Islam, paedophilia and racism in the quran

[jthedon]

Can some muslims please shed some light on the abuse of black people in the quran and mahommed marrying a 6 year old girl ? As im confused as to why anybody would follow this religion based on these things.

[turquoisefire777]

The Prophet of Islam Discriminate Black People

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctuydc5ubhk

[decode reality]

Can some muslims please shed some light on the abuse of black people in the quran and mahommed marrying a 6 year old girl ? As im confused as to why anybody would follow this religion based on these things.

I don't know if it's the Qu'ran but from what I observe, the Muslims from south Asian backgrounds are conditioned to view lighter skin as superior. Many of them would have big issues if their son or daughter wanted to marry a black person, even if they were Muslim and good human beings. It may also be the same in Arab nations.

In Bradford, a friend told me about the experience of his Bangladeshi friend, who is very dark skinned. The Bangla guy was saying that he had been turned away and made to feel unwelcome by certain mosques, purely down to skin colour.

Though this mentality does not apply to everyone, it does apply to many. If a person has a colour preference, that is their choice, fine. But I think some like to expound the words of the Qu'ran as regards all human beings being God's creation and yet in their lives they view some lesser than others based upon skin colour. Many muslims will say to me that there is no racism in Islam. My jury's out on that one; what I can say without any hesitation is that there ARE racist Muslims. And that term is an oxymoron because a real Muslim is not racist.

[decode reality]

Can some muslims please shed some light on the abuse of black people in the quran and mahommed marrying a 6 year old girl ? As im confused as to why anybody would follow this religion based on these things.

If those passages are authentic, then if I had ever converted to Islam (I did consider it many years ago), those things would have jumped out at me and I would have abandoned the religion instantly.

[jthedon]

The Prophet of Islam Discriminate Black People

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctuydc5ubhk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctuydc5ubhk

Thanks for the link mate but i can't watch it! I'm on a mobile because my pc blew up! Would you mind explaining it to me ? Like what the vid is talking about cheers

[decode reality]

Thanks for the link mate but i can't watch it! I'm on a mobile because my pc blew up! Would you mind explaining it to me ? Like what the vid is talking about cheers

To paraphrase the vid: It cites two passages supposedly in the Qu'ran, one in which Satan is said to be a black man and a black woman is compared to sickness. Also, it talks about the anti Christ having woolly hair (i.e black "nappy" hair).

Interesting...I will do my own looking, as sometimes youtube videos are incorrect.

[turquoisefire777]

Thanks for the link mate but i can't watch it! I'm on a mobile because my pc blew up! Would you mind explaining it to me ? Like what the vid is talking about cheers

hehe, you should watch it.

but basically, the vid takes verses from the koran where it says the anti-christ is a black man and black women are bad luck.

[dragon fang]

Islam is the fairest of all religions

"It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces Towards east or West; but it is righteousness to believe in God and the Last Day, and the Angels, and the Book, and the Messengers; to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans, for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask, and for the ransom of slaves; to be steadfast in prayer, and practice regular charity; to fulfil the contracts which ye have made; and to be firm and patient, in pain (or suffering) and adversity, and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth, the God-fearing." ( Quran 2:177)

In this verse, we see that Allah Almighty orders Muslims to spend from their money and wealth and to give with love and respect the kin, orphans, the needy, the wayfarer, for those who ask, and for slaves. Muslims have to help those who need it in their community.

"Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe: A slave woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe: A man slave who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the Fire. But God beckons by His Grace to the Garden (of bliss) and forgiveness, and makes His Signs clear to mankind: That they may celebrate His praise." ( Quran 2:221)

In this verse, we see that Allah Almighty in some cases considers a slave to be better than a free human being. Allah Almighty orders Muslims not to marry from the Pagans, and He tells us that a slave Muslim (who is owned by a non Muslim) is better than a non believer, even if that non believer was beautiful.

"And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards God, that ye may attain Bliss." ( Quran 24:31)

In this verse, we see that Allah Almighty orders the Muslim women to guard their modesty and not to display their beauty to strangers. However, the Muslim women are allowed to display their beauty to their husbands, relatives, other women, and their slaves. This Noble Verse clearly shows a full respect to the slaves by allowing the Muslim women to display their beauty to them.

"Never should a believer kill a believer; but (If it so happens) by mistake, (Compensation is due): If one (so) kills a believer, it is ordained that he should free a believing slave, and pay compensation to the deceased's family, unless they remit it freely. If the deceased belonged to a people at war with you, and he was a believer, the freeing of a believing slave (Is enough). If he belonged to a people with whom ye have treaty of Mutual alliance, compensation should be paid to his family, and a believing slave be freed. For those who find this beyond their means, (is prescribed) a fast for two months running: by way of repentance to God: for God hath all knowledge and all wisdom." ( Quran 4:92)

In this verse, we see that Allah Almighty ordered to free a believing slave if a Muslim accidentally kills another Muslim. This Noble Verse came to encourage Muslims to liberate slaves.

"God will not call you to account for what is futile in your oaths, but He will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; or clothe them; or give a slave his freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths ye have sworn. But keep to your oaths. Thus doth God make clear to you His signs, that ye may be grateful." ( Quran 5:89)

This verse is also another proof that Allah Almighty did encourage Muslims to liberate slaves.

"But those who divorce their wives by Zihar, then wish to go back on the words they uttered, (It is ordained that such a one) should free a slave before they touch each other: Thus are ye admonished to perform: and God is well-acquainted with (all) that ye do." ( Quran 58:3)

This verse is another proof that Allah Almighty did encourage Muslims to liberate slaves.

24:33 "Let those who find not the wherewithal for marriage keep themselves chaste, until God gives them means out of His grace. And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum), give them such a deed if ye know any good in them: yea, give them something yourselves out of the means which God has given to you. But force not your maids to prostitution when they desire chastity, in order that ye may make a gain in the goods of this life. But if anyone compels them, yet, after such compulsion, is God, Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful (to them),"

In this verse, we see that if a slave requests his freedom from his Muslim master, then his master not only must help him earn his freedom if there is good in the Slave, but also pay him money so the slave can have a good start in his free life.

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: "When the slave of anyone amongst you prepares food for him and he serves him after having sat close to (and undergoing the hardship of) heat and smoke, he should make him (the slave) sit along with him and make him eat (along with him), and if the food seems to run short, then he should spare some portion for him (from his own share) - (another narrator) Dawud said:" i. e. a morsel or two". 4097. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman), Book 015, Number 4096)"

Narrated Al-Ma'rur: "At Ar-Rabadha I met Abu Dhar who was wearing a cloak, and his slave, too, was wearing a similar one. I asked about the reason for it. He replied, "I abused a person by calling his mother with bad names." The Prophet said to me, 'O Abu Dhar! Did you abuse him by calling his mother with bad names You still have some characteristics of ignorance. Your slaves are your brothers and Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears. Do not ask them (slaves) to do things beyond their capacity (power) and if you do so, then help them.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 29)"

Narrated Anas: "The Prophet said, 'None of you will have faith till he wishes for his (Muslim) brother [this includes slaves, since a slave is considered a brother as shown above] what he likes for himself.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 12)"

Narrated Abu Musa: "Some people asked Allah's Apostle, 'Whose Islam is the best? i.e. (Who is a very good Muslim)?' He replied, 'One who avoids harming the Muslims with his tongue and hands.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 10)"

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr: "A man asked the Prophet, 'What sort of deeds or (what qualities of) Islam are good?' The Prophet replied, 'To feed (the poor) and greet those whom you know and those whom you do not Know.' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Belief, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 11)"

Narrated Asma: "No doubt the Prophet ordered people to manumit slaves during the solar eclipse. (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Eclipses, Volume 2, Book 18, Number 163)"

"'Abdullah b. 'Umar reported that 'Umar b. Khattab asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) as he was at ji'rana (a town near Mecca) on his way back from Ta'if: Messenger of Allah, I had taken a vow during the days of Ignorance that I would observe I'tikaf for one day in the Sacred Mosque. So what is your opinion? He said: Go and observe I'tikaf for a day. And Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) gave him a slave girl out of the one-fifth (of the spoils of war meant for the Holy Prophet). And when Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) set the war prisoners free. 'Umar b. Khattab heard their voice as they were saying: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) has set us free. He (Hadrat 'Umar) said: What is this? They said: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) has set free the prisoners of war (which had fallen to the lot of people). Thereupon he (Hadrat 'Umar) said: Abdullah, go to that slave-girl and set her free. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Oaths (Kitab Al-Aiman), Book 015, Number 4074)"

Hadith - Sahih Bukhari, Muslim and Ahmad:
... Anas said, "I served the Prophet of Allah, upon him be peace, for ten years. During that time, he never once said to me as much as 'Oof' if I did something wrong. He never asked me, if I had failed to do something, 'Why did you not do it?,' and he never said to me, if I had done something wrong, 'Why did you do it?'"

The reason why Muslims had slaves is because when Islam was still weak and growing, the Arab Pagans' tribes used to launch continuous attacks on the Muslims to destroy Islam once and for all. Muslims had entered many bloody and vicious battles against the non believers which had cost both sides many lives from the men. When the Muslims used to enter a city after defeating its army, they would face a new dilemma. They often meet hundreds of non believing women and young children and elderly left without any support because their men had died in the battle field.
But after muslims had government slaves quickly vanished and everyone muslims and non-muslims were free.
Just compare this to what pagan arabs used to treat slaves.

And for Aisha (May god be pleased with her) and if you want to see real pedophilia and racism see what is written on the bible:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=106582

[rapunzel]

You can prove anything by selectively quoting verses and quotations.

[eternal_spirit]

Rules for men having sex with boys
Man-boy sex is institutionalised to the extent that the Islamic rulebook specifies who should and should not be the object of a man's amorous attentions. Apart from the requirement that the boy should be beardless (bacha bereesh), there are also some restrictions regarding family members.

From http://www.al-islam.org/laws/marriage1.html (http://www.al-islam.org/laws/marriage1.html)2414. * If a baligh person commits sodomy with a boy , the mother, sister and daughter of the boy become haraam for him. And the same law applies when the person on whom sodomy is committed is an adult male, or when the person committing sodomy is na-baligh. But if one suspects or doubts whether penetration occurred or not, then the said woman would not become haraam.

2415. * If a person marries the mother or sister of a boy, and commits sodomy with the boy after the marriage, as a precaution, they will become haraam for him.

In other words, if a Muslim dates a woman and finds her kid brother or son attractive, he must choose one or the other. He can't have both.

[eternal_spirit]

In Muslim societies women are kept covered in burkhas, so the prettiest things that most unmarried Muslim men ever see are beardless pre-pubescent boys. Beardless boys are not regarded as male, so sex with them is not considered as homosexuality as it is between adult men. (http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/violent-muslim-homophobia-jihad-against.html)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_lCftRrT_cGY/S134huKsfWI/AAAAAAAAADk/pPBK3-xMEp8/s320/muslims-hang-gays.jpg

Hanged for being gay

Consequently, in traditional Muslim societies completely clean shaving is frowned upon, as it sends the wrong messages about sexual availability. If full beards (Taliban-style) are not worn, then moustaches are required.

Muslim clerics are especially fond of little boys, and enjoying them is one of the perks of the job. Muslims get very annoyed if kuffars interfere with their rightful privileges. (http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/Imam-s-family-custody-protest/article-1823117-detail/article.html)

If a boy refuses to have sex with an Imam, he can expect severe punishment. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/1453786/Acid-attack-on-boy-who-refused-sex-with-Muslim-cleric.html)

[eternal_spirit]

Some of the stuff I found made a thread




Yemen: Another child bride hospitalized with genital injuries

by Kal El (http://infidelsarecool.com/author/kal/) on April 15, 2010 · View comments (http://infidelsarecool.disqus.com/?url=http://infidelsarecool.com/2010/04/15/yemen-another-child-bride-hospitalized-with-genital-injuries/)Comments (http://infidelsarecool.com/2010/04/15/yemen-another-child-bride-hospitalized-with-genital-injuries/#disqus_thread)

More brutality towards children, per the legacy of the pedophile Muhammad.
An 11-year-old Yemeni girl who was was married to a man in country’s Hajja province was hospitalized today with genital injuries, said a human rights group in Sanaa.
It was the second incident (http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/04/child-marriage-story-in-yemen-finds-a-way-to-get-even-more-disturbing.html) involving a child bride in the last week. A 13-year-old girl died after being sexually assaulted by her adult husband. Both girls were married in the country’s rural Hajja province.
The 11-year-old girl was married last year only under the condition that the adult husband would wait until she reached puberty to consummate the marriage. He did not wait, nor do many of the men who marry young brides, says Amal Basha, director of the Arabic Sisters Forum.
An estimated 50 percent of women in Yemen are married before age 18, some as young as 8. Less than a week ago the Sana’a-based human rights group reported the death of a 13-year-old bride in the same rural area. The Associated Press reported the girl was allegedly raped, and that her 23-year-old husband is now in police custody.
“She looked like she was butchered,” said the girl’s mother, Nijma Ahmed. The AP also cited police a report saying the husband forced himself on his young bride, feeling under pressure to prove his manhood.
An average of eight women die each day in Yemen due to child marriage, many of them in childbirth, according to the Arabic Sisters Forum. The group runs a hotline for victims of domestic violence and has been lobbying in support of a minimum marriage age now under consideration by the Yemeni parliament.
Pushing against the proposed law is the strong hand of Islamic conservatives in Yemen. Clerics have declared women like Amal Basha apostates from Islam for opposing child marriage, which they see as divinely ordained. The government, she says, is intimidated by the religious and tribal customs.
“They say this is Islamic…and they declared jihad against… the UN treaty on women’s rights,” she said.
“They say my campaign is a Western agenda, that it will lead to sex out of wedlock and prostitution,” Basha said….


Saudi Arabia’s senior most cleric ok’s pedophelia

by Infidelesto (http://infidelsarecool.com/author/admin/) on January 14, 2009 · View comments (http://infidelsarecool.disqus.com/?url=http://infidelsarecool.com/2009/01/14/saudi-arabias-senior-most-cleric-oks-pedophelia/)Comments (http://infidelsarecool.com/2009/01/14/saudi-arabias-senior-most-cleric-oks-pedophelia/#disqus_thread)


Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1115624/Its-injustice-NOT-marry-girls-aged-10-says-Saudi-cleric.html)
http://infidelsarecool.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/saudi-cleric.jpg (http://infidelsarecool.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/saudi-cleric.jpg)
Saudi Arabia’s most senior cleric has told followers it is permissible for ten-year-old girls to marry and anyone who think they are too young are doing the youngsters ‘an injustice’.
Abdul-Azeez ibn Abdullaah Aal ash-Shaikh, the country’s grand mufti, said: ‘It is wrong to say it’s not permitted to marry off girls who are 15 and younger.
‘A female who is ten or 12 is marriageable and those who think she’s too young are wrong and are being unfair to her,’ he said during a Monday lecture.
Al Sheikh’s comments come at a time when Saudi human rights groups have been pushing the government to put an end to marriages involving the very young and to define a minimum age for marriage.
In the past few months, Saudi newspapers have highlighted several cases in which young girls were married off to much older men or very young boys.

[eternal_spirit]

Some of the stuff I found made a thread
NOTE SOME OF it (articles) is written with sarcasm and not my words
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=112411

Sexual Perversion in Islam

Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims


Muslim Man on Muslim Boy Love (http://thechroniclesofislam.blogspot.com/2009/12/muslim-man-on-muslim-boy-love.html)



http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_LjkTcIrZHko/SxZY34JbcVI/AAAAAAAAAts/qrj3lSmKWpo/s1600/mullah-kissing-boy2.jpg

This subject is close to the hearts of many Muslims, and so, I feel it is my responsiblity to explain what is acceptable in an Islamic context of man on boy love.

First let us begin with the ETERNAL promises of Allah as provided by the Messenger:

Quran 52:24

"..Round about them will serve, (devoted) to them, young male servants (handsome) as Pearls well-guarded..."

Also in Surah 76:19 Allah promises fresh youths to Muslim men:

"...And round about them shall go youths never altering in age; when you see them you will think them to be scattered pearls..."

Before we begin, you have to understand is that Western, man-made legal systems, (that have no basis in truth, because they are not sanctioned by Allah), put all the stress on the protection of the weaker members of the society, especially women and children. However, this is the first fallacy of man-made laws. (SEVERE SARCASM)

Infidels put stress on on protecting those that cannot wage Jihad, and have little use to Allah other than making babies and serving Muslim men.

Whereas in the case of the Islamic legal system it is the opposite. Allah has rightfully created the Islamic legal system (Sharia) to benefit those that fight in his name, namely Sharia is in the service of strong virile, productive men. Allah is merciful as he is gernerous in bestowing rights and the bounty of pleasures for those that fight in his Jihad.

In the verses about the beautiful youth of paradise, he nurtured in Muslims, a liking for sodomizing young boys. (see the Quranic quotes at the top of this post). All Muslims know that homosexuality is forbidden, however, we also know that this infraction is less serious than fornication with an unwed girl.

As you see Allah likened the young boys to pearls, in the same way as he did with Houris, pearl in Arabic poetry is a feminine sexual symbol. Islam considers boys and women as of the same gender hence a woman is considered a minor all her life in Islam (first she is the property of her father, then, her husband, and finally her son).

A woman is never considered an "adult" in the Western sense. Thus the confusion. However the feminine status of a boy is temporary and it ends with growing a beard. Islam does not consider it as sexual abuse but rather a mere PLAY as described in the following hadeeth, narrated by Bukhari.

What you must understand is the mercy of Allah and his Messenger, because if a Muslim man sodomizes a young boy, is not permitted to marry his mother. See this hadith at: The Sahih Collection of al-Bukhari - Book of Marriage - SunniPath ...

"...As for whom ever plays with a boy: if there is full penetration, then he shall not marry his mother..."

With the JUSTICE that Islam affords, I think it is pretty clear that no crime in the eyes of Allah has been committed, but the pleasure that a brave Muslim warrior has received from a young boy is the will of Allah! Look to the famous Islamic scholar and Jurist Imam ibn al-Jawzi (died 1200) said boldly : "He who claims that he experiences no sexual desire when looking at beautiful young boys is a liar."

Indeed, this pederasty is a practice that has been in place for 1400 years with Allah's blessing. However, you will see that there are Western forces out to malign and insult Islam, and in the endless oppression, infidels are trying to put an end to that which Allah has permitted.


Recently, in Pakistan there were over 500 cases of Islamic man on boy love "reported" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4084951.stm)(probably by Apostate Muslims and their co-conspirators Westerners) in Islamic schools, and this was revealed by Aamer Liaquat Hussain, a minister in the religious affairs Pakistani Minister. This is on top of the 2000 reports last year. (Thankfully, no pious Islamic brother has been successfully prosecuted by these man-made laws). Rightfully, this slanderer of Islam and the practices of the Messenger and that which Allah has made halal, has received death threats from clerics, and infuriated some religious political leaders.

Moreover, Islamic leaders recently at a parliamentary meeting, have demanded he apologize for insulting Islam!
---
Thus, we can see with the endless evidence found both in the holy texts of Islam and the religious convictions of those in positions of power within the Islamic society.

If there is no beard. It is not a man. Therefore it is not homosexuality, and totally within the rights of a Muslim man to take little boys, sodomize them and use them in the manner that Allah has pre-ordained.

[dragon fang]

*Sigh* We are back to the copy paste full of lies articles.

First of all it have a cutted and edited verses.
Second prove that this is from the Islamic laws rather than crawling for lies through anti islamic sites.

[zarah]

*Sigh* We are back to the copy paste full of lies articles.

First of all it have a cutted and edited verses.
Second prove that this is from the Islamic laws rather than crawling for lies through anti islamic sites.

Well exactly, it became boring two years ago. Please don't think you pointing out that his deliberate misdirection will cause him to do anything else but ensure your post is drowned out by another ten fallacious articles.

[jktruth]

am i right that in islam we must only have sex during marraige, and then not for pleasure but to concieve a child?

so if it is true,those men having sex with young boys are not following islams teachings.

good try though

as for rasism, i don't need any quotes from the quran or anything. we are all equal in the eyes of allah, he sees past our wealth, clothes, and skin colour. islam is open for any to join, walk into a mosque in london and you will the the diverse ethnic backgrounds of the brothers and sisters. there is No rasism or paodophilia in islam.

[decode reality]

am i right that in islam we must only have sex during marraige, and then not for pleasure but to concieve a child?

so if it is true,those men having sex with young boys are not following islams teachings.

good try though

as for rasism, i don't need any quotes from the quran or anything. we are all equal in the eyes of allah, he sees past our wealth, clothes, and skin colour. islam is open for any to join, walk into a mosque in london and you will the the diverse ethnic backgrounds of the brothers and sisters. there is No rasism or paodophilia in islam.

That proves nothing. It's like saying there's no racist police because there's a few black and Asian guys in the force. It's a ritual, just like walking around the kaaba. Once the ritual's over it's business as usual (please see my earlier posts in the thread to get an inkling what I mean).

[jktruth]

yeah i understand what your saying. like in pakistani weddings the bride will wear alot of make up to look white, or lighten her skin tone. i have no idea why.
yes there may be some rasist muslims however look at the title of this thread, you cannot base the actions of the representative ( a muslim) and say that this is a part of islam. therefore my statement is correct, there is no rasism in islam, as discrimination because of ones skin colour is not the will of Allah.

[decode reality]

yeah i understand what your saying. like in pakistani weddings the bride will wear alot of make up to look white, or lighten her skin tone. i have no idea why.
yes there may be some rasist muslims however look at the title of this thread, you cannot base the actions of the representative ( a muslim) and say that this is a part of islam. therefore my statement is correct, there is no rasism in islam, as discrimination because of ones skin colour is not the will of Allah.

I know....I saw a programme about skin lightening. I saw women transform their skin tone into something that looked like a manneqin at best, a zombie at worst.

I will have to check out the link to see if those quotes are true. My jury is still out. As I say, there are Muslims who do not practice racism. The thing that I bear in mind is that the rhetoric of some established religions and political institutions is often at contradictory odds with the behaviour of human beings. The United States constitution and the UN declaration of human rights comes to mind.

[converger]

ignorant you are entirely ignorant the time before islam was called aljaheliya which means ignorance now that all you kow about islam ..........you are jahel.......

[decode reality]

ignorant you are entirely ignorant the time before islam was called aljaheliya which means ignorance now that all you kow about islam ..........you are jahel.......

I'm not sure who you're referring to.
I don't know what jahel means either.

Could you please post again, I don't know what you meant.

[converger]

I meant about jahel is an ignorant ....

[loveisthelaw]

Can some muslims please shed some light on the abuse of black people in the quran and mahommed marrying a 6 year old girl ? As im confused as to why anybody would follow this religion based on these things.

If you can provide the valid references for each of your questions from the Quraan or the Sahih hadith, then sure I can try :)

Speaking for myself, I converted to, gained and constantly try to sustain motivation to follow this religion by correctly understanding it, by having a default internal agreement with it's core teachings, as well as of course implementing it's teachings.

It is far more complex than that but you get the idea I guess :)

[lawliet]

Can some muslims please shed some light on the abuse of black people in the quran and mahommed marrying a 6 year old girl ? As im confused as to why anybody would follow this religion based on these things.

don't believe brainwashed muslim piece of shits, they are the biggest retards i have ever seen. They will defend their religion without even knowing what it stands for, they truelly think it stands for peace hahaha! Arrogant cunts living in the FREE WESTERN WORLD and DEFENDING ISLAM! hah what a joke..

[jthedon]

If you can provide the valid references for each of your questions from the Quraan or the Sahih hadith, then sure I can try :)

Speaking for myself, I converted to, gained and constantly try to sustain motivation to follow this religion by correctly understanding it, by having a default internal agreement with it's core teachings, as well as of course implementing it's teachings.

It is far more complex than that but you get the idea I guess :)


http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Muhammad_the_Racist
can i ask ? if yahweh came first why do people follow allah ? especially black people.

[eternal_spirit]

don't believe brainwashed muslim piece of shits, they are the biggest retards i have ever seen. They will defend their religion without even knowing what it stands for, they truelly think it stands for peace hahaha! Arrogant cunts living in the FREE WESTERN WORLD and DEFENDING ISLAM! hah what a joke..
Indeed, no matter how much reality and truth you post, they will never ever apologise for how disgustingly sick and evil "Proper Islam" really is.

[dragon fang]

http://www.wikiislam.com/wiki/Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Muhammad_the_Racist
can i ask ? if yahweh came first why do people follow allah ? especially black people.

Maybe... Because the bible is corrupt.

[dragon fang]

Indeed, no matter how much reality and truth you post, they will never ever apologise for how disgustingly sick and evil "Proper Islam" really is.

Seriously, Can you bring a prove by investigating yourself and bring a proof rather than bring us full of lies articles?
Seriously It is have no proof other than an edited verse.

[lawliet]

Seriously, Can you bring a prove by investigating yourself and bring a proof rather than bring us full of lies articles?
Seriously It is have no proof other than an edited verse.


Proof?

Warlord and Pedophile Sex Lord Muhammed spread Islam by forcing it on the people and killing all who didn't gave in, there is your proof.

[jthedon]

Maybe... Because the bible is corrupt.

Care to expand ? I'm sure there's bible quote's which speak about fondling young girls and marrying 9 year olds right ?

[dragon fang]

Proof?

Warlord and Pedophile Sex Lord Muhammed spread Islam by forcing it on the people and killing all who didn't gave in, there is your proof.

This is called "Lie" not "proof"
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=106582
This is about Aisha

And for your "Proof":

On that account: We ordained For the Children of Israel That if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. The although there came To them Our Messengers With clear Sings, yet, Even after that, many Of them continued to commit Excess in the land. ( Quran 5:32)"

"Those who invoke not, with God, any other god, nor slay such life as God has made sacred except for just cause, nor commit fornication; - and any that does this (not only) meets punishment. (But) the Penalty on the Day Of Judgement will be doubled To him, and he will dwell Therein in ignominy. ( Quran, 25:68-69)"

"Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. ( Quran, 2:190)"

"O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other. Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well-acquainted. ( Quran, 49:13)"

"They perform (their) vows, and they fear a Day Whose evil flies far and wide. And they feed, for the love of Allah, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive -- (Saying), 'We feed you For the sake of Allah alone: No reward do we desire from you, nor thanks.' ( Quran, 76:7-9)"

After Mohammad (pbuh) forgave the pagans Arab tribes after years of being attacked, tortured, oppressed, and sanctioned by them.
Then the Prophet (pbuh) sent letters to the surrounding powers inviting them to Islam and the permission to call to the path of the Almighty just like Moses did to Pharaoh.
The Christian Byzantine king murdered the messenger whom the Prophet (pbuh) sent and then sent his headless body back to the Prophet (pbuh) and annouced war on the Islam.
The Persian Emperor became outraged and cursed the letter-bearer and told him that if it wasn't against international practice he would have him mutilated, Instead he cussed the Muslim letter-bearer and claimed that the Arabs are merely slaves to the Persians and that He will send an army to have the Prophet seized, humiliated and imprisoned.
The Egyptian Christian king sent a respectful no but thank you message, And sent some gifts.
The Ethiopian (Abyssinian) king voiced his will to embrace Islam after he studied it, yet secretly because he feared what the church might do to him.

You must understand that back then the world was made up of empires and nomad lands;No borders and no free democracies, The world was in a perpetual state of war, Romans and Persians wanted to conquer the world, They would start war for the stupidest reason.
So if the leader shows hostility to a group then I guarantee that you can expect all kinds of trouble from them.

So because of that the Prophet immediately sent armies to the closest and most clear threat which was the Byzantines who showed no respect, After the death of the Prophet (1 year after that), His successor in authority over the Islamic state and not in Prophet-hood, started sending armies to wage an all out war on both hostile powers in Persia and Byzantium who obviously will not allow a peaceful mission of spreading Islam in their lands.

The Muslim warriors were way outnumbered and out-equipped toppled the Persian empire and Byzantine (half of the roman empire) in less than 50 years with the help of Allah.

What do you expect? Stay on their homes and wait for them to kill anyone who reject being a muslim?

They didn’t force religion on anyone; They would make a contract of a tax in return for freedom of like, religion and worshiping places, and trade, Work, Money in the Muslim lands for all non-Muslim believers in God, The Islamic countries were the only one that would offer such respect and freedom to people from other cultures and religion, And because of that many came to Islamic lands.
Just study the laws of other cultures, It is full of injustice and the "Royals" always rule.
It was the morals, uprightness, and justice of Islam and its law that attracted most of these people to become Muslim, It is the opposite of what you thought, Some people from other cultures became Muslims after they saw the honesty and justice of Muslim traders coming into their land.

In the Muslim world you can find beautiful ancient churches and temples some of them are traced back to before the Muslim rule, Alot of them in Jerusalem, Bethleham, and Nazereth, There are 30 million orthodox/catholic Arabs across the Middle East today whose roots go back also before the Muslim domination of these lands this is roughly 10% of the Arab world, Why didn't they kill those Arab infidels?
And there was never a war fought by the Muslims anywhere near Indonesia.
Indonesia is the most densely populated Muslim country of close to 200 million Muslims whose ancestors learned of Islam through traders and merchants from the Islamic world, Because they actually listen and respect.

“History makes it clear however, legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam a the point of a sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.” (by: De lacy O’Leary “Islam at the crossroads” pg.8)

“The more important factor for the spread of Islam is its (just) religious law (shariah) which was designed to cover all manifestations of life” (Franz Rosenthal, “Political thought in Medieval Islam” pg. 21 Cambridge Press)
The Europeans were no different than the Persian and the Byzantines, They wanted war and to destroy Islam.[/QUOTE]

[eternal_spirit]

What caused the Christian Crusades?

Centuries of Islamic invasions

On this basis Islam started the centuries long war.

c. Dar al-Islam and dar al-harb: the House of Islam and the House of War
The violent injunctions of the Quran and the violent precedents set by Muhammad set the tone for the Islamic view of politics and of world history. Islamic scholarship divides the world into two spheres of influence, the House of Islam (dar al-Islam) and the House of War (dar al-harb). Islam means submission, and so the House of Islam includes those nations that have submitted to Islamic rule, which is to say those nations ruled by Sharia law. The rest of the world, which has not accepted Sharia law and so is not in a state of submission, exists in a state of rebellion or war with the will of Allah. It is incumbent on dar al-Islam to make war upon dar al-harb until such time that all nations submit to the will of Allah and accept Sharia law. Islam's message to the non-Muslim world is the same now as it was in the time of Muhammad and throughout history: submit or be conquered. The only times since Muhammad when dar al-Islam was not actively at war with dar al-harb were when the Muslim world was too weak or divided to make war effectively.
But the lulls in the ongoing war that the House of Islam has declared against the House of War do not indicate a forsaking of jihad as a principle but reflect a change in strategic factors. It is acceptable for Muslim nations to declare hudna, or truce, at times when the infidel nations are too powerful for open warfare to make sense. Jihad is not a collective suicide pact even while "killing and being killed" (Sura 9:111) is encouraged on an individual level. For the past few hundred years, the Muslim world has been too politically fragmented and technologically inferior to pose a major threat to the West. But that is changing.
i. Taqiyya -- Religious Deception
Due to the state of war between dar al-Islam and dar al-harb, reuses de guerre, i.e., systematic lying to the infidel, must be considered part and parcel of Islamic tactics. The parroting by Muslim organizations throughout dar al-harb that "Islam is a religion of peace," or that the origins of Muslim violence lie in the unbalanced psyches of particular individual "fanatics," must be considered as disinformation intended to induce the infidel world to let down its guard. Of course, individual Muslims may genuinely regard their religion as "peaceful" -- but only insofar as they are ignorant of its true teachings, or in the sense of the Egyptian theorist Sayyid Qutb, who posited in his Islam and Universal Peace that true peace would prevail in the world just as soon as Islam had conquered it.
A telling point is that, while Muslims who present their religion as peaceful abound throughout dar al-harb, they are nearly non-existent in dar al-Islam. A Muslim apostate once suggested to me a litmus test for Westerners who believe that Islam is a religion of "peace" and "tolerance": try making that point on a street corner in Ramallah, or Riyadh, or Islamabad, or anywhere in the Muslim world. He assured me you wouldn't live five minutes.{A} problem concerning law and order {with respect to Muslims in dar al-harb} arises from an ancient Islamic legal principle -- that of taqiyya, a word the root meaning of which is "to remain faithful" but which in effect means "dissimulation." It has full Quranic authority (3:28 and 16:106) and allows the Muslim to conform outwardly to the requirements of unislamic or non-Islamic government, while inwardly "remaining faithful" to whatever he conceives to be proper Islam, while waiting for the tide to turn. (Hiskett, Some to Mecca Turn to Pray, 101.) Volume 4, Book 52, Number 269; Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "War is deceit."
Historically, examples of taqiyya include permission to renounce Islam itself in order to save one's neck or ingratiate oneself with an enemy. It is not hard to see that the implications of taqiyya are insidious in the extreme: they essentially render negotiated settlement -- and, indeed, all veracious communication between dar al-Islam and dar al-harb -- impossible. It should not, however, be surprising that a party to a war should seek to mislead the other about its means and intentions. Jihad Watch's own Hugh Fitzgerald sums up taqiyya and kitman, a related form of deception."Taqiyya" is the religiously-sanctioned doctrine, with its origins in Shi'a Islam but now practiced by non-Shi'a as well, of deliberate dissimulation about religious matters that may be undertaken to protect Islam, and the Believers. A related term, of broader application, is "kitman," which is defined as "mental reservation." An example of "Taqiyya" would be the insistence of a Muslim apologist that "of course" there is freedom of conscience in Islam, and then quoting that Qur'anic verse -- "There shall be no compulsion in religion." {2:256} But the impression given will be false, for there has been no mention of the Muslim doctrine of abrogation, or naskh, whereby such an early verse as that about "no compulsion in religion" has been cancelled out by later, far more intolerant and malevolent verses. In any case, history shows that within Islam there is, and always has been, "compulsion in religion" for Muslims, and for non-Muslims. "Kitman" is close to "taqiyya," but rather than outright dissimulation, it consists in telling only a part of the truth, with "mental reservation" justifying the omission of the rest. One example may suffice. When a Muslim maintains that "jihad" really means "a spiritual struggle," and fails to add that this definition is a recent one in Islam (little more than a century old), he misleads by holding back, and is practicing "kitman." When he adduces, in support of this doubtful proposition, the hadith in which Muhammad, returning home from one of his many battles, is reported to have said (as known from a chain of transmitters, or isnad), that he had returned from "the Lesser Jihad to the Greater Jihad" and does not add what he also knows to be true, that this is a "weak" hadith, regarded by the most-respected muhaddithin as of doubtful authenticity, he is further practicing "kitman."
In times when the greater strength of dar al-harb necessitates that the jihad take an indirect approach, the natural attitude of a Muslim to the infidel world must be one of deception and omission. Revealing frankly the ultimate goal of dar al-Islam to conquer and plunder dar al-harb when the latter holds the military trump cards would be strategic idiocy. Fortunately for the jihadists, most infidels do not understand how one is to read the Quran, nor do they trouble themselves to find out what Muhammad actually did and taught, which makes it easy to give the impression through selective quotations and omissions that "Islam is a religion of peace." Any infidel who wants to believe such fiction will happily persist in his mistake having been cited a handful of Meccan verses and told that Muhammad was a man of great piety and charity. Digging only slightly deeper is sufficient to dispel the falsehood.
d. Jihad Through History
In 622 AD (year one in the Islamic calendar, AH 1), Muhammad abandoned Mecca for the city of Medina (Yathrib) some 200 farther north in the Arabian peninsula. In Medina, Muhammad established a paramilitary organization that would spread his influence and that of his religion throughout Arabia. Because there has never been a separation of the political-military and the religious in Islam, this development was entirely natural by Islamic principles. By the time of his death in 632 AD, Muhammad had extended his control in a series of raids and battles over most of southern Arabia. The conquered populations of these areas either had to submit to Muslim rule and pay a protection tax or convert to Islam.
i. The First Major Wave of Jihad: the Arabs, 622-750 AD
Near the end of his life, Muhammad sent letters to the great empires of the Middle East demanding their submission to his authority. This dispels any notion that the Prophet intended Islam's expansion to stop with Arabia. Indeed, it is only logical that the one true religion, revealed by the final and fullest prophet, should have universal sway. Thus, as Muhammad had fought and subdued the peoples of the Arabian peninsula, his successors Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali (known as "the four rightly-guided Caliphs") and other Caliphs fought and subdued the people of the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and Europe in the name of Allah.Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386; Narrated Jubair bin Haiya: Umar {the second Caliph} sent the Muslims to the great countries to fight the pagans. ? When we reached the land of the enemy, the representative of Khosrau {Persia} came out with forty-thousand warriors, and an interpreter got up saying, "Let one of you talk to me!" Al-Mughira replied, ? "Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says: "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."Unleashing upon the world the blitzkrieg of its day, Islam rapidly spread into the territories of Byzantium, Persia, and Western Europe in the decades after Muhammad's death. The creaking Byzantine and Persian powers, having battled each other into mutual decline, offered little resistance to this unanticipated onslaught. The Arab Muslim armies charged into the Holy Land, conquered what is now Iraq and Iran, then swept west across North Africa, into Spain, and finally into France. The Muslim offensive was finally halted in the West at the Battle of Poitiers/Tours, not far from Paris, in 732 AD. In the east, the jihad penetrated deep into Central Asia.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/Arab%20Wave.jpg As Muhammad had plundered his foes, so his successors also stripped the conquered areas -- incomparably richer both materially and culturally than the desolate sands of Arabia -- of their wealth and manpower. Almost overnight, the more advanced civilizations of the Middle East, North Africa, Persia, and Iberia saw their agriculture, native religions, and populations destroyed or plundered. Save for a handful of walled cities that managed to negotiate conditional surrenders, the catastrophes those lands suffered were very nearly complete.
Bat Ye'or, the leading scholar of Islam's expansion and its treatment of non-Muslims, has provided an inestimable service through the compilation and translation of numerous primary source documents describing centuries of Islamic conquest. She includes these documents in her works on Islamic history and the plight of non-Muslims under Islamic rule. In the history of jihad, the slaughter of civilians, the desecration of churches, and the plundering of the countryside are commonplace. Here is Michael the Syrian's account of the Muslim invasion of Cappodocia (southern Turkey) in 650 AD under Caliph Umar:... when Muawiya {the Muslim commander} arrived {in Euchaita in Armenia} he ordered all the inhabitants to be put to the sword; he placed guards so that no one escaped. After gathering up all the wealth of the town, they set to torturing the leaders to make them show them things [treasures] that had been hidden. The Taiyaye {Muslim Arabs} led everyone into slavery -- men and women, boys and girls -- and they committed much debauchery in that unfortunate town: they wickedly committed immoralities inside churches. They returned to their country rejoicing. (Michael the Syrian, quoted in Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 276-7.)The following description by the Muslim historian, Ibn al-Athir (1160-1233 AD), of razzias (raiding expeditions) in Northern Spain and France in the eighth and ninth centuries AD, conveys nothing but satisfaction at the extent of the destruction wrought upon the infidels, including noncombatants.In 177 <17 April 793>, Hisham, prince of Spain, sent a large army commanded by Abd al-Malik b. Abd al-Wahid b. Mugith into enemy territory, and which made forays as far as Narbonne and Jaranda . This general first attacked Jaranda where there was an elite Frank garrison; he killed the bravest, destroyed the walls and towers of the town and almost managed to seize it. He then marched on to Narbonne, where he repeated the same actions, then, pushing forward, he trampled underfoot the land of the Cerdagne {near Andorra in the Pyrenees}. For several months he traversed this land in every direction, raping women, killing warriors, destroying fortresses, burning and pillaging everything, driving back the enemy who fled in disorder. He returned safe and sound, dragging behind him God alone knows how much booty. This is one of the most famous expeditions of the Muslims in Spain. In 223 <2 December 837>, Abd ar-Rahman b. al Hakam, sovereign of Spain, sent an army against Alava; it encamped near Hisn al-Gharat, which it besieged; it seized the booty that was found there, killed the inhabitants and withdrew, carrying off women and children as captives. In 231 <6 September 845>, a Muslim army advanced into Galicia on the territory of the infidels, where it pillaged and massacred everyone. In 246 <27 March 860>, Muhammad b. Abd ar-Rahman advanced with many troops and a large military apparatus against the region of Pamplona. He reduced, ruined and ravaged this territory, where he pillaged and sowed death. (Ibn al-Athir, Annals, quoted in Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 281-2.)This first wave of jihad engulfed much of the Byzantine, Visigothic, Frankish, and Persian Empires and left the newborn Islamic Empire controlling territory from Southern France, south through Spain, east across North Africa to India, and north to Russia. Early in the second millennium AD, the Mongol invasion from the east greatly weakened the Islamic Empire and ended Arab predominance therein.
ii. The Second Major Wave of Jihad: the Turks, 1071-1683 AD
Some twenty-five years before the first Crusading army set out from central Europe for the Holy Land, the Turkish (Ottoman) armies began an assault on the Christian Byzantine Empire, which had ruled what is now Turkey since the Roman Empire's capital was moved to Constantinople in 325 AD. At the battle of Manzikert, in 1071, the Christian forces suffered a disastrous defeat, which left much of Anatolia (Turkey) open to invasion. This second wave of jihad was temporarily held up by the invading Latin Armies during the Crusades (see Islam 101 FAQs), but, by the beginning of the 14th century, the Turks were threatening Constantinople and Europe itself.




In the West, Roman Catholic armies were bit by bit forcing Muslim forces down the Iberian peninsula, until, in 1492, they were definitively expelled (the Reconquista). In Eastern Europe, however, Islam continued in the ascendant. One of the most significant engagements between the invading Muslims and the indigenous peoples of the region was the Battle of Kosovo in 1389, where the Turks annihilated a multinational army under the Serbian King, St. Lazar, though their progress into Europe was significantly slowed.



After numerous attempts dating back to the seventh century, Constantinople, the jewel of Eastern Christendom, finally fell in 1453 to the armies of Sultan Mahomet II. Lest one ascribe the atrocities of the first wave of jihad to the "Arabness" of its perpetrators, the Turks showed they were fully capable of living up to the principles of the Quran and the Sunnah. Paul Fregosi in his book Jihad describes the scene following the final assault on Constantinople:Several thousand of the survivors had taken refuge in the cathedral: nobles, servants, ordinary citizens, their wives and children, priests and nuns. They locked the huge doors, prayed, and waited. {Caliph} Mahomet {II} had given the troops free quarter. They raped, of course, the nuns being the first victims, and slaughtered. At least four thousand were killed before Mahomet stopped the massacre at noon. He ordered a muezzin {one who issues the call to prayer} to climb into the pulpit of St. Sophia and dedicate the building to Allah. It has remained a mosque ever since. Fifty thousand of the inhabitants, more than half the population, were rounded up and taken away as slaves. For months afterward, slaves were the cheapest commodity in the markets of Turkey. Mahomet asked that the body of the dead emperor be brought to him. Some Turkish soldiers found it in a pile of corpses and recognized Constantine {XI} by the golden eagles embroidered on his boots. The sultan ordered his head to be cut off and placed between the horse's legs under the equestrian bronze statue of the emperor Justinian. The head was later embalmed and sent around the chief cities of the Ottoman empire for the delectation of the citizens. Next, Mahomet ordered the Grand Duke Notaras, who had survived, be brought before him, asked him for the names and addresses of all the leading nobles, officials, and citizens, which Notaras gave him. He had them all arrested and decapitated. He sadistically bought from their owners {i.e., Muslim commanders} high-ranking prisoners who had been enslaved, for the pleasure of having them beheaded in front of him. (Fregosi, Jihad, 256-7.)http://www.jihadwatch.org/Turkish%20Wave.jpg This second, Turkish wave of jihad reached its farthest extent at the failed sieges of Vienna in 1529 and 1683, where in the latter instance the Muslim army under Kara Mustapha was thrown back by the Roman Catholics under the command of the Polish King, John Sobieski. In the decades that followed, the Ottomans were driven back down through the Balkans, though they were never ejected from the European continent entirely. Still, even while the imperial jihad faltered, Muslim land- and sea-borne razzias into Christian territory continued, and Christians were being abducted into slavery from as far away as Ireland into the 19th century.
e. Dhimmitude
Islam's persecution of non-Muslims is in no way limited to jihad, even though that is the basic relationship between the Muslim and non-Muslim world. After the jihad concludes in a given area with the conquest of infidel territory, the dhimma, or treaty of protection, may be granted to the conquered "People of the Book" -- historically, Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians. The dhimma provides that the life and property of the infidel are exempted from jihad for as long as the Muslim rulers permit, which has generally meant for as long as the subject non-Muslims -- the dhimmi -- prove economically useful to the Islamic state. The Quran spells out the payment of the jizya (poll- or head-tax; Sura 9:29), which is the most conspicuous means by which the Muslim overlords exploit the dhimmi. But the jizya is not merely economic in its function; it exists also to humiliate the dhimmi and impress on him the superiority of Islam. Al-Maghili, a fifteenth century Muslim theologian, explains:On the day of payment {of the jizya} they {the dhimmi} shall be assembled in a public place like the suq {place of commerce}. They should be standing there waiting in the lowest and dirtiest place. The acting officials representing the Law shall be placed above them and shall adopt a threatening attitude so that it seems to them, as well as to others, that our object is to degrade them by pretending to take their possessions. They will realize that we are doing them a favor in accepting from them the jizya and letting them go free. (Al-Maghili, quoted in Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 361.)Islamic law codifies various other restrictions on the dhimmi, all of which derive from the Quran and the Sunnah. Several hundred years of Islamic thought on the right treatment of dhimmi peoples is summed up by Al-Damanhuri, a seventeenth century head of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the most prestigious center for learning in the Muslim world:... just as the dhimmis are prohibited from building churches, other things also are prohibited to them. They must not assist an unbeliever against a Muslim ... raise the cross in an Islamic assemblage ... display banners on their own holidays; bear arms ... or keep them in their homes. Should they do anything of the sort, they must be punished, and the arms seized. ... The Companions [of the Prophet] agreed upon these points in order to demonstrate the abasement of the infidel and to protect the weak believer's faith. For if he sees them humbled, he will not be inclined toward their belief, which is not true if he sees them in power, pride, or luxury garb, as all this urges him to esteem them and incline toward them, in view of his own distress and poverty. Yet esteem for the unbeliever is unbelief. (Al-Damanhuri, quoted in Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 382.)The Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian peoples of the Middle East, North Africa, and much of Europe suffered under the oppressive strictures of the dhimma for centuries. The status of these dhimmi peoples is comparable in many ways to that of former slaves in the post-bellum American South. Forbidden to construct houses of worship or repair extant ones, economically crippled by the jizya, socially humiliated, legally discriminated against, and generally kept in a permanent state of weakness and vulnerability by the Muslim overlords, it should not be surprising that their numbers dwindled, in many places to the point of extinction. The generally misunderstood decline of Islamic civilization over the past several centuries is easily explained by the demographic decline of the dhimmi populations, which had provided the principle engines of technical and administrative competence.
Should the dhimmi violate the conditions of the dhimma -- perhaps through practicing his own religion indiscreetly or failing to show adequate deference to a Muslim -- then the jihad resumes. At various times in Islamic history, dhimmi peoples rose above their subjected status, and this was often the occasion for violent reprisals by Muslim populations who believed them to have violated the terms of the dhimma. Medieval Andalusia (Moorish Spain) is often pointed out by Muslim apologists as a kind of multicultural wonderland, in which Jews and Christians were permitted by the Islamic government to rise through the ranks of learning and government administration. What we are not told, however, is that this relaxation of the disabilities resulted in widespread rioting on the part of the Muslim populace that killed hundreds of dhimmis, mainly Jews. By refusing to convert to Islam and straying from the traditional constraints of the dhimma (even at the behest of the Islamic government, which was in need of capable manpower), the dhimmi had implicitly chosen the only other option permitted by the Quran: death.
f. Jihad in the Modern Era
Following its defeat at the walls of Vienna in 1683, Islam entered a period of strategic decline in which it was increasingly dominated by the rising European colonial powers. Due to its material weakness vis-à-vis the West, dar al-Islam was unable to prosecute large-scale military campaigns into infidel territory. The Islamic Empire, then ruled by the Ottoman Turks, was reduced to fending of the increasingly predatory European powers.
In 1856, Western pressure compelled the Ottoman government to suspend the dhimma under which the Empire's non-Muslim subjects labored. This provided hitherto unknown opportunities for social and personal improvement by the former dhimmis, but it also fomented resentment by orthodox Muslims who saw this as a violation of the Sharia and their Allah-given superiority over unbelievers.
By the late 19th century, tensions among the European subjects of the Empire broke out into the open when the Ottoman government massacred 30,000 Bulgarians in 1876 for allegedly rebelling against Ottoman rule. Following Western intervention that resulted in Bulgarian independence, the Ottoman government and its Muslim subjects were increasingly nervous about other non-Muslim groups seeking independence.
It was in this atmosphere that the first stage of the Armenian genocide took place in 1896 with the slaughter of some 250,000 Armenians. Both civilians and military personnel took place in the massacres. Peter Balakian, in his book, The Burning Tigris, documents the whole horrific story. But the massacres of the 1890s were only the prelude to the much larger holocaust of 1915, which claimed some 1.5 million lives. While various factors contributed to the slaughter, there is no mistaking that the massacres were nothing other than a jihad waged against the Armenians, no longer protected as they were by the dhimma. In 1914, as the Ottoman Empire entered World War I on the side of the central powers, an official anti-Christian jihad was proclaimed.To promote the idea of jihad, the sheikh-ul-Islam's {the most senior religious leader in the Ottoman Empire} published proclamation summoned the Muslim world to arise and massacre its Christian oppressors. "Oh Moslems," the document read, "Ye who are smitten with happiness and are on the verge of sacrificing your life and your good for the cause of right, and of braving perils, gather now around the Imperial throne." In the Ikdam, the Turkish newspaper that had just passed into German ownership, the idea of jihad was underscored: "The deeds of our enemies have brought down the wrath of God. A gleam of hope has appeared. All Mohammedans, young and old, men, women, and children must fulfill their duty. ... If we do it, the deliverance of the subjected Mohammedan kingdoms is assured." ... "He who kills even one unbeliever," one pamphlet read, "of those who rule over us, whether he does it secretly or openly, shall be rewarded by God." (quoted in Balakian, The Burning Tigris, 169-70.)The anti-Christian jihad culminated in 1922 at Smyrna, on the Mediterranean coast, where 150,000 Greek Christians were massacred by the Turkish army under the indifferent eye of Allied warships. All in, from 1896-1923, some 2.5 million Christians were killed, the first modern genocide, which to this day is denied by the Turkish government.
Since the breakup of the Islamic Empire following World War I, various jihads have been fought around the globe by the independent Muslim nations and sub-state jihadist groups. The most sustained effort has been directed against Israel, which has committed the unpardonable sin of rebuilding dar al-harb on land formerly a part of dar al-Islam. Other prominent jihads include that fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan, the Muslim Bosnians against the Serbs in the former Yugoslavia, the Muslim Albanians against the Serbs in Kosovo, and the Chechens against the Russians in the Caucasus. Jihads have also been waged throughout northern Africa, the Philippines, Thailand, Kashmir, and a host of other places throughout the world.
The fact is, the percentage of conflicts in the world today that do not include Islam is pretty small. Islam is making a comeback.




http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101.html

[lawliet]

This is called "Lie" not "proof"
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=106582
This is about Aisha

And for your "Proof":


The Europeans were no different than the Persian and the Byzantines, They wanted war and to destroy Islam.

Wow you are pretty stupid, you do know that Islam is forced on people in allot of Islamic counteries don't you? there is your proof, Islam does not allow freedom nor choise.

Also persians were more civilized than your barbarian pedhophile Warlord Muhammed. Cyrus the Great made the first decleration of human rights, what did muhammed do to help humanity? create Islam, Islam was fought because it is EVIL.

[lawliet]

What caused the Christian Crusades?

Centuries of Islamic invasions

On this basis Islam started the centuries long war.

c. Dar al-Islam and dar al-harb: the House of Islam and the House of War
The violent injunctions of the Quran and the violent precedents set by Muhammad set the tone for the Islamic view of politics and of world history. Islamic scholarship divides the world into two spheres of influence, the House of Islam (dar al-Islam) and the House of War (dar al-harb). Islam means submission, and so the House of Islam includes those nations that have submitted to Islamic rule, which is to say those nations ruled by Sharia law. The rest of the world, which has not accepted Sharia law and so is not in a state of submission, exists in a state of rebellion or war with the will of Allah. It is incumbent on dar al-Islam to make war upon dar al-harb until such time that all nations submit to the will of Allah and accept Sharia law. Islam's message to the non-Muslim world is the same now as it was in the time of Muhammad and throughout history: submit or be conquered. The only times since Muhammad when dar al-Islam was not actively at war with dar al-harb were when the Muslim world was too weak or divided to make war effectively.
But the lulls in the ongoing war that the House of Islam has declared against the House of War do not indicate a forsaking of jihad as a principle but reflect a change in strategic factors. It is acceptable for Muslim nations to declare hudna, or truce, at times when the infidel nations are too powerful for open warfare to make sense. Jihad is not a collective suicide pact even while "killing and being killed" (Sura 9:111) is encouraged on an individual level. For the past few hundred years, the Muslim world has been too politically fragmented and technologically inferior to pose a major threat to the West. But that is changing.
i. Taqiyya -- Religious Deception
Due to the state of war between dar al-Islam and dar al-harb, reuses de guerre, i.e., systematic lying to the infidel, must be considered part and parcel of Islamic tactics. The parroting by Muslim organizations throughout dar al-harb that "Islam is a religion of peace," or that the origins of Muslim violence lie in the unbalanced psyches of particular individual "fanatics," must be considered as disinformation intended to induce the infidel world to let down its guard. Of course, individual Muslims may genuinely regard their religion as "peaceful" -- but only insofar as they are ignorant of its true teachings, or in the sense of the Egyptian theorist Sayyid Qutb, who posited in his Islam and Universal Peace that true peace would prevail in the world just as soon as Islam had conquered it.
A telling point is that, while Muslims who present their religion as peaceful abound throughout dar al-harb, they are nearly non-existent in dar al-Islam. A Muslim apostate once suggested to me a litmus test for Westerners who believe that Islam is a religion of "peace" and "tolerance": try making that point on a street corner in Ramallah, or Riyadh, or Islamabad, or anywhere in the Muslim world. He assured me you wouldn't live five minutes.{A} problem concerning law and order {with respect to Muslims in dar al-harb} arises from an ancient Islamic legal principle -- that of taqiyya, a word the root meaning of which is "to remain faithful" but which in effect means "dissimulation." It has full Quranic authority (3:28 and 16:106) and allows the Muslim to conform outwardly to the requirements of unislamic or non-Islamic government, while inwardly "remaining faithful" to whatever he conceives to be proper Islam, while waiting for the tide to turn. (Hiskett, Some to Mecca Turn to Pray, 101.) Volume 4, Book 52, Number 269; Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: The Prophet said, "War is deceit."
Historically, examples of taqiyya include permission to renounce Islam itself in order to save one's neck or ingratiate oneself with an enemy. It is not hard to see that the implications of taqiyya are insidious in the extreme: they essentially render negotiated settlement -- and, indeed, all veracious communication between dar al-Islam and dar al-harb -- impossible. It should not, however, be surprising that a party to a war should seek to mislead the other about its means and intentions. Jihad Watch's own Hugh Fitzgerald sums up taqiyya and kitman, a related form of deception."Taqiyya" is the religiously-sanctioned doctrine, with its origins in Shi'a Islam but now practiced by non-Shi'a as well, of deliberate dissimulation about religious matters that may be undertaken to protect Islam, and the Believers. A related term, of broader application, is "kitman," which is defined as "mental reservation." An example of "Taqiyya" would be the insistence of a Muslim apologist that "of course" there is freedom of conscience in Islam, and then quoting that Qur'anic verse -- "There shall be no compulsion in religion." {2:256} But the impression given will be false, for there has been no mention of the Muslim doctrine of abrogation, or naskh, whereby such an early verse as that about "no compulsion in religion" has been cancelled out by later, far more intolerant and malevolent verses. In any case, history shows that within Islam there is, and always has been, "compulsion in religion" for Muslims, and for non-Muslims. "Kitman" is close to "taqiyya," but rather than outright dissimulation, it consists in telling only a part of the truth, with "mental reservation" justifying the omission of the rest. One example may suffice. When a Muslim maintains that "jihad" really means "a spiritual struggle," and fails to add that this definition is a recent one in Islam (little more than a century old), he misleads by holding back, and is practicing "kitman." When he adduces, in support of this doubtful proposition, the hadith in which Muhammad, returning home from one of his many battles, is reported to have said (as known from a chain of transmitters, or isnad), that he had returned from "the Lesser Jihad to the Greater Jihad" and does not add what he also knows to be true, that this is a "weak" hadith, regarded by the most-respected muhaddithin as of doubtful authenticity, he is further practicing "kitman."
In times when the greater strength of dar al-harb necessitates that the jihad take an indirect approach, the natural attitude of a Muslim to the infidel world must be one of deception and omission. Revealing frankly the ultimate goal of dar al-Islam to conquer and plunder dar al-harb when the latter holds the military trump cards would be strategic idiocy. Fortunately for the jihadists, most infidels do not understand how one is to read the Quran, nor do they trouble themselves to find out what Muhammad actually did and taught, which makes it easy to give the impression through selective quotations and omissions that "Islam is a religion of peace." Any infidel who wants to believe such fiction will happily persist in his mistake having been cited a handful of Meccan verses and told that Muhammad was a man of great piety and charity. Digging only slightly deeper is sufficient to dispel the falsehood.
d. Jihad Through History
In 622 AD (year one in the Islamic calendar, AH 1), Muhammad abandoned Mecca for the city of Medina (Yathrib) some 200 farther north in the Arabian peninsula. In Medina, Muhammad established a paramilitary organization that would spread his influence and that of his religion throughout Arabia. Because there has never been a separation of the political-military and the religious in Islam, this development was entirely natural by Islamic principles. By the time of his death in 632 AD, Muhammad had extended his control in a series of raids and battles over most of southern Arabia. The conquered populations of these areas either had to submit to Muslim rule and pay a protection tax or convert to Islam.
i. The First Major Wave of Jihad: the Arabs, 622-750 AD
Near the end of his life, Muhammad sent letters to the great empires of the Middle East demanding their submission to his authority. This dispels any notion that the Prophet intended Islam's expansion to stop with Arabia. Indeed, it is only logical that the one true religion, revealed by the final and fullest prophet, should have universal sway. Thus, as Muhammad had fought and subdued the peoples of the Arabian peninsula, his successors Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali (known as "the four rightly-guided Caliphs") and other Caliphs fought and subdued the people of the Middle East, Africa, Asia, and Europe in the name of Allah.Volume 4, Book 53, Number 386; Narrated Jubair bin Haiya: Umar {the second Caliph} sent the Muslims to the great countries to fight the pagans. ? When we reached the land of the enemy, the representative of Khosrau {Persia} came out with forty-thousand warriors, and an interpreter got up saying, "Let one of you talk to me!" Al-Mughira replied, ? "Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah Alone or give Jizya (i.e. tribute); and our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says: "Whoever amongst us is killed (i.e. martyred), shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever amongst us remain alive, shall become your master."Unleashing upon the world the blitzkrieg of its day, Islam rapidly spread into the territories of Byzantium, Persia, and Western Europe in the decades after Muhammad's death. The creaking Byzantine and Persian powers, having battled each other into mutual decline, offered little resistance to this unanticipated onslaught. The Arab Muslim armies charged into the Holy Land, conquered what is now Iraq and Iran, then swept west across North Africa, into Spain, and finally into France. The Muslim offensive was finally halted in the West at the Battle of Poitiers/Tours, not far from Paris, in 732 AD. In the east, the jihad penetrated deep into Central Asia.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/Arab%20Wave.jpg As Muhammad had plundered his foes, so his successors also stripped the conquered areas -- incomparably richer both materially and culturally than the desolate sands of Arabia -- of their wealth and manpower. Almost overnight, the more advanced civilizations of the Middle East, North Africa, Persia, and Iberia saw their agriculture, native religions, and populations destroyed or plundered. Save for a handful of walled cities that managed to negotiate conditional surrenders, the catastrophes those lands suffered were very nearly complete.
Bat Ye'or, the leading scholar of Islam's expansion and its treatment of non-Muslims, has provided an inestimable service through the compilation and translation of numerous primary source documents describing centuries of Islamic conquest. She includes these documents in her works on Islamic history and the plight of non-Muslims under Islamic rule. In the history of jihad, the slaughter of civilians, the desecration of churches, and the plundering of the countryside are commonplace. Here is Michael the Syrian's account of the Muslim invasion of Cappodocia (southern Turkey) in 650 AD under Caliph Umar:... when Muawiya {the Muslim commander} arrived {in Euchaita in Armenia} he ordered all the inhabitants to be put to the sword; he placed guards so that no one escaped. After gathering up all the wealth of the town, they set to torturing the leaders to make them show them things [treasures] that had been hidden. The Taiyaye {Muslim Arabs} led everyone into slavery -- men and women, boys and girls -- and they committed much debauchery in that unfortunate town: they wickedly committed immoralities inside churches. They returned to their country rejoicing. (Michael the Syrian, quoted in Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 276-7.)The following description by the Muslim historian, Ibn al-Athir (1160-1233 AD), of razzias (raiding expeditions) in Northern Spain and France in the eighth and ninth centuries AD, conveys nothing but satisfaction at the extent of the destruction wrought upon the infidels, including noncombatants.In 177 <17 April 793>, Hisham, prince of Spain, sent a large army commanded by Abd al-Malik b. Abd al-Wahid b. Mugith into enemy territory, and which made forays as far as Narbonne and Jaranda . This general first attacked Jaranda where there was an elite Frank garrison; he killed the bravest, destroyed the walls and towers of the town and almost managed to seize it. He then marched on to Narbonne, where he repeated the same actions, then, pushing forward, he trampled underfoot the land of the Cerdagne {near Andorra in the Pyrenees}. For several months he traversed this land in every direction, raping women, killing warriors, destroying fortresses, burning and pillaging everything, driving back the enemy who fled in disorder. He returned safe and sound, dragging behind him God alone knows how much booty. This is one of the most famous expeditions of the Muslims in Spain. In 223 <2 December 837>, Abd ar-Rahman b. al Hakam, sovereign of Spain, sent an army against Alava; it encamped near Hisn al-Gharat, which it besieged; it seized the booty that was found there, killed the inhabitants and withdrew, carrying off women and children as captives. In 231 <6 September 845>, a Muslim army advanced into Galicia on the territory of the infidels, where it pillaged and massacred everyone. In 246 <27 March 860>, Muhammad b. Abd ar-Rahman advanced with many troops and a large military apparatus against the region of Pamplona. He reduced, ruined and ravaged this territory, where he pillaged and sowed death. (Ibn al-Athir, Annals, quoted in Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 281-2.)This first wave of jihad engulfed much of the Byzantine, Visigothic, Frankish, and Persian Empires and left the newborn Islamic Empire controlling territory from Southern France, south through Spain, east across North Africa to India, and north to Russia. Early in the second millennium AD, the Mongol invasion from the east greatly weakened the Islamic Empire and ended Arab predominance therein.
ii. The Second Major Wave of Jihad: the Turks, 1071-1683 AD
Some twenty-five years before the first Crusading army set out from central Europe for the Holy Land, the Turkish (Ottoman) armies began an assault on the Christian Byzantine Empire, which had ruled what is now Turkey since the Roman Empire's capital was moved to Constantinople in 325 AD. At the battle of Manzikert, in 1071, the Christian forces suffered a disastrous defeat, which left much of Anatolia (Turkey) open to invasion. This second wave of jihad was temporarily held up by the invading Latin Armies during the Crusades (see Islam 101 FAQs), but, by the beginning of the 14th century, the Turks were threatening Constantinople and Europe itself.




In the West, Roman Catholic armies were bit by bit forcing Muslim forces down the Iberian peninsula, until, in 1492, they were definitively expelled (the Reconquista). In Eastern Europe, however, Islam continued in the ascendant. One of the most significant engagements between the invading Muslims and the indigenous peoples of the region was the Battle of Kosovo in 1389, where the Turks annihilated a multinational army under the Serbian King, St. Lazar, though their progress into Europe was significantly slowed.



After numerous attempts dating back to the seventh century, Constantinople, the jewel of Eastern Christendom, finally fell in 1453 to the armies of Sultan Mahomet II. Lest one ascribe the atrocities of the first wave of jihad to the "Arabness" of its perpetrators, the Turks showed they were fully capable of living up to the principles of the Quran and the Sunnah. Paul Fregosi in his book Jihad describes the scene following the final assault on Constantinople:Several thousand of the survivors had taken refuge in the cathedral: nobles, servants, ordinary citizens, their wives and children, priests and nuns. They locked the huge doors, prayed, and waited. {Caliph} Mahomet {II} had given the troops free quarter. They raped, of course, the nuns being the first victims, and slaughtered. At least four thousand were killed before Mahomet stopped the massacre at noon. He ordered a muezzin {one who issues the call to prayer} to climb into the pulpit of St. Sophia and dedicate the building to Allah. It has remained a mosque ever since. Fifty thousand of the inhabitants, more than half the population, were rounded up and taken away as slaves. For months afterward, slaves were the cheapest commodity in the markets of Turkey. Mahomet asked that the body of the dead emperor be brought to him. Some Turkish soldiers found it in a pile of corpses and recognized Constantine {XI} by the golden eagles embroidered on his boots. The sultan ordered his head to be cut off and placed between the horse's legs under the equestrian bronze statue of the emperor Justinian. The head was later embalmed and sent around the chief cities of the Ottoman empire for the delectation of the citizens. Next, Mahomet ordered the Grand Duke Notaras, who had survived, be brought before him, asked him for the names and addresses of all the leading nobles, officials, and citizens, which Notaras gave him. He had them all arrested and decapitated. He sadistically bought from their owners {i.e., Muslim commanders} high-ranking prisoners who had been enslaved, for the pleasure of having them beheaded in front of him. (Fregosi, Jihad, 256-7.)http://www.jihadwatch.org/Turkish%20Wave.jpg This second, Turkish wave of jihad reached its farthest extent at the failed sieges of Vienna in 1529 and 1683, where in the latter instance the Muslim army under Kara Mustapha was thrown back by the Roman Catholics under the command of the Polish King, John Sobieski. In the decades that followed, the Ottomans were driven back down through the Balkans, though they were never ejected from the European continent entirely. Still, even while the imperial jihad faltered, Muslim land- and sea-borne razzias into Christian territory continued, and Christians were being abducted into slavery from as far away as Ireland into the 19th century.
e. Dhimmitude
Islam's persecution of non-Muslims is in no way limited to jihad, even though that is the basic relationship between the Muslim and non-Muslim world. After the jihad concludes in a given area with the conquest of infidel territory, the dhimma, or treaty of protection, may be granted to the conquered "People of the Book" -- historically, Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians. The dhimma provides that the life and property of the infidel are exempted from jihad for as long as the Muslim rulers permit, which has generally meant for as long as the subject non-Muslims -- the dhimmi -- prove economically useful to the Islamic state. The Quran spells out the payment of the jizya (poll- or head-tax; Sura 9:29), which is the most conspicuous means by which the Muslim overlords exploit the dhimmi. But the jizya is not merely economic in its function; it exists also to humiliate the dhimmi and impress on him the superiority of Islam. Al-Maghili, a fifteenth century Muslim theologian, explains:On the day of payment {of the jizya} they {the dhimmi} shall be assembled in a public place like the suq {place of commerce}. They should be standing there waiting in the lowest and dirtiest place. The acting officials representing the Law shall be placed above them and shall adopt a threatening attitude so that it seems to them, as well as to others, that our object is to degrade them by pretending to take their possessions. They will realize that we are doing them a favor in accepting from them the jizya and letting them go free. (Al-Maghili, quoted in Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 361.)Islamic law codifies various other restrictions on the dhimmi, all of which derive from the Quran and the Sunnah. Several hundred years of Islamic thought on the right treatment of dhimmi peoples is summed up by Al-Damanhuri, a seventeenth century head of Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the most prestigious center for learning in the Muslim world:... just as the dhimmis are prohibited from building churches, other things also are prohibited to them. They must not assist an unbeliever against a Muslim ... raise the cross in an Islamic assemblage ... display banners on their own holidays; bear arms ... or keep them in their homes. Should they do anything of the sort, they must be punished, and the arms seized. ... The Companions [of the Prophet] agreed upon these points in order to demonstrate the abasement of the infidel and to protect the weak believer's faith. For if he sees them humbled, he will not be inclined toward their belief, which is not true if he sees them in power, pride, or luxury garb, as all this urges him to esteem them and incline toward them, in view of his own distress and poverty. Yet esteem for the unbeliever is unbelief. (Al-Damanhuri, quoted in Bat Ye'or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 382.)The Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian peoples of the Middle East, North Africa, and much of Europe suffered under the oppressive strictures of the dhimma for centuries. The status of these dhimmi peoples is comparable in many ways to that of former slaves in the post-bellum American South. Forbidden to construct houses of worship or repair extant ones, economically crippled by the jizya, socially humiliated, legally discriminated against, and generally kept in a permanent state of weakness and vulnerability by the Muslim overlords, it should not be surprising that their numbers dwindled, in many places to the point of extinction. The generally misunderstood decline of Islamic civilization over the past several centuries is easily explained by the demographic decline of the dhimmi populations, which had provided the principle engines of technical and administrative competence.
Should the dhimmi violate the conditions of the dhimma -- perhaps through practicing his own religion indiscreetly or failing to show adequate deference to a Muslim -- then the jihad resumes. At various times in Islamic history, dhimmi peoples rose above their subjected status, and this was often the occasion for violent reprisals by Muslim populations who believed them to have violated the terms of the dhimma. Medieval Andalusia (Moorish Spain) is often pointed out by Muslim apologists as a kind of multicultural wonderland, in which Jews and Christians were permitted by the Islamic government to rise through the ranks of learning and government administration. What we are not told, however, is that this relaxation of the disabilities resulted in widespread rioting on the part of the Muslim populace that killed hundreds of dhimmis, mainly Jews. By refusing to convert to Islam and straying from the traditional constraints of the dhimma (even at the behest of the Islamic government, which was in need of capable manpower), the dhimmi had implicitly chosen the only other option permitted by the Quran: death.
f. Jihad in the Modern Era
Following its defeat at the walls of Vienna in 1683, Islam entered a period of strategic decline in which it was increasingly dominated by the rising European colonial powers. Due to its material weakness vis-à-vis the West, dar al-Islam was unable to prosecute large-scale military campaigns into infidel territory. The Islamic Empire, then ruled by the Ottoman Turks, was reduced to fending of the increasingly predatory European powers.
In 1856, Western pressure compelled the Ottoman government to suspend the dhimma under which the Empire's non-Muslim subjects labored. This provided hitherto unknown opportunities for social and personal improvement by the former dhimmis, but it also fomented resentment by orthodox Muslims who saw this as a violation of the Sharia and their Allah-given superiority over unbelievers.
By the late 19th century, tensions among the European subjects of the Empire broke out into the open when the Ottoman government massacred 30,000 Bulgarians in 1876 for allegedly rebelling against Ottoman rule. Following Western intervention that resulted in Bulgarian independence, the Ottoman government and its Muslim subjects were increasingly nervous about other non-Muslim groups seeking independence.
It was in this atmosphere that the first stage of the Armenian genocide took place in 1896 with the slaughter of some 250,000 Armenians. Both civilians and military personnel took place in the massacres. Peter Balakian, in his book, The Burning Tigris, documents the whole horrific story. But the massacres of the 1890s were only the prelude to the much larger holocaust of 1915, which claimed some 1.5 million lives. While various factors contributed to the slaughter, there is no mistaking that the massacres were nothing other than a jihad waged against the Armenians, no longer protected as they were by the dhimma. In 1914, as the Ottoman Empire entered World War I on the side of the central powers, an official anti-Christian jihad was proclaimed.To promote the idea of jihad, the sheikh-ul-Islam's {the most senior religious leader in the Ottoman Empire} published proclamation summoned the Muslim world to arise and massacre its Christian oppressors. "Oh Moslems," the document read, "Ye who are smitten with happiness and are on the verge of sacrificing your life and your good for the cause of right, and of braving perils, gather now around the Imperial throne." In the Ikdam, the Turkish newspaper that had just passed into German ownership, the idea of jihad was underscored: "The deeds of our enemies have brought down the wrath of God. A gleam of hope has appeared. All Mohammedans, young and old, men, women, and children must fulfill their duty. ... If we do it, the deliverance of the subjected Mohammedan kingdoms is assured." ... "He who kills even one unbeliever," one pamphlet read, "of those who rule over us, whether he does it secretly or openly, shall be rewarded by God." (quoted in Balakian, The Burning Tigris, 169-70.)The anti-Christian jihad culminated in 1922 at Smyrna, on the Mediterranean coast, where 150,000 Greek Christians were massacred by the Turkish army under the indifferent eye of Allied warships. All in, from 1896-1923, some 2.5 million Christians were killed, the first modern genocide, which to this day is denied by the Turkish government.
Since the breakup of the Islamic Empire following World War I, various jihads have been fought around the globe by the independent Muslim nations and sub-state jihadist groups. The most sustained effort has been directed against Israel, which has committed the unpardonable sin of rebuilding dar al-harb on land formerly a part of dar al-Islam. Other prominent jihads include that fought against the Soviets in Afghanistan, the Muslim Bosnians against the Serbs in the former Yugoslavia, the Muslim Albanians against the Serbs in Kosovo, and the Chechens against the Russians in the Caucasus. Jihads have also been waged throughout northern Africa, the Philippines, Thailand, Kashmir, and a host of other places throughout the world.
The fact is, the percentage of conflicts in the world today that do not include Islam is pretty small. Islam is making a comeback.




http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101.html

Amazing post, very informative! Thanks allot! I am glad Christian Crusaders put those muslim pigs where they belong.

[zarah]

[/COLOR]Proof?

Warlord and Pedophile Sex Lord Muhammed spread Islam by forcing it on the people and killing all who didn't gave in, there is your proof.

You don't have a clue do you?

My brother in law grew up in Iran...(I think you're the person who said they left there when they were 9) and his recollections are entirely different to yours. I wonder why...

[zarah]

Amazing post, very informative! Thanks allot! I am glad Christian Crusaders put those muslim pigs where they belong.

Are you stupid? I mean that in all seriousness.

Have an opinion by all means, but do a modicom of research first.

[phoenikaa]

I must say that so much of the negativity that has been written in this thread is a very twisted distortion of the actual truth. Also, many a times confusion has been placed by mentioning some actions of a cultural people and then it being concluded as coming from Islam, when that couldn't be further from the truth. This thread is definitely not a place for researchers and seekers for the truth.

[01cobravortech]

How dare anyone criticize the religion of peace!

[lawliet]

[/COLOR]

You don't have a clue do you?

My brother in law grew up in Iran...(I think you're the person who said they left there when they were 9) and his recollections are entirely different to yours. I wonder why...

He received religion indoctrination thats why, Islam wants to dominate the way people live, all religions are an assault on freedom.

[dragon fang]

Wow you are pretty stupid, you do know that Islam is forced on people in allot of Islamic counteries don't you? there is your proof, Islam does not allow freedom nor choise.

Also persians were more civilized than your barbarian pedhophile Warlord Muhammed. Cyrus the Great made the first decleration of human rights, what did muhammed do to help humanity? create Islam, Islam was fought because it is EVIL.

Stupid is the one who calls others stupid.
Where is the proof?
Persians had slaves who they would torture, The kings were cruel they only wanted power, While the rest of the people were poor the kings and nobles would wear gold and jewels.
And yes Mohammad helped humanity by creating the first human rights.
They didn't fight Islam because it is evil, They just wanted a reason to start a war.

[dragon fang]

How dare anyone criticize the religion of peace!

No, How dare someone put lies on the religion of peace!