♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 9, 2016 13:25:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2016 14:15:12 GMT
What Anna has posted about the Crusades being after Islam attacked Europe, sacking cities taking over large portions of Europe, and killing individuals and taking slaves (estimated at about a million)is absolutely true.
The posting I provided was the video by Bill Warner visually demonstrating this reality, but if that isn't good enough I'll provide a list (by date) of the atrocities committed by Islam prior to the first Crusade. Even though that list is long, it is still only a partial list.
It is also important to keep in mind that the wars began in North Africa by Islam were to conquer lands ruled by Jews and Christians.
Islam has been the initiator of violence every since Medina.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 9, 2016 21:58:05 GMT
Well, I don't know anyone who has the remotest knowledge of history who doesn't accept that the Crusades were (at least in the beginning) an attempt to recover formerly Christian lands from Muslim rulers.
On the other hand I'd be interested to know precisely which lands in North Africa that were conquered by the Muslims were ruled by Jews. I can't think of a single one as it happens.
Now to say that 'Islam has been the initiator of violence ever since Medina' is simply NOT a fact. Leaving aside the thousands of years of previous empires that long preceded Mohammed, there were plenty of wars AGAINST Muslim states by non-Muslims such as the Mongols, the Indiana, the Persians and so on.
If it comes to that you could argue that wars of reconquest (as someone with Basque blood in me I honour the memory of Pelayo and the Basques who kept their region of Spain independent and eventually began to reconquer the country from the Moors) also show that Muslims were NOT the initiators of violence.
Was Chaka a Muslim? Dingaan? Cetewayo? Was Simon Bolivar? Santa Anna? George Washington?
Menantol, I deeply admire you and regard you as a highly intelligent person but that final sentence of yours is not just silly but provably false to the facts of history.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2016 0:59:35 GMT
Big Lin, while in the past there were Jewish States, at the time of rise of Islam (cir. – 622 CE) this was the period of tribal communities albeit some were quite large. There were at the time of the rise of Islam, a significant number of Jews in Arabia. Historians claim that very large numbers of Jews ( as many as 80,000) arrived after the destruction of the First Temple, to join others already long-established in places such as the oasis of Khaybar as well as the trading colonies in Medina and Mecca (where they had their own cemetery). Arab historians mention some 20 Jewish communities, including two of Kohanim. (re: Bernard Lewis, The Crisis of Islam (London, 2003), p. XXVII) During the time of Muhammad at Medina, three Jewish communities were done away with. One was Banu Qaynuqa (Jewish) and Muhammad applied casus belli to end the Constitution and treaty as applied to these Jews and went to war with them and beat them and then expelled them. The very next year Muhammad did a similar approach to Banu Nadir (Jewish), ending with their expulsion from that area of Medina. Then Muhammad went after the Jewish community of Banu Qurayza where the approach was different in that he killed all males who had reached puberty (estimated 600 to 900) , enslaved all of the women and remaining children. With this there were no more Jews in that area. Muhammad being the ideal Muslim and being the example of how a good Muslim acts, had demonstrated how Muslims were to act relative to people of the book, i.e., Jews and Christians. So . . . . in 641 CE, Caliph Umar (Muhammad’s successor) decreed that Jews and Christians to be isolated in the Eastern and Southern edges of Arabia. In the Islamic world justification for this savage rule was the Prophet Muhammad declaring, “Let there not be two religions in Arabia.” So the Jews of the Khaybar Oasis and the Christians of Nairan were removed by the powerful and pagan Islamic ruler. However, for a more complete demonstration of the aggressive acts of Islam and the aggressive acts of Christians during the Crusades, go to the following address in this forum: biglinmarshall.proboards.com/user/261/recent#ixzz4B8B67guKHere you can see in a video I supplied, the many Islamic aggressive acts not just in Africa but throughout Europe. A couple of points to remember is that there were other cultures in Africa prior to 622 CE but from that point on, they were basically eliminated. In addition, there was no reason for Islam to cross over into Europe. But Islam did so initiating attacks, for no reason except conquest and to spread Islam primarily by the sword. While the video presentation comes up to and past the Crusades into near modern times, if this is not enough I can also provide you with a narrative list of attacks up to the Crusades. This list I personally put together and is from multiple sources and that is primarily from older history books before all this modern contention with Islam began. Thank you for your comment, “ . . . Menantol, I deeply admire you and regard you as a highly intelligent person but that final sentence of yours is not just silly but provably false to the facts of history. . . . “ I’m guessing that you have some idea that I develop and use factual data to back up my assertions. In that context I strongly stand by what I stated, “ . . . Islam has been the initiator of violence every since Medina. . . . “ The facts of history support this assertion 100% To make that clearer. I’m not saying that other people, groups, nations, haven’t initiated violence. That said, in terms of just Islam, I am hard press to point to anything where they responded in defensive acts. Rather, they have had cycles of increasing and decreasing aggression initiated on their part simply to spread their religion. I feel that all that I offer is not only factual but backed with fully vetted sources. Of course anyone is free to counter my assertions with their ‘facts’.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 10, 2016 14:20:46 GMT
Menantol, I have (in spite of the lies put about by certain people about me) NEVER been 'an apologist for Islam' any more than I am an 'apologist' for any belief system.
If you want to call me any kind of 'apologist' then I'm an 'apologist' for tolerance, open-mindedness and I make NO apology for adopting that attitude towards the world.
Now the presence of Jews in Arabis is perfectly true; I don't know anyone (at least on here) who has denied it.
But the idea that Mohammed overthrew ANY 'Jewish state' is simply FALSE.
There WERE no Jewish states at that time for him to overthrow.
You have simply made an error of fact.
In terms of the conquest of Spain, by the way, one party in a Visigoth civil war invited troops from Morocco to boost their cause. The Moors took advantage of the civil war to conquer nearly all Spain except the Basque country which retained its independence and slowly began to reconquer Spain.
So you can't really call the fall of Granada 'Muslim aggression' any more than the battles of Alfonso and Pedro a couple of hundred years earlier.
Or the still earlier attempts by Asturias and then Leon to slowly regain territory.
MY facts are correct; yours are INCORRECT.
Because I am sure you wouldn't be deliberately dishonest I'm assuming you haven't researched the subject in sufficient depth.
By the way, a) the Crusaders when they conquered Jerusalem massacred the Jews - the Muslims didn'tl b) by what conceivable stretch of special pleading can you regard the Fourth Crusade as being anything other than Christian on Christian aggression.
I could say a lot more but I have more urgent priorities.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2016 16:54:46 GMT
Big Lin, I have never referred to you as an ‘apologist for Islam’ and so you are making a point in a vacuum.
Nor did I say that Mohammad overthrew any Jewish State, rather I made the point that such did not exist at the time of Muhammad and that those times (for the Jews) dealt with tribal communities. So here too you are making a point in a vacuum and create an assumed error on my part that didn’t exist.
As to the Visigoths and the Iberian Peninsula - In or around 589, the Visigoths under Reccared I converted from Arianism to Nicene Christianity, gradually adopting the culture of their Hispano-Roman subjects. Their legal code, the Visigothic Code (completed in 654) abolished the longstanding practice of applying different laws for Romans and Visigoths. Once legal distinctions were no longer being made between Romani and Gothi, they became known collectively as Hispani. In the century that followed, the region was dominated by the Councils of Toledo and the episcopacy. (Little else is known about the Visigoths' history during the 7th century, since records are relatively sparse.)
In 711 or 712, a force of invading Arabs and Berbers defeated the Visigoths in the Battle of Guadalete. The local Visigoth king and many members of their governing elite were killed, and their kingdom rapidly collapsed. Gothic identity survived, however, especially in Marca Hispanica and the Kingdom of Asturias, which had been founded by the Visigothic nobleman Pelagius of Asturias after his victory over the Moors at the Battle of Covadonga.
This invasion by the Moors into the Iberian Peninsula from North Africa and would exercise influence over Al-Andalus, the name given to Muslim territory, to some extent for over 700 years. It was the cities of the south: Cordoba, Seville and Granada where most Moorish power was concentrated.
The idea that some Visigoth King invited the Moors to aid him in a civil war is a nice story but with little if any connection to actual history. No matter what was agreed to between the Visigoths and the Moors, the intent of the Moors would have been to convert that area to Islam.
If you wish I can go much deeper into this period but for now, yours is the story of justification by Islam to expand its Caliphate borders. The visual demonstration of the expansion of Islam into Europe I have offered (inclusive of Iberian) and it is the historical record.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 10, 2016 21:59:02 GMT
Big Lin, I have never referred to you as an ‘apologist for Islam’ and so you are making a point in a vacuum. Nor did I say that Mohammad overthrew any Jewish State, rather I made the point that such did not exist at the time of Muhammad and that those times (for the Jews) dealt with tribal communities. So here too you are making a point in a vacuum and create an assumed error on my part that didn’t exist. As to the Visigoths and the Iberian Peninsula - In or around 589, the Visigoths under Reccared I converted from Arianism to Nicene Christianity, gradually adopting the culture of their Hispano-Roman subjects. Their legal code, the Visigothic Code (completed in 654) abolished the longstanding practice of applying different laws for Romans and Visigoths. Once legal distinctions were no longer being made between Romani and Gothi, they became known collectively as Hispani. In the century that followed, the region was dominated by the Councils of Toledo and the episcopacy. (Little else is known about the Visigoths' history during the 7th century, since records are relatively sparse.) In 711 or 712, a force of invading Arabs and Berbers defeated the Visigoths in the Battle of Guadalete. The local Visigoth king and many members of their governing elite were killed, and their kingdom rapidly collapsed. Gothic identity survived, however, especially in Marca Hispanica and the Kingdom of Asturias, which had been founded by the Visigothic nobleman Pelagius of Asturias after his victory over the Moors at the Battle of Covadonga. This invasion by the Moors into the Iberian Peninsula from North Africa and would exercise influence over Al-Andalus, the name given to Muslim territory, to some extent for over 700 years. It was the cities of the south: Cordoba, Seville and Granada where most Moorish power was concentrated. The idea that some Visigoth King invited the Moors to aid him in a civil war is a nice story but with little if any connection to actual history. No matter what was agreed to between the Visigoths and the Moors, the intent of the Moors would have been to convert that area to Islam. If you wish I can go much deeper into this period but for now, yours is the story of justification by Islam to expand its Caliphate borders. The visual demonstration of the expansion of Islam into Europe I have offered (inclusive of Iberian) and it is the historical record. I didn't say that you had called me an apologist for Islam but others have. And your last paragraph seems to me to show that even if you don't mean to, you ARE implying that. By saying 'yours is the story of justification by Islam' you are a) implying that I support spreading religious beliefs - Muslim or otherwise - by force of arms when that's totally alien to my philosophy of life and always has been and will be; b) you're implying that I support even 'the expansion of Islam' when again I don't. I've said repeatedly that I'm a Christian, born a Presbyterian but now a Church of England (Episcopalian) and just because I do NOT demonize either Islam or Muslims does NOT mean that I AM a Muslim, that I AM a sympathizer with Islam, that I AM an advocate of Islam or that I defend the behaviour of ANY group (whether it's the A4A, the CP, the Naxalites, Shining Path, Al-Qaida, ISIS, Sinhalese Buddhist or Uncle Tom Cobblers and all to IMPOSE their beliefs on other people. You are totally MISREPRESENTING my position and in effect you ARE calling me an apologist for Islam by your last paragraph. I'd greatly appreciate it if you corrected that impression, please. Otherwise we end up in the sort of silliness that a few other posters we both know indulge in because they can't accept when they make an error of fact.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2016 23:33:23 GMT
It is amazing how we read into the words of others, as we most often want them to state. Consider what I actually said in that last paragraph.
" . . . yours is the story of justification by Islam to expand its Caliphate borders. . . . " Key on the term of “by Islam.” To reword that, I interpret that as you presenting words of those in Islam (not your words) which have those members of Islam justifying Islamic actions to expand its Caliphate borders." That is not you being an apologist for Islam.
I see little between you talking that way than if I were to present words of Secretary Clinton justifying her actions. She being a person whom I detest to a degree that I cannot even express. That would not stop me from using her words to demonstrate a point she was attempting to make.
The dialog that exists here (as well as in other places) relative to the nature of Islam is confused by a number of side issues. I suggest that those in the West so misunderstand the nature of Islam that when those of the West provide some stimulus to people of Islam, we (of the West) anticipate their reaction and response to be something that falls within the acceptable limits and culture of the West. That is both a serious mistake and the height of arrogance. Their culture is so dissimilar that their reactions will rarely be akin to reactions anticipated by those in the West.
This difference in response is not due to those of Islam being evil but rather true to their culture which is so different as to not mesh with the West. The record is quite clear in the war acts of Islam, but then they have little choice. But to judge them by our standards is both wrong and will only produce the incorrect result. I must admit that the record demonstrating these acts of war has been offered by me more than once and for the most part it is disregarded. This visual demonstration of the expansion of Islam into Europe I have offered (inclusive of Iberia) and it is the historical record. To not recognize this factual record is puzzling but the video presentation addresses that puzzling fact.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 16, 2016 13:37:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jun 16, 2016 14:21:44 GMT
Warner's history lessons really put this whole thing in perspective. I'm especially impressed by how relentless Muslim Jihad attacks have been over the centuries. Unlike Chrsitian wars, that are fought and then over, these Jihad battles, attacks, and atrocities continue relentlessly century after century up to and including the present day. This shows us that Jihad fighters like ISIL and Boko Haram are not a recent invention. They're just a continuation of what Islam has been doing for 14 centuries. It isn't only the relentless attacks but also the atrocities including the taking of sex slaves, cutting off heads of their enemies, etc. This history lesson helps to get things in perspective. If western civilization is to survive, it will be necessary for our leaders to understand that we are at war with Islam and we have been for 14 centuries. This was never a war of our choosing, but something forced upon us by the militant Jihadist cult that is Islam. What we can also understand from Warner's history lessons is the reason for Islam's hostility or why they attack us so relentlessly century after century. The reason is that Jihad is the only way Islam has been successful. Other than discovering oil in Saudi Arabia, Islam's growth and success has come from conquering unbelievers, exterminating or enslaving them, and taking their lands, livestock, and possessions.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 16, 2016 21:18:40 GMT
Well, it always helps to get your facts right; 'Islam' did NOT 'destroy' the classical world. The 'classical world' was 'destroyed' by Western barbarians, overwhelmingly Arian Christians and mainly Germanic. (Ben Hecht, 'The Sickness Called Germany,' anyone?) Byzantium lingered on for another thousand years or so but its glory days basically ended when Heraclius overreached himself and tried to conquer Persia. He and Rustum fought themselves to a standstill and weakened both countries so badly that Omar was able to conquer not only Persia but also North Africa and the Middle East. Even then it took the Muslims until 1453 to take Constantinople and, as history shows on even a CURSORY reading, 'the classical world' died in the late 5th Century AD before Islam even existed. So let's have some facts rather than propaganda.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jun 17, 2016 0:42:32 GMT
Well, it always helps to get your facts right; 'Islam' did NOT 'destroy' the classical world. The 'classical world' was 'destroyed' by Western barbarians, overwhelmingly Arian Christians and mainly Germanic. (Ben Hecht, 'The Sickness Called Germany,' anyone?) Byzantium lingered on for another thousand years or so but its glory days basically ended when Heraclius overreached himself and tried to conquer Persia. He and Rustum fought themselves to a standstill and weakened both countries so badly that Omar was able to conquer not only Persia but also North Africa and the Middle East. Even then it took the Muslims until 1453 to take Constantinople and, as history shows on even a CURSORY reading, 'the classical world' died in the late 5th Century AD before Islam even existed. So let's have some facts rather than propaganda. [/quote/] The maps that Bill Warner shows us look pretty accurate, especially during the time when Spain was occupied by Muslims. His detailed history of the battles of Islamic fighters vs. Christians also looks credible too. ISIS captures territories, kills enemies often by cutting off their heads, takes attractive younger women as sex slaves, etc. This appears to be modeled after Mohammad's actions. They're emulating Mohammad. That puts them on Islam's main street where Mohammad is revered.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jun 17, 2016 9:27:56 GMT
Well, it always helps to get your facts right; 'Islam' did NOT 'destroy' the classical world. The 'classical world' was 'destroyed' by Western barbarians, overwhelmingly Arian Christians and mainly Germanic. (Ben Hecht, 'The Sickness Called Germany,' anyone?) Byzantium lingered on for another thousand years or so but its glory days basically ended when Heraclius overreached himself and tried to conquer Persia. He and Rustum fought themselves to a standstill and weakened both countries so badly that Omar was able to conquer not only Persia but also North Africa and the Middle East. Even then it took the Muslims until 1453 to take Constantinople and, as history shows on even a CURSORY reading, 'the classical world' died in the late 5th Century AD before Islam even existed. So let's have some facts rather than propaganda. [/quote/] The maps that Bill Warner shows us look pretty accurate, especially during the time when Spain was occupied by Muslims. His detailed history of the battles of Islamic fighters vs. Christians also looks credible too. ISIS captures territories, kills enemies often by cutting off their heads, takes attractive younger women as sex slaves, etc. This appears to be modeled after Mohammad's actions. They're emulating Mohammad. That puts them on Islam's main street where Mohammad is revered. absolutely. it is NOT the terrorists who have been kidnapping ten year old girls all over europe and using them for sexslaves.it is NOT the terrorists who were groping and manhandling women all over europe on new year's. it was the so called moderate muz zies committing the atrocities, just as it was the "moderate" muz zies looting and burning all over europe when the danish cartoons were published.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 17, 2016 13:32:28 GMT
The simple FACTS prove conclusively that Warner is WRONG.
He is either ignorant of the facts or he is deliberately LYING.
You can argue about the history of Islam but as classical civilisation DIED two hundred years BEFORE Islam came about to try and blame Islam for its collapse is either lunacy on the level of Flat-Earthism or deliberate LYING to support a prejudiced point of view.
Islam COULD NOT have destroyed classical civilisation as it had ALREADY been destroyed two hundred yesrs BEFORE.
So what's your explanation?
Is Warner a nutjob?
Or is he deliberately lying?
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jun 17, 2016 14:44:25 GMT
I see Bill Warner as a smart guy. After all, he's a well educated scientist with a doctorate degree. His presentation includes a lot of confirmable facts because, as a scientist, he was trained to be data oriented and analytical in his approach. That's why he refers to credible historical databases in support of his main arguments.
You might be able to pick apart a few examples from his lengthy presentation. However, when you look at the big picture over 14 centuries, he makes a very very strong case.
He doesn't only blame Islam. For instance, he reports that the Byzantine Empire was greatly weakened by Persian wars and especially the black plague killing off one third of the population. That made it easy for the Muslim invaders to conquer.
Another fascinating lesson from Warner's presentation relates to the importance of the Mediterranean sea trade through the centuries. So much of civilized history revolves around the Med. That all started way before Mohammad and Islam arrived on the scene. From the Phoenicians and Carthage to the city states like Amalfi, Venice, etc all were dependent on sea trade routes being open. The Barbary pirates and other raiders were able to disrupt that trade which could cause economic recessions since overland trade was so difficult and dangerous.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jun 17, 2016 15:22:45 GMT
Slavery was the economic and military secret weapon of Islam. Islam forced enslaved women to bear children for the Muslim economy and military.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jun 17, 2016 17:47:35 GMT
Slavery was the economic and military secret weapon of Islam. Islam forced enslaved women to bear children for the Muslim economy and military. All along the coast of Italy you see lookout towers like the one pictured here in Priano on the Amalfi coast. I've seen many of these towers on trips to Italy, but never fully realized that the Islamic pirate raiders were coming to capture slaves. No wonder the people living on the coast were so vigilant. We visited Maratea on a vacation last year. Though there is a lovely small harbor, the main town was built up in the hills a mile or two from the beach. It is behind a coastal mountain in a position that isn't visible from the sea. The located it there just because of the pirate raids. Even so, they still had those observation tower and lookouts. Guess they didn't want to become Muslim slaves.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 17, 2016 18:47:31 GMT
Slavery was the economic and military secret weapon of Islam. Islam forced enslaved women to bear children for the Muslim economy and military. All along the coast of Italy you see lookout towers like the one pictured here in Priano on the Amalfi coast. I've seen many of these towers on trips to Italy, but never fully realized that the Islamic pirate raiders were coming to capture slaves. No wonder the people living on the coast were so vigilant. We visited Maratea on a vacation last year. Though there is a lovely small harbor, the main town was built up in the hills a mile or two from the beach. It is behind a coastal mountain in a position that isn't visible from the sea. The located it there just because of the pirate raids. Even so, they still had those observation tower and lookouts. Guess they didn't want to become Muslim slaves. And now the pretence that 'Islam' invented slavery. Honestly, don't you guys ever READ any history? Slavery has been around for THOUSANDS of years before Islam and I don't think many US slaveowners were Muslim if it comes to that - or British ones in the West Indies. So let's have some HONESTY rather than just bigoted and ignorant DISTORTION of the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Jun 17, 2016 18:53:26 GMT
I see Bill Warner as a smart guy. After all, he's a well educated scientist with a doctorate degree. His presentation includes a lot of confirmable facts because, as a scientist, he was trained to be data oriented and analytical in his approach. That's why he refers to credible historical databases in support of his main arguments. You might be able to pick apart a few examples from his lengthy presentation. However, when you look at the big picture over 14 centuries, he makes a very very strong case. He doesn't only blame Islam. For instance, he reports that the Byzantine Empire was greatly weakened by Persian wars and especially the black plague killing off one third of the population. That made it easy for the Muslim invaders to conquer. Another fascinating lesson from Warner's presentation relates to the importance of the Mediterranean sea trade through the centuries. So much of civilized history revolves around the Med. That all started way before Mohammad and Islam arrived on the scene. From the Phoenicians and Carthage to the city states like Amalfi, Venice, etc all were dependent on sea trade routes being open. The Barbary pirates and other raiders were able to disrupt that trade which could cause economic recessions since overland trade was so difficult and dangerous. A smart guy would check his facts before making sweeping statements and dogmatic assertions. And the world is full of people with a narrowly specialized form of intelligence but a total lack of common sense or grasp upon reality. And appeals to authority - which is what your suggestion that because he is a scientist we have to go along with any rubbish he spouts on areas OUTSIDE his field of knowledge - are logically invalid. It's the 'six million housewives can't be wrong' sort of 'argument' that hustling admen use. It's complete nonsense. Warner has been caught out in a PROVABLE LIE. That makes everything else he says highly dubious. Does he, for instance, mention that when the Muslims conquered Syria within THREE YEARS of their conquest of the country a NEW Christian monastery was founded? Or that within FOUR years of their conquest a NEW Christian church was built? And another one in the same vicinity in 750? Facts give the LIE to his ignorant, bigoted, stupidity.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2016 19:01:34 GMT
And Big Lin, most societies that allowed slave owning did so for economic reasons and over time they matured out of it.
However, while economics was part of the Islamic slavery, it was also imbedded in the very core of the religion. And, while they do not all practice slavery today, it is yet an ethical part of their society deeply supported by the religion. Many of the world’s societies have changed during the last 1,400 years, but Islam is still pretty much today as it was then.
|
|