forgotten, as though they were not a dangerous enemy at that time, or are confused with Arabs, while the Armenians, Byzantines, and other near-Eastern Christians are ignored for lack of time and space to discuss them. What is emphasized most strongly is the moral superiority of "natives," non-Christians, and non-traditional Christians. Secondly, the victimization of culturally superior Moslems by ethnocentric Westerners whose crudeness is equalled only by their love of violence and cunning. Lastly, any questioning of this thesis is dismissed as racism. In short, an aging collection of anti-colonial sentiments has merged with mild political correctness (opposition to violence, scepticism toward Western religious traditions and practices, concern for social issues reflecting race, gender, class, and ethnicity) to dominate current historiography of the Crusades.”

Dr. Thomas Madden on Islam

“If the Muslims won the crusades (and they did), why the anger now? Shouldn't they celebrate the crusades as a great victory? Until the nineteenth century that is precisely what they did. It was the West that taught the Middle East to hate the crusades. During the peak of European colonialism, historians began extolling the medieval crusades as Europe's first colonial venture. By the 20th century, when imperialism was discredited, so too were the crusades. They haven't been the same since. In other words, Muslims in the Middle East — including bin Laden and his creatures — know as little about the real crusades as Americans do. Both view them in the context of the modern, rather than the medieval world. The truth is that the crusades had nothing to do with colonialism or unprovoked aggression. They were a desperate and largely unsuccessful attempt to defend against a powerful enemy.”

Dr. Timothy Furnish on Islam

“As Vincent Carroll so eloquently explains, only a historical ignoramus--or, I would add at the risk of redundancy, a tendentious PBS editor --could produce the claptrap statement that the Crusades marked the first time Islam and the West met on the battlefield. Islam began with one man in Mecca and, within less than two centuries, encompassed territory from the Iberian Peninsula to the Hindu Kush. This expansion did not happen peacefully. The Arab Muslim armies attacked and conquered Byzantine Christian territories in Syria and Egypt and, a bit later, Arab-Berber Muslim forces conquered the formerly Roman, but still Christian, cities and towns across North Africa and into what is now Spain and Portugal, ruling there for seven centuries. Muslim armies invaded the Frankish Kingdom, later to become France, in 732 and were defeated by Charlemagne's grandfather, Charles Martel. Over the next three centuries the Sunni Muslim Seljuq Turks further dissected the Byzantine Empire, beginning a process that would be completed by their cousins the Ottomans, who conquered Constantinople in 1453 and ruled south-eastern Europe for centuries. So the Crusades, far from being the first time Muslims and Christians fought, were actually merely the first time that Christians, after four centuries of defeats, really fought back. “

John Quincy Adams on Islam:


In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, [{Editor’s Note: Mohammed] combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust, by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion.

He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE [capitals in original].

Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. That war is yet flagrant; nor can it cease but by the extinction of that imposture, which has been permitted by Providence to prolong the degeneracy of man. While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men. The hand of Ishmael will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him. It is, indeed, amongst the mysterious dealings of God, that this delusion should have been suffered for so many ages, and during so many generations of human kind, to prevail over the doctrines of the meek and peaceful and benevolent Jesus…

The precept of the koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force. [Capitals in original]

—John Quincy Adams, “Christianity—Islamism.” “Unsigned essays dealing with the Russo-Turkish War, and on Greece,” originally published in The American Annual Register for 1827–1829 (New York, 1830).

John Wesley on Islam:

Ever since the religion of Islam appeared in the world, the espousers of it … have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations, rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth; that numberless cities are razed from the foundation, and only their name remaining; that many countries, which were once as the garden of God, are now a desolate wilderness; and that so many once numerous and powerful nations are vanished from the earth! Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of human kind.

— John Wesley, “The Doctrine of Original Sin, Works” (1841), ix 205

Alexis de Tocqueville on Islam:

In the 1840’s. Alexis de Tocqueville traveled twice to Algeria. He wrote to Arthur de Gobineau, October 22, 1843:

“I studied the Koran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Mohammed.

“So far as I can see, it is the principle cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.”

Winston Churchill on Islam:

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property.

A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

Barack Hussein Obama II on Islam:

"I also know that Islam has always been a part of America's story."

"That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn't."

"These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings."

"America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings."

"So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed"

"Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality"

"As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith."

"I look forward to hosting an Iftar dinner celebrating Ramadan here at the White House later this week, and wish you a blessed month."

"My job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives."



To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1326399)10/28/2021 10:21:08 AM
From: Maple MAGA 2 Recommendations

Recommended By
bjzimmy
Mick Mørmøny

  Respond to of 1572786
 
What the Murder of a Five-Year-Old Yazidi Girl by Muslims Tells Us

OCT 28, 2021 10:00 AM

HUGH FITZGERALD



A judge in Munich has just sentenced a German woman, one Jennier Wenisch, a convert to Islam who was an ISIS bride, to ten years in prison for her part in the murder of a five-year-old Yazidi girl, whom she and her husband had enslaved. An earlier Jihad Watch report on this atrocity is here, and a detailed report here: “German ISIS bride who chained up five-year-old Yazidi slave girl in the sun and let her die of thirst as punishment for wetting the bed is jailed ten years for ‘war crime,’” by David Averre, MailOnline, October 25, 2021:

A German ISIS bride was sentenced to 10 years in prison by a Munich court today over the war crime of letting a five-year-old Yazidi ‘slave’ girl die of thirst in the sun.

Jennifer Wenisch, 30, from Lohne in Lower Saxony, was found guilty of ‘two crimes against humanity in the form of enslavement’, as well as aiding and abetting the girl’s killing and being a member of a terrorist organisation.

Wenisch converted to Islam in 2013 and made her way to Iraq to join the Islamic State, where she and her husband ‘purchased’ a Yazidi woman and child as household slaves according to the Court.

‘After the girl fell ill and wet her mattress, the husband of the accused chained her up outside as punishment and let the child die an agonising death of thirst in the scorching heat,’ prosecutors said during the trial.

‘The accused allowed her husband to do so and did nothing to save the girl.’…

Wenisch’s husband, Taha al-Jumailly, is also facing trial in separate proceedings in Frankfurt, where the verdict is due in late November.

When asked during the trial about her failure to save the girl, Wenisch said she was ‘afraid’ that her husband would ‘push her or lock her up’.

Identified only by her first name Nora, the Yazidi girl’s mother has repeatedly testified in both Munich and Frankfurt about the torment allegedly visited on her child.

The defence had claimed the mother’s testimony is untrustworthy and said there was no proof that the girl, who was taken to hospital after the incident, actually died.

The hospital tried unsuccessfully to revive her. Isn’t her lifeless body, that had been found chained – to what? — outside, enough proof that she had died?

Wenisch’s lawyers had called for her to receive just a two-year suspended sentence for supporting a terrorist organisation.

Wenisch herself claimed she was being ‘made an example of for everything that has happened under ISIS’ at the close of the trial, according to the daily Sueddeutsche Zeitung, and appeared to show remorse for the crimes for which she was found guilty….

Full of self-pity, this monstrous woman claimed she was being punished for “everything that has happened under ISIS.” Nonsense. She is being punished for exactly one thing: her role in the murder of a five-year-old girl. We are told that Wenisch “appeared” to show remorse. That’s easy to feign. But In prison isn’t it likely that Wenisch, who apparently has not turned her back on ISIS or on Islam, will continue to proselytize among the inmates?

Prominent London-based human rights lawyer Amal Clooney, who has been involved in a campaign for IS crimes against the Yazidi to be recognised as a ‘genocide’, was part of the team representing the Yazidi girl’s mother….

What do this atrocity, and Wenisch’s punishment, tell us?

First, it reminds us that in Islam it is deemed licit to hold slaves, like the little Yazidi girl whom the couple had enslaved (it’s hard to imagine what tasks she was given). Muhammad himself bought, sold, and owned slaves, which has made the practice permissible for Muslims ever since, for Muhammad was the Perfect Man (al-insan al-kamil) and Model of Conduct (uswa hasana).

Second, it reminds us that Muslims are taught in the Qur’an that while they are the “best of peoples” (3:110), Infidels are the “most vile of created beings.” (98:6) Not all Muslims accept, much less act on, that view. But fanatical Muslims such as Wenisch’s husband, Taha al-Jumailly, felt he could treat this helpless little girl, a non-Muslim, with as much cruelty as he wished. She was, after all, an Infidel, and therefore he could do anything he wanted to do with her. And his wife was too afraid to protest, or try to rescue her.

Third, Jennifer Wenisch saw her husband fasten the little girl to a chain, attaching her to something – a tree, a pole – so that she could not move about, or seek shade, but was made to endure without relief the scorching heat of the sun. She died of thirst. If Jennifer Wenisch had any qualms about this, she did not dare to express them to her husband, because she knew that he could punish her; the Qur’an gives Muslim husbands the right to “beat” their wives if they even suspect them of being disobedient (4:34); what might she expect from a man as demonstrably cruel as Taha al-Jumailly?

Fourth, the girl’s mother will obtain a kind of justice for her martyred daughter, because Germany is one of several dozen countries with laws that include aspects of universal jurisdiction, ”a legal principle that some crimes are so grave — such as genocide and war crimes — that impunity and normal territorial restraints on prosecutions should not apply.” The crime in this case – the murder of the little girl — was committed in Iraq, but was understood, properly, as part of the Islamic State’s genocidal treatment of the Yazidi people. Hence German courts believed they could invoke “universal jurisdiction” and try her murderers.

Fifth, the justice in this case might not have been obtained, had the murdered little girl’s mother not had as her lawyer Amal Clooney, who is now, for obvious reasons, the most famous human rights lawyer in the world. That led to media attention that insured the case would not disappear from view, but would be decided by German judges. Who knows how many other Yazidis have been tormented and murdered, but their families never obtained justice because they lacked the services of someone like Amal Clooney?