So much friction for such an easy Executive Order, Trum. Or did all these Americans think being in DC and the White House would make it easy to win over the Leftist alliance and their Islamic Jihad allies… what naive mortals they would be then.

Islam isn’t about a personal relationship with God. It really is about the ummah acquiring political and military power. The modern jihadist age really began in 1928. The rise in jihadism began nearly two decades before the state of Israel ever existed, and it had nothing to do with US foreign policy as we really had none and no presence there in 1928 so there go the usual scapegoats. What caused it? Kemal Ataturk abolished the Caliphate in 1924. Ataturk recognized (correctly) that the fusion of mosque and state had been the main reason for the Ottoman empire perpetually being the “sick man” of Europe and ultimately causing it’s loss in WWI. So he set out to create a modern secular state.

This infuriated other Muslims, such as Hasan al Banna in Egypt. Stripped of its military and political power Islam is not Islam. So he founded the Muslim Brotherhood, the original modern Islamic terrorist organization. One might think it’s not, but for most of it’s history it has been and still is classified as one in most Muslim countries. Hamas is simply its Gazan branch, so the MB isn’t against terrorism when it suits its purpose. Sayyid Qutb, one of the MB’s earliest members wrote several books, mostly in prision before he was executed for what we’d call terrorism charges, that are the “intellectual” basis behind the ideologies of groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda. And, of course, the MB.

I tend to regard Islam as much less of a religion than you do because while the prophet supposedly died in 632, and Jerusalem fell to the Arabs in 637, and there were other early conquests as well, there’s no archeological, numismatic, or documentary evidince of anything called Islam. Which is strange if these conquests were prompted by religious zeal. The people who were conquered were educated, and wrote about these people. They called them Saracens, Ishmaelites, Hagarites, but never Muslims. They built Masjids, or Mosques, but Masjid simply means a place of prostration and the Arab pagans had called their temples the same thing since time immemorial. Interestingly the qibla or direction of prayer invariably was toward Petra, never Mecca, until 722ad. It wasn’t until 822ad until all the Masjids faced toward Mecca. If the traditional historical narrative was remotely true, that the qibla was standardized while the prophet we think was a 7th century Meccan was still alive, this is impossible.

The conquered didn’t begin to hear about somebody named Muhammad or a holy book named the Quran until about 690, when the first archeological and numismatic evidence began to appear. Islam appears to be the brainchild of the 5th Umayyad Caliph, Caliph abd-al-Malik ibn Marwan. The Byzantines had their Eastern Orthodox Christianity and the Persians had their Zoroastrianism and abd-al-Malik ibn Marwan decided he needed a religion to hold an empire together too. The process of creating Islam took generations and Muhammad (actually not a name but a title meaning the praised one, and there are pre-Islamic coins with the title but with a figure holding a cross) of the ahadith began to develop. A history was written and then cast back two centuries to the death of the mythic Muhammad.

All the evidence indicates the traditionally accepted historical narrative is not at all accurate, and it was a religion developed over time, very much for a purpose.

Atheism is a faith, a tradition, and an ideology.

Pro-Choice is a religion, a faith, a tradition, and an ideology.

It’s when they conflate logical domains, deny individual dignity, and reject or debase intrinsic value, that they cause catastrophic anthropogenic climate change.

Hereis my post on whether Islam is a religion. This post is also relevant.

It’s not a religion. It’s an ideology of violent conquest and oppression with a thin veneer of something resembling a religion. But it’s the only “religion” I know of in which it’s “prophet” actually has a teaching on al-Azl. What is that, you say? You’ll be sorry you asked. Let’s turn to Sahih Muslim, the second most authoritative collection of ahadith (reports, of Muhammad) in that Khuttub-al-Sittih, the six books, that comprise the bulk of what makes up the Sunnah of Muhammad.

Sahih Muslim – The Book of Marriage – (22) – Chapter: The ruling on coitus interrupts (‘Azl)

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him):

“0 Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger mentioning al-‘azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger, and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.”

Reference : Sahih Muslim 1438 a
In-book reference : Book 16, Hadith 147
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 8, Hadith 3371
(deprecated numbering scheme)

Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported:

“We took women captives, and we wanted to do ‘azl with them. We then asked Allah’s Messenger about it, and he said to us: Verily you do it, verily you do it, verily you do it, but the soul which has to be born until the Day of judgment must be born.”

Reference : Sahih Muslim 1438 c
In-book reference : Book 16, Hadith 149
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 8, Hadith 3373
(deprecated numbering scheme)

It is the only religion in the world I know of that, to put it in modern terms, has tenderly passed down instructions from the highest human authority in Islam over the generations so the Islamic State knows how to rape their Yazidi sex slaves. Isn’t it nice they can know it’s halal to practice al-Azl so they can rape them on the way to the slave market where they can sell them reasonably confident they’re not pregnant? That brings a higher price. Muhammad approved of the practice, though he told his rapist/soldiers that they couldn’t do anything to keep their rape victims from getting pregnant if Allah wanted them to be pregnant.

This is what Islam teaches. It’s in the Sunnah of Muhammad. The Sunnah is the “well trodden path” of Muhammad. All Muslims are commanded to model their lives on the example of Muhammad. And 85% or so of Muslims in get it from the Sunnah. Hence their name in English; Sunnis. Sunnis can not reject the ahadith; it’s apostasy for Sunnis to reject a reliable (sahih, or even the next lower grade, hasan) hadith. So no Sunni can say it’s wrong for IS to have sex slaves. That would be to blaspheme Allah as he ordained the practice as lawful in the Quran as well as their prophet as according to both the Sunni and Shia traditions he engaged in it (the Shia have their own, equivalent texts).

Charming how they put their rape instructions in the “Book of Marriage.” Although given that there is no such crime as marital rape in the Islamic world, that women are little more than property under Islamic law, it’s not like legal wives necessarily have it much differently.

Quran Surah 2 Al Baqarah verse 223:

Your wives are a place of sowing of seed for you, so come to your place of cultivation however you wish and put forth [righteousness] for yourselves. And fear Allah and know that you will meet Him. And give good tidings to the believers.

Speaking of marriage, this is why child marriage can’t be eradicated in the Islamic world. First of all along with divinely ordained sex slavery it’s in the Quran. And like divinely ordained sex slavery, Muhammad engaged in it as well. Sahih al Bukhari is second only to the Quran in authority among the Sunni sacred texts.

Sahih al-Bukhari – Book of Wedlock, Marriage (Nikaah) – (39) Chapter: Giving one’s young children in marriage

Narrated `Aisha:

that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5133
In-book reference : Book 67, Hadith 69
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 7, Book 62, Hadith 64
(deprecated numbering scheme)

Have you seen how young some of these IS sex slaves are? Pace Imams Obama, Kerry, May, Merkel and Francis, the Islamic state is following their prophet’s example and commands to the letter.

Just in case anyone thinks I’m taking anything out of context, I’m not. But I’m always happy to show my work. I can give you all the context you want, whether it’s the immediate literary context, the overall scriptural context, or even the historical context using the ahadith and the Sirah (biographical material, now forming the minor part of the Sunnah) from texts like Sirat Rasul Allah (The Life of the Prophet of Allah). All authoritative Muslim sources. Most Muslims are very nice people, but they didn’t learn about their religion from their own authoritative religious sources. I’ve read some of what they’ve grown up on. Muhammad comes out looking like a cross between Jesus Christ, a Smurf, and Santa Claus.

Every one of the canonical ahadith collections have volumes or chapters on Jihad. Guess what; the prophet wasn’t engaged in any internal spiritual struggle that CAIR propagandists want you to think comprises Jihad. Sometimes it’s combined as “Jihad and the Military Expeditions of the Prophet” and sometimes they’re divided into two separate sections, so that should give you a hint. You read those, along with his biography, and Muhammad ain’t Jesus Christ and he’s not Santa Claus. But the Islamic State starts looking very familiar.

“You obviously haven’t read a word of the new EO. Piss off.”

The simple truth is that this is our country, a sovereign nation, and we are allowed to decide whom we admit, and whom we choose to exclude, for any reason whatsoever. Anything else means voluntarily giving up our sovereignty to non-citizens and foreign outsiders.

it’s not just the mindset of those seeking entry. It’s also the real identity. CNN, BBC, and France 24 have never reported on the fake ID mills run by ISIS in the countries named. I read the other day about a guy arrested in Sweden (can’t remember what for) whose ID said he was 12. In reality, he was around 20. They don’t report on a guy in Germany who moved to about 6 different towns here and used a different ID ar each refugee center. Germany still doesn’t have the ability to take fingerprints at each of the refugee reception areas and compare them with a national fingerprint data base.

All people get from the international news is ” travel ban fpr muslim majority nations.” We get immigration lawyers who spout off and offended Muslims who are now afraid to live in America. Most people don’t even realize tat the six named countries have large enclaves of ISIS supporters and that as ISIS gets squeezed out of places like Mosul, their fighters will be heading to Libya to get new travel papers.

Meanwhile there is a brouhaha in Germany because Erdogan wants to send campaign officials here so that dual citizens will vote for him in the election about whether he can take over the whole parliamentary system in Turkey,

I really wish someone would put Amanpour and Kate Bolduan in niqabs, take away their drivers licences, and refuse to allow them to leave their houses without a male escort. If they want multiculturalsim, let them experience it.