March 11, 2004 – Muslims bomb Madrid train killing 191 and injuring more than 1,800

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

via 2004 Madrid Train Bombings – History Commons

At about 7:40 a.m., four trains are bombed in Madrid, Spain, killing 191 people and injuring about 1,800 more. These are not suicide bombings, but were set by cell phone timers. Basque separatists are initially blamed, but evidence later points to people loosely associated with al-Qaeda. It will later be reported that 34 out of the 40 main people suspected or arrested for involvement in the bombings were under surveillance in Spain prior to the bombings (see Shortly Before March 11, 2004). Most of the bombers had never been to any training camps. In 2006, Spanish investigators will announce that the bombings were inspired by al-Qaeda, but not ordered or funded by al-Qaeda’s leadership. Specifically, the bombers are said to have been inspired by a speech allegedly given by Osama bin Laden in October 2003 (see October 19, 2003). [New Yorker, 7/26/2004; Associated Press, 3/9/2006] However, there will also be evidence against this that will not be refuted. For instance, the investigators will claim that all the key participants are either dead or in jail, but a number of them remain free overseas.

More:

Hours later, police find a van with detonators and a cassette tape with verses from the Qur’an at a train station through which all of the trains had passed.

History Commons has extensive details on the pre-attack surveillance and failure to prevent the Madrid bombing.

June 2001: Spain Does Not Heed French Warning to Arrest Future Madrid Train Bomber

January 2003-March 10, 2004: Spanish Authorities Fail to Arrest Madrid Bombers Taking Part in Common Crimes

Ten years on, Spain is facing a different type of attack.

(“Spain” is now a searchable category for those interested in the Islamization of that nation)

Muslims Captured and Enslaved Hundreds of Americans

via Citizen Warrior: Muslims Captured and Enslaved Hundreds of Americans.

The following passages are excerpted from the excellent book, The Pirate Coast: Thomas Jefferson, the First Marines, and the Secret Mission of 1805, by Richard Zacks:

In 1801, just after the inauguration of Thomas Jefferson, Tripoli had become the first country ever to declare war on the United States. The ruler, Yussef Karamanli, had ordered his Janissaries to chop down the flagpole at the U.S. consulate to signal his grave displeasure with the slow trickle of gifts from America. Jefferson, when he learned the news, had responded by sending a small fleet to confront Tripoli and try to overawe it into a peace treaty.

For more than two centuries, the Barbary countries of Morocco, Tunis, Algiers, and Tripoli (now called Libya) had been harassing Christian ships, seizing cargo and capturing citizens. Algiers once boasted more than 30,000 Christian slaves, including one Miguel Cervantes, before he wrote Don Quixote. European powers in the 1500s and 1600s fought ferocious battles against Muslim pirates like Barbarosa. However, over time, a cynical system of appeasement had developed. The nations of Europe paid tribute — in money, jewels, and naval supplies — to remain at peace. England and France — in endless wars — found it cheaper to bribe the Barbary pirates than to devote a squadron to perpetually trawling the sea off Africa. At its core, expediency outweighed national honor.

When the thirteen American colonies split off from mother England, they lost British protection. The United States found itself lumped in the pile of potential Barbary victims, alongside the likes of Sardinia and Sicily. (From 1785 to 1815, more than six hundred American citizens would be captured and enslaved. This nuisance would prove to be no mere foreign trade issue but rather a near-constant hostage crisis.)

In colonial days, preacher Cotton Mather had described Barbary slaves as living for years in dug-out pits with a crosshatch of bars above… Galley slaves also lived to tell of being chained naked to an oar, forced to row ten hours at a stretch. Slaves, facing forward, pushed the forty-foot-long oars by rocking back to near horizontal, as though in a grotesque limbo contest, and then lurching with full strength, again and again. During hard chases, they were sustained by a wine-soaked rag shoved in their mouths…

Rituals varied, but in one account (of a North African slave auction) an American stated that after being purchased: “I was forced to lie down in the street and take the foot of my new master and place it upon my neck.” Another described being forced to lick the dust along a thirty-foot path to the throne of the [king] of Algiers (now called Algeria).

John Foss survived captivity in Algiers, and his popular account ran in several American newspapers in the late 1790s, fleshing out the nightmare. He wrote of prisoners (Americans who had been captured on American ships and enslaved) routinely shackled with forty-pound chains, forced to perform sunrise-to-sunset labor ranging from digging out sewers to hauling enormous rocks for the harbor jetty. He matter-of-factly described the most common Barbary punishment for light infractions: bastinado of 150 strokes: “The person is laid upon his face, with his hands in irons behind him and his legs lashed together with a rope. One taskmaster holds down his head and another his legs, while two others inflict the punishment upon his breech (his buttocks) with sticks, somewhat larger than an ox goad. After he has received one half in this manner, they lash his ankles to a pole, and two Turks (Muslims) lift the pole up, and hold it in such a manner, as he brings the soles of his feet upward, and the remainder of his punishment, he receives upon the soles of his feet.”

In 1803, Tripoli captured the Philadelphia. The Americans onboard the beautiful 1,200-ton American frigate were captured too, most of them enslaved.

The loss of the Philadelphia and its 307 crewmen and officers on Kaliusa Reef in Tripoli harbor marked a national disaster for the young United States. The Bashaw (king of Tripoli), a wily and worthy adversary, would set his first ransom demand for the American slaves at $1,690,000, more than the entire military budget of the United States.


Read it all.

Saturday Night Cinema: The Wave

Based on a true story.

In 1960’s California, young history teacher Ron Jones wanted to deter his students from the allure of totalitarianism and groupthink. Instituting a daring social experiment, Jones succeeded beyond his wildest dreams–or rather nightmares–creating a virtual fascist state on campus. Replete with salutes and Gestapo-like informants, 30 students grew to 200 as this exercise in fascism spiraled out of control, re-enacting the roots of the Third Reich.

More: “The Third Wave” – the original short story by Ron Jones, 1976

 

 

The Islamization of America in 2013

via The Islamization of America in 2013.

by Pamela Geller

Since I wrote my book Stop the Islamization of America and established the Stop Islamization of America initiative of my organization, the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), we have seen increasing accommodation and submission to Islam in the United States. This past year was a particularly good year for Islamic supremacists, who are working furiously in this country to impose Sharia (Islamic law) — and in particular, the blasphemy laws under the Sharia.

The Islamic supremacist approach is stealthier here in the States than it is in Europe, where we see no-go zones, mass car burnings, etc., because Europe currently has a much bigger Muslim population than the U.S. does. More on Muslim immigration here.

That kind of aggression is in our future, for nothing is being done to prevent its coming here. The few of us who dare to speak against Sharia and jihad are blacklisted from the mainstream media’s major newspaper and broadcast outlets. Trimmers (those who soften the message about Islam or speak of “Islamism,” an artificial word making a distinction without a difference) and Islamic apologists are dusted off and trotted out to make some inane comment whenever the mainstream media cannot avoid covering a jihad news story (such as the Boston Marathon jihad bombing). But the effective true voices against Islamization, such as myself, Robert Spencer, Wafa Sultan, and Ibn Warraq are rarely seen these days.

It’s never been as bad as it is now, and we have never been proven so right as we were in 2013. In the U.S., in a survey released at the end of 2012, almost half of the Muslims in America said that they thought parodies of Muhammad should be subject to criminal prosecution. One in eight thought that insulting Islam should be a death penalty offense. Forty percent said that they shouldn’t have to obey U.S. laws, but should be subject only to Islamic law.

These findings should have come as no surprise; they weren’t much different from those of a May 2013 survey of Muslims worldwide. The survey showed that the harshest Sharia punishments enjoy broad support among Muslims the world over: “72% of Indonesian Muslims, 84% of Pakistani Muslims, 82% of Bengladeshi Muslims, 74% of Egyptian Muslims, and 71% of Nigerian Muslims supported making Sharia the official state law of their respective societies.” 85% of Muslims in Pakistan, 81% in Afghanistan, and 70% in Egypt supported the most brutal aspects of Sharia, such as amputating the hands of thieves. 86% of Muslims in Pakistan, 84% in Afghanistan, and 80% in Egypt supported stoning for adultery. 75% in Pakistan, 79% in Afghanistan, and 88% in Egypt favored executing those who leave Islam. “91% of Iraqi Muslims and 99% of Afghan Muslims supported making Sharia the official state law of their respective societies.”

And in America, wherever Islamic law and American law conflict, it is increasingly American law that gives way. Islam is even taught in public schools, according to a report at The Blaze:

An elementary school teacher in Chesapeake, Va. has been charged with simple assault after a parent claimed her daughter’s hand was cut open as a result of the teacher yanking her arm aggressively while trying to teach students an “Islamic hand sign.”

In November 2012, a Muslim mother went on trial for beating her teenage daughter after the girl refused an arranged marriage and was seen at school talking to a boy who was not her planned husband. Her devout Muslim father stabbed his daughter in the neck, leaving a wound an inch and a half long, and admitted that he tried to kill her. This couple was freed: the mother got two years of probation.

This was Arizona. Not Yemen, not Iran, but Phoenix. This is the Sharia in America, for honor violence is not merely sanctioned in Islam, it is encouraged. And honor murder of the offspring is sanctioned under Islam: according to Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, “not subject to retaliation” is “a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring” (o1.1-2).

The following month, a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which has now been declared a terrorist organization by the Egyptian government, spoke at a mosque in Brooklyn. The NYPD enforced the Sharia there as well, arresting a man who came to protest against Brotherhood atrocities in Egypt. One must not criticize Islam or its self-appointed representatives – even in Brooklyn.

In another Sharia ruling that same month, a federal judge ruled against a Tulsa police captain who had exercised his First Amendment rights and refused to force some of his subordinates to attend a dawah (Islamic proselytizing) event at a Tulsa mosque. If these police officers had been required to go to a church, they’d have won their case.

In Minnesota in November 2013, the YMCA and the St. Paul Police Department organized a Muslim swim, restricted to Muslim women only, with taxpayer dollars. The police department is providing transportation for the Muslimas to segregated Sharia swim at the YMCA. There are thousands of Islamic centers across the country — Sharia swim belongs there, not in our public pools. If it is so crucial that these Muslims live under Sharia, why move here? Why not live in a Sharia state?

Instead, Sharia is coming here. In June 2013, it was revealed that the San Francisco Airport used public money to construct a foot-washing station for Muslims. Harvard University in January 2013 posted a Qur’anic verse at the entrance of its faculty of law, describing the verse as one of the greatest expressions for justice in history, heedless of the fact that Sharia law is the antithesis of America law. The Constitution is the great shining moment of Western civilization, based on individual rights, the premise of which is the opposite of Islamic law. Continue reading

Video: What Every American Needs To Know About Islam

via William J. Federer  h/t thereligionofpeace.com. Click play and scroll through the headlines of the last few weeks.

What Every American Needs to Know About the Qur’an – A History of Islam & the United States by Dr. Bill Federer http://www.americanminute.com/store/p…

Islamic Conquest-Past & Present -A Captivating 5-part DVD series http://www.americanminute.com/store/p…

Not to be confused with this Video: What the West Needs to Know About Islam

Flashback: Muslim Sets Himself Ablaze at White House 11/15/2004

via Man Sets Himself Ablaze at White House

US Secret Service personnel restrain a man after he set himself on fire outside the White House on Monday in Washington, DC. The man repeatedly shouted ``Allah'' as authorities held him to the ground.Nov 17, 2004 FULL STORY PHOTO: AP

US Secret Service personnel restrain a man after he set himself on fire outside the White House on Monday in Washington, DC. The man repeatedly shouted “Allah” as authorities held him to the ground. PHOTO: AP

A man set himself afire Monday just outside a White House gate and repeatedly yelled “Allah Allah” after Secret Service officers put out the flames and one held him facedown on the sidewalk.

U.S. Park Police said the man was carrying a letter for President Bush. According to police investigators, the man talked with uniformed Secret Service officers at the northwest gate before pulling a lighter from his pocket and igniting his jacket.

Alan Etter, spokesman for the District of Columbia Fire and Emergency Medical Services, said guards at the gate quickly extinguished the flames, and the man had second- and third-degree burns on about 30 percent of his body.

The man had burns to his head, back, arms and face but was conscious when medics took him to Washington Hospital Center, Etter said.

“I can confirm that there was an ignitable liquid present on the scene,” Etter said.

White House doctors joined uniformed Secret Service personnel in administering first aid until the emergency service technicians arrived. They transported the 52-year-old man, who was not identified, to the burn unit of the hospital. Park Police said he was of Middle Eastern descent.

Lorie Lewis, a Secret Service spokeswoman, said the man “set himself on fire on Pennsylvania Avenue on the north side of the White House complex.” That section of Pennsylvania Avenue was recently reopened to pedestrians after being closed for security.

Witnesses reported hearing screams and seeing a man in flames. The man’s right trouser leg was burned.

Afterward, he lay on the sidewalk about 10 to 15 feet from his partially burned raincoat, attache case and various papers. A fire extinguisher was there as well. Secret Service personnel confiscated the man’s items.

A Florida couple with a video camera taped the incident. John and Beverly Beers, tourists from Palm Beach, Fla., said they turned the tape over to the Secret Service. Authorities also interviewed the couple in Lafayette Park.

Jim Clarke of Burke, Va., was walking his dog when the incident occurred. He said Secret Service agents acted quickly and used an extinguisher to put out the flames.

More via Man sets self on fire at White House

Mohamed Alanssi, 52, arrived at the White House gate just before 2pm Monday with a letter addressed to President George W. Bush. After talking briefly with uniformed Secret Service officers, he pulled a lighter from his pocket and set his clothing ablaze.

The Post reported that Alanssi, who also used the name Mohamed Alhadrami, had informed the newspaper of his plans early Monday. He told the newspaper by fax and telephone that he was “going to burn my body at unexpected place.” He also faxed a letter to an FBI agent in New York who has had contact with him, the Post reported.

Last year, Alanssi was the subject of a Washington Post story describing his role as an informant for the FBI, providing information on terrorist financiers in Yemen.

Alanssi told the Post in recent interviews that he was upset because he could not travel to Yemen to visit his ailing wife, who has stomach cancer. He also said the FBI had not kept promises it made to him to secure his assistance.

Could the Kenya mall attack happen here? It already did

But law enforcement, the government and media coordinated a media blackout.

via Could the Kenya attack happen here? It did | New York Post.

After Islamic gunmen attacked the Westgate Mall in Nairobi, Kenya, the collective reaction from the US media was to speculate whether such terror could happen here, as if a jihadist assault on a mall inside America had never before been tried.

CNN was typical: “Can it happen here? Yes, say security experts, but it hasn’t.”

News flash: it did.

On the evening of Feb. 12, 2007, a young Muslim man walked into the Trolley Square mall in Salt Lake City with a pistol-grip, 12-gauge shotgun and a 38-caliber revolver and opened fire on shoppers, killing five and wounding four others, including a pregnant woman.

Police say he “sought to kill as many people as possible.” He had a backpack full of ammunition, enough firepower to massacre dozens of innocent people. But fortunately, an off-duty cop returned fire and eventually, with the help of other police, put an end to the terrorist’s life and grand plans.

Twice as many people were killed at the Utah mall than the Boston Marathon. Yet the attack garnered few national headlines.

Local media wrote it off as the act of a madman, parroting the quick conclusion of law enforcement.

Officially, the FBI declared the mass shooting was not an act of terrorism.

“We were unable to pin down any particular motive,” said Tim Fuhrman, then-special agent in charge of the bureau’s field office in Salt Lake City. “Unfortunately, his motivations went to the grave with him.”

But the FBI ignored much of the shooter’s background. Continue reading

Saving the West: Remember the Battle of Tours

In the year 732, on or around October 10, one of history’s most decisive battles took place, demarcating the extent of Islam’s western conquests and ensuring the survival of the West

via Today in History: The Battle of Tours | Raymond Ibrahim.

Battle_of_Tours

Precisely 100 years after the death of Islam’s prophet Muhammad in 632, his Arab followers, after having conquered thousands of miles of lands from Arabia to Spain, found themselves in Gaul, modern day France, facing a hitherto little known people, the Christian Franks.

There, around October 10-11, in the year 732, one of history’s most decisive battles took place, demarcating the extent of Islam’s western conquests and ensuring the survival of the West.

Prior to this, the Islamic conquerors had for one century been subjugating all peoples and territories standing in their western march—including Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco. In 711, the Muslims made their fateful crossing of the straits of Gibraltar, landing on European soil. Upon disembarkation, the leader of the Muslims, Tariq bin Zayid, ordered the Islamic fleet burned, explaining that “We have not come here to return. Either we conquer and establish ourselves here, or we perish.”

This famous Tariq anecdote—often reminisced by modern day jihadis—highlights the jihadi nature of the Umayyad caliphate (661-750), the superpower of its day. Indeed, as most historians have acknowledged, the Umayyad caliphate was the “Jihadi-State” par excellence. Its very existence was coterminous with its conquests.  Its legitimacy as “viceroy” of Allah was based on subjugating lands in the name of Allah.

Once on European ground, the depredations continued unabated. Writes one Arab chronicler regarding the Muslim northern advance past the Pyrenees: “Full of wrath and pride” the Muslims “went through all places like a desolating storm. Prosperity made those warriors insatiable… everything gave way to their scimitars, the robbers of lives.” Even far off English anchorite, the contemporary, the venerable, Bede, wrote, “A plague of Saracens wrought wretched devastation and slaughter upon Gaul.”

Strange anecdotes also find their way in the chroniclers’ accounts during this time. Muslim historian Abd al-Hakem reports that, after landing on an island off Iberia, one of Tariq’s squadrons discovered that the only inhabitants were vinedressers. “They made them prisoners. After that, they took one of the vinedressers, slaughtered him, cut him into pieces, and boiled him, while the rest of the companions looked on.”  This incident resulted in a rumor that Muslims feast on human flesh.  (Nearly 1300 years later, in the year 2013, a Muslim jihadi ate the organs of his slain enemy to surrounding cries of “Allahu Akbar”.)

At any rate, this must have been the picture the men to the north had of the invaders from the south—wild and insatiable madmen, possibly cannibals, mounted on swift steeds, not unlike, in this manner, the Huns of old, who, under the “anti-Christ” figure of Attila, came ravaging through Europe, only to be defeated, in part by the Franks, in the year 451 at the Battle of Chalons, also in modern day France, 150 miles east of Tours.

“Alas,” exclaimed the Franks, “what a misfortune! What an indignity! We have long heard of the name and conquests of the Arabs; we were apprehensive of their attack from the East [see Siege of Byzantium, 717-718]: they have now conquered Spain, and invade our country on the side of the West.”

Conversely, the Muslims, flushed with a century’s worth of victories, seem to have had an ambivalent view, at best, regarding Frankish mettle. When asked about the Franks, some years before the Battle of Tours, the then emir of Spain, Musa, replied: “They are a folk right numerous, and full of might: brave and impetuous in the attack, but cowardly and craven in the event of defeat. Never has a company from my army been beaten.”

If this view betrayed overconfidence, Musa’s successor, Abd al-Rahman (“Slave to the Merciful”) exhibited even greater haughtiness regarding those whom he was about to give battle. At the head of some 80,000 Muslims, primarily mounted moors, Rahman’s destructive northward march into the heart of France was greatly motivated by rumors of more riches for the taking, particularly at the Basilica of St. Martin of Tours. Rahman initially separated his army into several divisions to better ensure the plunder of Gaul. Writes Isidore, author of the Chronicle of 754: “[Rahman] destroyed palaces, burned churches, and imagined he could pillage the basilica of St. Martin of Tours. It is then that he found himself face to face with the lord of Austrasia, Charles, a mighty warrior from his youth, and trained in all the occasions of arms.”

Indeed, unbeknownst to the Muslims, the battle-hardened Frankish king Charles, aware of their purport, had begun rallying his liegemen to his standard in an effort to ward off the Islamic drive. Having risen to power in France in 717—the same year a mammoth Muslim army was laying siege to Byzantium—Charles appreciated the significance of the Islamic threat. Accordingly, he intercepted the invaders somewhere between Poitiers and Tours, the latter being the immediate aim of the Muslims. The chroniclers give amazing numbers concerning the Muslims, as many as 300,000. Suffice to say, the Franks were greatly outnumbered, and most historians are content with the figures of 80,000 Muslims against 30,000 Franks.

Continue reading here.

Oct. 3, 1993 – Black Hawk Down

Read The Original Newspaper Series Online.

Six Million Dollar Man’s first mission: Saudi terrorists (video)

40 years ago, the 1973 pilot episode of The Six Million Dollar Man.

 

Islam Coexists?

via Political Islam // Articles // Islam Coexists?.

There is an enormous irony contained in the Boston Marathon bombing. When the jihadi Tsarnaev brothers car jacked a Mercedes, it had a Coexist bumper sticker.

The Coexist bumper sticker is the religious symbol of the multicultural crowd — you know — all religions are the same. Well, the leading symbol of those who want to Coexist is the star and crescent Islam. And exactly how well has Islam coexisted with all of the others? What kind of neighbor has Islam been over history?

Start with Mohammed. We know an enormous amount about Mohammed as a neighbor to Kafirs (non-Muslims), pagans, Jews and Christians.
When Mohammed was in Mecca before he became a Muslim, he was a good neighbor who was prosperous and helped to settle disputes. But, that all changed when he became the prophet of Allah. Once he became a public preacher of Islam, he became an irritant to his neighbors. You see, not only did Mohammed know what was right, he demanded that everybody do everything his way, Allah’s way. He was a neighbor who was always right and you were always wrong. Not only were you wrong, but your parents and grandparents were wrong. Mohammed no longer settled arguments; he created arguments. After 13 years of this, the Meccans told Mohammed to leave Mecca.

So he went to the town of Medina, which was half Jewish. And what kind of neighbor was Mohammed to the Jews? Put briefly, two years later, Medina was Judenrein (cleansed of Jews). When he arrived, there were three tribes of Jews. In rapid order, the first tribe was driven out of town, bereft of their goods. Then the second tribe of Jews was exiled. They were lucky. The last of the Jewish tribes suffered the most. The women were enslaved and sold wholesale for money to purchase horses and arms for jihad. For the rest of his life, Mohammed used slavery to help finance his jihad. The children were kidnapped and adopted into Muslim families to be raised as Muslims. Then the 800 male Jews were all beheaded.

But wait. Mohammed was not through coexisting with the Jews. Later he left Medina and went to Khaybar and attacked them. Mohammed crushed them, took their wealth and put them to work under the Sharia to work as dhimmis and give him half of what they earned.
That was how Mohammed coexisted with the Jews.

But Mohammed was not through with coexisting with the Arabians. He attacked the Meccan caravans. His jihadists killed, kidnapped, stole, assassinated and fought the pagan Arabs at every turn. Mohammed’s coexistence policy with the Arabs was jihad. This went on until every Arab became a Muslim.

After Mohammed has made every soul in Arabia convert to Islam, he turned his coexistence policy to the Christians north of Arabia in Syria. He attacked the Christians the losers became dhimmis just like the Jews. Continue reading

Pope canonises 800 Italians beheaded by Muslims for refusing conversion or submission to Islam

Will we all be Otrantians?

Otranto-skulls

via BBC News – Pope canonises 800 Italian Ottoman vi’ctims of Otranto. (um, note to BBC:  they were victims of invading Muslims for the sake of Allah, not victims of Otranto as your title incorrectly states)

Pope Francis has proclaimed the first saints of his pontificate in a ceremony at the Vatican – a list which includes 800 victims of an atrocity carried out by Ottoman soldiers in 1480.

They were beheaded in the southern Italian town of Otranto after refusing to convert to Islam.

Their names are unknown, apart from one man, Antonio Primaldo.

The Italian “Martyrs of Otranto” were executed after 20,000 Turkish soldiers invaded their town in south-eastern Italy.

There was no hint of any anti-Islamic sentiment in the homily that Pope Francis delivered before tens of thousands of worshippers gathered in St Peter’s Square, the BBC’s David Willey in Rome reports.

The Pope may refuse to acknowledge the source and the BBC may be quick to grasp for anti-Islamic straws, but history cannot be rewritten by the dhimmi.

The BBC sidebar notes:

Otranto 14 August 1480

  • The `’Martyrs of Otranto” were 813 Italians beheaded for defying demands by Turkish invaders to renounce Christianity
  • The Turks had been sent by Mohammed II, who had already captured the “second Rome” of Constantinople
  • His fleet landed in Otranto, Italy’s easternmost city, and laid siege
  • Its citizens held out for two weeks, allowing the King of Naples to muster his forces and prevent the fall of Rome

More via Antonio Primaldo, the Saint Who Stood to the End:

Blessed Antonio was a tailor in the city of Otranto, Italy, in the 1400s.  In 1480 the city was invaded by Turkish Moslems, their 150 ships and 18,000 troops greatly outnumbering the 6,000 inhabitants of the town.  The conquerors executed the elderly bishop, Archbishop Stephen Pendinelli, and took the women and children into slavery.  They rounded up all the men between the ages of fifteen and fifty—some 800 men in all.  The Ottoman captors threatened to kill all the men, but promised to grant their lives and the freedom of their women and children if the men would simply renounce Christ and become Muslim.

Blessed Antonio remained firm, and encouraged his fellow citizens to stand strong in their faith.  “My brothers,” he said, “until today we have fought in defense of our homeland, to save our lives, and for our earthly governors.  Now it is time for us to fight to save our souls for the Lord.  And since he died on the cross for us, it is fitting that we should die for him, remaining firm and constant in the faith, and with this earthly death we will earn eternal life and the glory of martyrdom.”

Blessed Antonio was the first to be beheaded, followed by 799 others.  Tradition holds that Blessed Antonio’s headless body remained standing and could not be knocked down by the Turkish soldiers.  Only when the last of the men was slain did his body collapse of its own accord.  One of the Muslims, seeing this miracle, was converted and professed his faith in Christianity—after which he was immediately impaled upon a scimitar by his own comrades-in-arms.

Antonio-Primaldo-headless-2

Legacy of jihad: The Skull Cathedral of Otranto

The Ottoman Wars were motivated by territory gains and eradicating the Christian faith while spreading the Muslim one.

Image: Laurent Massoptier

Image: Laurent Massoptier

For knowing, Otranto, recognized as one of the most beautiful villages in Italy, in 2010 was declared by UNESCO World Heritage of a culture of Peace.

A similar remnant of Muslim conquest and barbarism in Serbia: Chele Kula: Tower of Skulls.

Pope to Canonize 800 Italian Martyrs Beheaded by Muslims for Refusing to Renounce Faith

And refusing to convert to Islam. via Pope Canonizes Otranto Christian Martyrs Slayed by Muslim Turks.

Pope Benedetto XVI announced that he will leave his ministry at 8pm on February 28.

He made this announcement during a consistory for the canonization of the martyrs of Otranto beheaded one by one by the Ottoman Turks.

Antonio Primaldo and his companions, 800 Christians, were murdered for hatred of their faith by Muslims during the Turkish siege of the town of Otranto, in South-East Italy, on August 13, 1480.

More via Antonio Primaldo, the Saint Who Stood to the End:

Blessed Antonio was a tailor in the city of Otranto, Italy, in the 1400s.  In 1480 the city was invaded by Turkish Moslems, their 150 ships and 18,000 troops greatly outnumbering the 6,000 inhabitants of the town.  The conquerors executed the elderly bishop, Archbishop Stephen Pendinelli, and took the women and children into slavery.  They rounded up all the men between the ages of fifteen and fifty—some 800 men in all.  The Ottoman captors threatened to kill all the men, but promised to grant their lives and the freedom of their women and children if the men would simply renounce Christ and become Muslim.

Blessed Antonio remained firm, and encouraged his fellow citizens to stand strong in their faith.  “My brothers,” he said, “until today we have fought in defense of our homeland, to save our lives, and for our earthly governors.  Now it is time for us to fight to save our souls for the Lord.  And since he died on the cross for us, it is fitting that we should die for him, remaining firm and constant in the faith, and with this earthly death we will earn eternal life and the glory of martyrdom.”

Blessed Antonio was the first to be beheaded, followed by 799 others.  Tradition holds that Blessed Antonio’s headless body remained standing and could not be knocked down by the Turkish soldiers.  Only when the last of the men was slain did his body collapse of its own accord.  One of the Muslims, seeing this miracle, was converted and professed his faith in Christianity—after which he was immediately impaled upon a scimitar by his own comrades-in-arms.

Antonio-Primaldo-headless-2

From our previous post on the The Skull Cathedral of Otranto (pics).

On August 12, 800 citizens were taken to the hill of Minerva, now called the Hill of the Martyrs, and beheaded because they refused to renounce their Catholic faith. Their remains were taken to the cathedral and the skulls preserved in the altar piece as a prominent reminder of these 800 martyrs.

The Madonna in front of the skulls
Image: Andreas C.

Image: Laurent Massoptier

The Ottoman Wars were motivated by territory gains and eradicating the Christian faith while spreading the Muslim one.

There’s a similar remnant of Muslim jihad in Serbia. See it in our post, Chele Kula: Tower of Skulls.

Twenty Years after the WTC Bombing

A day late but thanks to @michellemalkin for the reminder yesterday. via Twenty Years after the WTC Bombing – Andrew C. McCarthy

Today is the 20th anniversary of the World Trade Center bombing. It also marks three weeks since the attempted murder of Lars Hedegaard, the intrepid Danish champion of free speech. These events are not unrelated.

Back in 1993, there was a tireless effort to limn the WTC bombers as wanton killers. They were, we were to understand, bereft of any coherent belief system, unrepresentative of any mainstream construction of Islam. In reality, though, they were devout Muslim operatives who belonged to a jihadist cell formed in the New York area by Omar Abdel Rahman — whose notoriety as the shadowy “Blind Sheikh” obscured the basis of his profound influence over Islamists across the globe.

Sheikh Abdel Rahman is an internationally renowned Islamic jurist, having earned a doctorate in the jurisprudence of sharia — Islam’s societal framework and legal code — from Egypt’s al-Azhar University, the center of Sunni Islamic learning for over a millennium. Blind from early youth and plagued by several other maladies, Abdel Rahman was physically incapable of building a bomb, hijacking a jetliner, carrying out an assassination — in short, of performing any blood-soaked activity that would be useful to a terrorist organization . . . other than leading it.

It was nothing other than Abdel Rahman’s indisputable mastery of Islamic doctrine, and hence his capacity to give present-day vitality to a seventh-century summons to holy war, that vaulted him to the forefront of the jihad.

The World Trade Center bombing was Islamic supremacism’s declaration of war on the United States. It was a blunt statement by the savage shock troops of a worldwide movement that America — “the head of the snake,” as the Blind Sheikh called us — could be struck at home, right in the beating heart of economic liberty.

Despite serial atrocities, thousands of deaths, and a decade of war, we are today more willfully blind to the reason we were attacked than we were back in 1993 — back when our ignorance might have been excused by our homeland’s seeming invulnerability to the scourge of jihadist terror. Regardless of our reluctance to see it, mainstream Islam — the dynamic Islam of the Middle East, unadulterated by incentives to moderate, at least for a time, while settling in non-Muslim lands — is aggressively hegemonic. As proclaimed by another iconic supremacist, Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna, “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated.”

And to dominate for a very specific reason. Supremacists are not the irrational savages we have been so desperate for two decades to portray them as. Whether the jihad terrorizes by explosives, suffocates by the systematic subjugation of women and persecution of religious minorities in Islamic countries, or infiltrates by stealthily using liberty to undermine liberty in the West, the mission is always coherent and always the same: the imposition of sharia.

The rationale of jihadist terror is to diminish our resolve to resist the gradual erosion of freedom and the relentless demands of Islamists — especially, Islamists of the Brotherhood variety. After the Blind Sheikhs and the bin Ladens have softened up the target, it is the Brothers who beguile us. Impeccably well-mannered and wearing neatly tailored suits, they flack for Hamas and maintain, straight-faced, that free speech is not so much a right to condemn their totalitarian ideology as a responsibility to suppress examination of it.

In that ideology, the implementation of classical sharia is the necessary precondition for Islamizing a society. Sharia is the architecture for a global caliphate. This is why Egypt’s president, Mohamed Morsi, a Muslim Brotherhood chieftain, promised that when elected he would birth a new constitution enshrining “the sharia, then the sharia, and finally the sharia” — a promise on which he has followed through. This is the utopia of all Islamists, be they terrorists, or faux moderates who proclaim their willingness to pursue totalitarian ends by “peaceful political” means, or the Muslim masses who celebrate 9/11 and vote Brotherhood parties into power.

We did not want to acknowledge the sharia logic of the terrorists 20 years ago. We were told then that Islam had nothing to do with attacks on the West incited by Muslim jurists citing Muslim scripture.

Read it all at National Review Online.

More at Feb 26, 1993: Muslim terrorists bomb World Trade Center (video)

The Koranic Sanction of Slavery

January has been designated Human Trafficking (aka Slavery) Awareness Month but you probably won’t be made aware of this part of history. via M.A. Khan’s Islam-Watch. (also see yesterday’s video)


Islamic Slavery

Islamic slavery has been the most horrible, yet the least known slavery in history. So, author M. A. Khan decided to publish the chapter “Islamic Slavery” from his book “Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery“.

INTRODUCTION

Slavery is a socio-economic institution, in which some human individuals, called slaves, become property of others, called masters or owners. Devoid of freedom and liberty, slaves are expected to provide loyal and diligent service for the comfort and economic well-being of their masters. Deprived of any human rights, slaves are the unconditional possession of their owners: mere chattels, having no right to leave, refuse work, or receive compensation for their labor. The position of slaves in society in many respects is akin to that of domesticated animals. Just as cows, horses and other beasts of burden are trained and utilized for economic advantage, such as for pulling carts or plowing fields—slaves are exploited for the benefit, comfort and economic well-being of the owner. Slave-trade, integral to slavery, involves buying and selling of human beings as a commodity like any other commercial transaction. Slavery, in essence, is the exploitation of the weak by the strong and has a very long history.

One major criticism of the West by all, and particularly by Muslims, pertains to the trans-Atlantic slave‑trade by European powers and their mindless exploitation and degrading treatment of slaves in the Americas and West Indies. Muslims are often quick to point fingers at the European slave-trade; they often claim that the exploitation of slaves enabled countries like the United States to amass the huge wealth they enjoy today. One young Muslim, born in America, wrote: ‘Do you know how the American slave-hunters went to Africa, seized the black people and brought them to America as slaves? America’s economic power owes a great deal to the labor of those slaves’ (personal communication). Terming the 350-year trans-Atlantic slave-trade ‘the worst and most cruel slavery’ in history, the Nation of Islam Minister Louis Farrakhan claims that some white Americans do not know that ‘they are in the privileged position… today based on what happened to us (Blacks)’ in the past.[1] An overwhelming majority of Muslims believe that Islamic history is devoid of the abhorrent practice of slavery. Rocky Davis (aka Shahid Malik), an Australian Aboriginal convert to Islam, told the ABC Radio that ‘Christianity were the founders of slavery. Not Islam.[2] When Muslims in India talk about the practice of slavery in the subcontinent—they talk about the harrowing tales of how the Portuguese transported slaves from coastal areas of Goa, Kerala and Bengal in terrible conditions. It is already noted that history books in Pakistan teach that before Islam, there was exploitation and slavery, which vanished with the coming of Islam. They will never talk about the slavery that Muslim invaders and rulers practiced on a grand scale in India.

This Muslim silence about the widespread practice slavery under Islamic rules, such as in India, likely results from their ignorance of historical facts. In modern history writing in India, there is extensive whitewashing of the atrocities that took place during the Muslim invasions and the subsequent Islamic rule. Such distortions of the true picture of Islamic history compound Muslims’ ignorance about Islamic atrocities in medieval India and create an erroneous perception amongst them about the extensive slavery practised by Muslim rulers. As recounted throughout this book, slavery was regrettably a prominent institution throughout the history of Islamic domination everywhere. It also had unique features, namely large-scale concubinage, eunuchs, and ghilman (described below).

___________________________

THE QURANIC SANCTION OF SLAVERY

The institution of slavery in Islam was formalized in the following Quranic verse, in which Allah distinguishes free human beings or masters, who exercise justice and righteousness, from the dumb, useless and burdensome ones, the slaves:

Allah sets forth (another) Parable of two men: one of them dumb, with no power of any sort; a wearisome burden is he to his master; whichever way he directs him, he brings no good: is such a man equal with one who commands Justice, and is on a Straight Way? [Quran 16:76]

Allah warns the believers against taking the slaves as equal partner in status and in sharing their wealth, lest they have to fear them as anyone else:

…do ye have partners among those whom your right hands possess (i.e., slaves, captives) to share as equals in the wealth We have bestowed on you? Do ye fear them as ye fear each other? [Quran 30:28][3]

Allah recognizes some human beings, namely the masters, as more blessed by Himself than the less favored slaves as part of His divine plan. He warns Muslims against sharing His gifts to them equally with their slaves. Those who would take slaves as equal, warns Allah, would deny Him:

Allah has bestowed His gifts of sustenance more freely on some of you than on others: those more favoured are not going to throw back their gifts to those whom their right hands possess, so as to be equal in that respect. Will they then deny the favours of Allah? [Quran 16:71]

Allah does not only sanction the institution of slavery, He also gave divine blessing to masters (Muslim men only can own slaves) to have sex with the female slaves:

And those who guard their private parts, Except in the case of their wives or those whom their right hands possess—for these surely are not to be blamed [Quran 70:29–30] Continue reading

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33,612 other followers

%d bloggers like this: