RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/274515/remembering-first-and-forgotten-armenian-genocide-raymond-ibrahim

Last April 24 was Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day.  Millions of Armenians around the world recollected how the Islamic Ottoman Empire killed—often cruelly and out of religious hatred—some 1.5 million of their ancestors during World War I.

Ironically, most people, including most Armenians, are unaware that the first genocide of Christian Armenians at the hands of Muslim Turks did not occur in the twentieth century; it began in 1019—exactly one-thousand years ago this year—when Turks first began to pour into and transform a then much larger Armenia into what it is today, the eastern portion of modern day Turkey.

Thus, in 1019, “the first appearance of the bloodthirsty beasts … the savage nation of infidels called Turks entered Armenia … and mercilessly slaughtered the Christian faithful with the sword,” writes Matthew of Edessa (d.1144), a chief source for this period.  Three decades later the raids were virtually nonstop. In 1049, the founder of the Turkic Seljuk Empire himself, Sultan Tughril Bey (r. 1037–1063), reached the unwalled city of Arzden, west of Lake Van, and “put the whole town to the sword, causing severe slaughter, as many as one hundred and fifty thousand persons.”

After thoroughly plundering the city—which reportedly contained eight hundred churches—he ordered it set ablaze and turned into a desert. Arzden was “filled with bodies” and none “could count the number of those who perished in the flames.” The invaders “burned priests whom they seized in the churches and massacred those whom they found outside. They put great chunks of pork in the hands of the undead to insult us”—Muslims deem the pig unclean—“and made them objects of mockery to all who saw them.”

Eight hundred oxen and forty camels were required to cart out the vast plunder, mostly taken from Arzden’s churches. “How to relate here, with a voice stifled by tears, the death of nobles and clergy whose bodies, left without graves, became the prey of carrion beasts, the exodus of women … led with their children into Persian slavery and condemned to an eternal servitude! That was the beginning of the misfortunes of Armenia,” laments Matthew, “So, lend an ear to this melancholy recital.”

https://amgreatness.com/2019/07/24/the-lessons-of

The Treaty of Versailles was signed in Versailles, France, on June 28, 1919. Neither the winners nor the losers of World War I were happy with the formal conclusion to the bloodbath.

The traditional criticism of the treaty is that the victorious French and British democracies did not listen to the pleas of leniency from progressive American President Woodrow Wilson. Instead, they added insult to the German injury by blaming Germany for starting the war. The final treaty demanded German reparations for war losses. It also forced Germany to cede territory to its victorious neighbors.

The harsh terms of the treaty purportedly embittered and impoverished the Germans. The indignation over Versailles supposedly explained why Germany eventually voted into power the firebrand Nazi Adolf Hitler, sowing the seeds of World War II.

But a century later, how true is the traditional explanation of the Versailles Treaty?

In comparison to other treaties of the times, the Versailles accord was actually mild—especially by past German standards.

After the 1870-1871 Franco-Prussian war, a newly unified and victorious Germany occupied France, forced the French to pay reparations and annexed the rich Alsace-Lorraine borderlands.

Berlin’s harsh 1914 plans for Western Europe at the onset of World War I—the so-called Septemberprogramm—called for the annexation of the northern French coast. The Germans planned to absorb all of Belgium and demand payment of billions of marks to pay off the entire German war debt.

https://www.andrewbostom.org/2019/07/moshe-perlmann-1940-koran-and-hadith-depict-jews-as-the-incarnation-of-evil/

Professor Moshe Perlmann (1905-2001) was a meticulous scholar of Arabic and Islam, with great fluency in not only Arabic and Hebrew, but also Russian (having been born in Odessa), and German, as well as further written proficiency in Persian, Syriac, French and Italian.

The focus of Perlmann’s work was the Medieval religious polemic, especially Islam’s anti-Jewish (here; here) and anti-Christian tracts (here; here). Unearthing and providing unique annotated translations of pathognomonic texts (cataloguedhere), with insightful commentary, Perlmann, as obituarist Herbert A. Dawson,observed, allowed the original writings, “to speak for themselves,” leaving readers “to draw whatever moral they can.”

Perlmann, uncompromising in his examination of Islamic religious fanaticism, even in mythically “tolerant” Muslim Spain, brought to light (1949) the “profuse” employment of the dehumanizing Koranic epithet (Koran 2:65/7:166)characterizing Jews as apes, for the incitement of the jihad annihilation of Granadan Jewry during 1066—a massive anti-Jewish pogrom, whose killing of some ~4000 Jews greatly exceeded in scale the much better known Crusader ravages of the Rhineland 30 years later at the outset of the first Crusade. Two decades later, Perlmann lamented how in 1966, the 900th anniversary of this “Granada debacle,” which he remonstrated was “the first major pogrom on European soil,” had “passed unnoticed.”

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/07/why_eastern_europeans_fear_islam_the_siege_of_vienna_1683.html

“Austria acts against Muslims almost every day because of their subconscious fear of Turks,” writes Turkish historian Erhan Afyoncu in the Daily Sabah.  “Austrians have not forgotten the fear and their emperor’s escape in the Battle of Vienna in 1683. When Turks were defeated in the Battle of Vienna, Europeans were so happy…”

Because this is true, a brief refresher of the Siege of Vienna is in order, particularly as its anniversary is right around now:

Around July 15, 1683, the largest Islamic army ever to invade European territory — which is saying much considering that countless invasions preceded it since the eighth century — came and surrounded Vienna, then the heart of the Holy Roman Empire and longtime nemesis of Islam.

Some 200,000 Muslim combatants, under the leadership of the Ottomans — the one state in nearly fourteen centuries of Islamic history most dedicated to and founded on the principles of jihad — invaded under the same rationale that so-called “radical” groups, such as the Islamic State, cite to justify their jihad on “infidels.”  Or, to quote the leader of the Muslim expedition, Grand Vizier Kara Mustafa, because Vienna was perceived as the head of the infidel snake, it needed to be laid low so that “all the Christians would obey the Ottomans.”

This was no idle boast; sources describe this Mustafa as “fanatically anti-Christian.” After capturing a Polish town in 1674 he ordered all the Christian prisoners to be skinned alive and their stuffed hides sent as trophies to Ottoman Sultan Muhammad IV.  Such supremacist hate was standard and on display during the elaborate pre-jihad ceremony presaging the siege of Vienna.  Then, the sultan, “desiring him [Mustafa] to fight generously for the Mahometan faith,” to quote a contemporary European source, placed “the standard of the Prophet… into his hands for the extirpation of infidels, and the increase of Muslemen.”