– Το ακολουθούν παρακάτω άρθρο, απλώς και μόνον για προβληματισμό! Πρόκειται για “κάτι άλλο“, διάφορο των όσων θέλουν να μας πουν και συνεχώς μας λένε, προπαγανδίζοντας στα άτυχα… αυτιά μας, κάποιοι αυτοαποκαλούμενοι ντόπιοι και εξ… Αμερικής “Δημοκράτες” ή “Σόρος – Δημοκράτες”! Καταλάβατε! Ό,τι μας λένε συνεχώς και… αδυσώπητα, όλοι αυτοί που διαχειρίζονται την παγκόσμια σήμερα πληροφόρηση! (ΠΡΟΣΟΧΗ: Υπάρχει και “Διεθνής”… ΠΑΠΠΑΣ και όχι μόνον εγχώριος)!..
– Αναρωτηθήκατε ποτέ φίλοι μου, γιατί όλα τα τηλεοπτικά κανάλια, οι Ρ/Σ, αλλά και το διεθνές Διαδίκτυο επίσης, σε Ελλάδα και εξωτερικό, προβάλουν την Κλίντον, στην… “κούρσα” για την Προεδρία των Η.Π.Α., στις προσεχείς αμερικανικές εκλογές, αν βεβαίως φτάσουμε ποτέ σ’ αυτές, (όπως σας έχω πει, εξηγήσει και… γράψει), ενώ έχουν ηλιθίως δαιμονοποιήσει τον Τραμπ! (Ηλιθίως, αφού και η προπαγάνδα ακόμα που εφαρμόζεται, επιτάσσει να μην προσβάλλεις ή να μην μειώνεις μονίμως τον αντίπαλό σου)!..
– Ο Κος Ν. Τραμπ πχ παρουσιάζεται σχεδόν ως… φρενοβλαβής, ενώ ξεχνούν να μας… θυμίσουν ότι η Κα Χ. Κλίντον έχει κάνει εγχείρηση στον εγκέφαλό της, (αν θυμάμαι καλά, μας είχαν πει κάτι για το αυτί της, κλπ / ίσως απ’ εκεί να προέρχονται / να πηγάζουν και οι πρόσφατες ανισορροπίες της) και άρα απαιτείται να περάσει από ειδική “Υγειονομική Επιτροπή“, η οποία θα πρέπει να πιστοποιήσει τη… στέρεη ή όχι υγεία της, ενώ σε κάθε περίπτωση θα πρέπει να ενημερωθεί πρωτίστως ο αμερικανικός λαός και ακολούθως και ο υπόλοιπος Πλανήτης, αφού μιλάμε για την υγεία μιας πιθανής μελλοντικής Προέδρου των Η.Π.Α.!
– Το ίδιο βεβαίως -δεν λέγω κάτι άλλο- θα πρέπει να ισχύσει και για τον Τραμπ, αλλά εγώ, “εδώ και τώρα”, στηλιτεύω την μονόπλευρη, την μονόπατη συμπεριφορά των διεθνών ΜΜΕ, τα οποία ελέγχονται από τους “Δημοκρατικούς Διεθνείς Εβραίους“, όπως και το μείζον του Πλανητη, όπως έχουμε πει και γράψει πολλάκις!.. Και άλλα πολλά παραδείγματα φίλοι μου θα μπορούσα να σας αναφέρω, να σας θυμίσω, κλπ, αλλά πιστεύω πως δεν απαιτείται, αφού το αναγνωστικό κοινό του “ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΟΥ ΘΡΥΛΟΥ“ είναι ιδαιτέρως εύστροφο!..
– / –
ΟΝ ISLAMIC VIOLENCE: FORGET THE KORAN, LOOK TO HISTORY
What Islam really teaches is ultimately academic: facts are facts.
August 9, 2016
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
The debate around Muslim violence all too often centers around doctrine—around what the Koran and Hadith (words and deeds of Muhammad) really mean and say. Forgotten in this debate is that Islamic scriptures are unnecessary in determining whether Islam teaches violence and war against non-Muslims.
Consider some facts, attested to by both Muslim and non-Muslim primary historic sources:
A mere decade after the birth of Islam in the 7th century, the jihad burst out of Arabia. In just a few decades, Muslims had permanently conquered what was then two-thirds of the Christian world. The heart of the Muslim world today—nations like Egypt, Syria, all of North Africa, Turkey and more—were, in the 7th century, the heart of Christendom.
Thereafter it was a continuous war on Christian Europe. Among other nations and territories that were attacked and/or came under Muslim domination throughout the centuries are (to give them their modern names and in no particular order): Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Sicily, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary, Greece, Russia, Poland, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Lithuania, Romania, Albania, Serbia, Armenia, Georgia, Crete, Cyprus, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, (“fuck you mister / Macedonia is only HELLENIC” / Aυτή είναι η μόνη παρέμβαση του “ΕΛΛΗΝΑ” / Και οι Ρεπουμπλικανοί των Η.Π.Α. “Μακεδονία” λένε τα Σκόπια, με πρώτον τον Μπους, τον 1ο, θα θυμάστε) Belarus, Malta, Sardinia, Moldova, Slovakia, and Montenegro.
Less than three decades after the traditional date of Islam’s founding (622), three of the five original Christian centers (“sees”) founded by the apostles—in Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem—were forever swallowed up by Islam; the fourth, Constantinople, valiantly resisted the Islamic onslaught for centuries, but was finally conquered in the name of Islam in 1453. Though sacked and burned by Muslims as early as 846, only distant Rome—the Vatican, fifth of the ancient Christian sees—remained unconquered.
The few European regions that escaped direct Islamic occupation due to their northwest remoteness include Great Britain, Scandinavia, and Germany. That, of course, does not mean that they were not attacked by Islam. Indeed, in the furthest northwest of Europe, in Iceland, Christians used to pray that God save them from the “terror of the Turk.” This was not mere paranoia; as late as 1627, Muslim corsairs raided the northern Christian island seizing four hundred captives and selling them in the slave markets of Algiers.
Nor did America escape. A few years after the formation of the United States, in 1800, American trading ships in the Mediterranean were plundered and their sailors enslaved by Muslim corsairs. The ambassador of Tripoli explained to Thomas Jefferson that it was a Muslim’s right and duty to make war upon non-Muslims wherever they could be found, and to enslave as many as they could take as prisoners.
There was no mystery about Islam in those days. As early as the 8th century, Byzantine chronicler Theophanes wrote in his Chronographia:
He [Muhammad] taught those who gave ear to him that the one slaying the enemy — or being slain by the enemy — entered into paradise [e.g., Koran 9:111]. And he said paradise was carnal and sensual — orgies of eating, drinking, and women. Also, there was a river of wine … and the woman were of another sort, and the duration of sex greatly prolonged and its pleasure long-enduring [e.g., 56: 7-40, 78:31, 55:70-77]. And all sorts of other nonsense.
Six hundred years later, in the 14th century, Byzantine emperor Paleologus II told a Muslim scholar: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman — such as the command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
Such was the honesty of interfaith dialoguing in former times.
It deserves repeating, by the standards of historiography, the aforementioned historical outline is unassailable, and attested to by both Muslim and European sources, from the traditional beginning of Islam till the modern era.
In short, regardless of what the Koran and other Islamic scriptures really “mean,” for roughly one millennium—punctuated by a Crusader-rebuttal that the modern West is obsessed with demonizing—Muslims waged unrelenting war on the West. And they did and continue doing so in the name of Islam.
And therein lies the rub: Today, whether as taught in high school or graduate school, whether as portrayed by Hollywood or the news media, the predominant historic narrative is that Muslims are the historic “victims” of “intolerant” Western Christians. (Watch my response to a Fox News host wondering why Christians have always persecuted Muslims.)
So here we are paying the price of being an ahistorical society:
A few years after the Islamic strikes of 9/11—merely the latest in the centuries-long, continents-wide jihad on the West—Americans elected (twice) a man with a Muslim name and heritage for president; a man who openly empowers the same Islamic ideology that Western warriors fought for centuries.
Surely the United States’ European forebears—who at one time or another either fought off or were conquered by Islam—must be turning in their graves.
But all this is history, you say? Why rehash it? Why not let it be and move on, begin a new chapter of mutual tolerance and respect, even if history must be “touched up” a bit?
This would be a somewhat plausible position if not for the fact that, all around the globe, Muslims are still exhibiting the same imperial impulse and intolerant supremacism that their conquering forbears did. The only difference is that the Muslim world is currently incapable of defeating the West through a conventional war.
Yet this may not even be necessary. Thanks to the West’s ignorance of history, Muslims are allowed to flood Europe, so that hardly a day now passes without headlines of Muslim on non-Muslim violence. Most recently—or at least as of this writing—Muslims invaded a church in France, forced the priest on his knees, and slit his throat.
All this leads to another, equally important point: If the true history of the West and Islam is being turned upside down, what other historical “truths” being peddled around today are equally false? The narrative concerning Islam’s alleged peacefulness is only being questioned because the world sees Muslims committing violence on a daily basis. But surely there are other nefarious and seditious forces that are intelligent enough not to expose themselves?
In the future (whatever one there may be) the histories written about our times will likely stress how our era, ironically called the “information age,” was not an age when people were so well informed, but rather an age when disinformation was so widespread and unquestioned that generations of people lived in bubbles of alternate realities—till they were finally popped.
– / –
α. Το μόνο που θέλω να σας παρακαλέσω(!) φίλοι μου είναι να “ψάξετε” σε βάθος, και όχι επιφανειακά, το τί είναι, σημαίνει και πώς υλοποιείται, αυτό που οι Ισλαμιστές αποκαλούν “Τζιχάντ“ ή -επί το ελληνικότερον– “Ιερό Πόλεμο“!
– / –
β. Τέλος, με την ευκαιρία της παρουσίασης της “ΙΣΛΑΜΙΚΗΣ ΒΙΑΣ” σας προτείνω, (με βάση τα όσα γράφαμε “εδώ” στο άρθρο μας με τους… “Αγγέλους“, για το συμβάν, στο Γαζί – Αντέπ, της 20-08-2016, αλλά και με βάση -ευρύτερα- τα όσα έχουμε παρουσιάσει και “ισχυριστεί” για τον “ISIS“ επίσης “εδώ“, στον “ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΟ ΘΡΥΛΟ“), σας προτείνω λοιπόν να διαβάσετε το παρακάτω συντομότατο άρθρο! “Πάμε” λοιπόν!
– / –
FACT CHECK: IS TRUMP CORRECT TO CALLOBAMA AND HILLARY THE FOUNDERS OF ISIS?
August 11, 2016
Donald Trump has said of Obama, “he’s the founder of ISIS“. He stated that Hillary is a co-founder of ISIS. The remarks have touched off anger from certain media outlets, but is it true or not?
The organization we currently know as ISIS had earlier incarnations, but it adopted its current name in response to its growing successes in the «Arab Spring» which was heavily backed and championed by Obama and Hillary. The expansion of ISIS in the «Arab Spring» functionally turned it into a very different organization. It not only temporarily succeeded in creating its Caliphate, but it went from a marginal terror group to a microstate controlling cities, large populations and winning the allegiance of Islamic terror groups around the world. And it was able to carry out terror attacks in America.
This was a fundamental change in its structure and its identity. It is therefore accurate to peg the transformation of ISIS as the starting point of the group we know today rather than its earlier far weaker incarnations.
There is no escaping the fact that ISIS is intertwined with the «Arab Spring» and that the organization as we know it today would not have become the threat that it did without it.
There is also no denying the fact that Obama and Hillary’s backing for the «Arab Spring», along with that of the media, proved crucial in overturning friendly regimes and bringing Islamists to power across the region leading to chaos and terror.
We might quibble over what the term “founder” exactly means, but there is no denying that ISIS, as we know it today, rose as a direct consequence of Obama and Hillary’s support for Islamists.
ISIS is the consequence of their pro-Islamic policies brought to life. And that too cannot be denied. From Benghazi to Baghdad, the wages of the left’s support for Islamic theocracy has been terror and death.
– / –