Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Political Manipulation / Cover-Ups / False Flags

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-03-2010, 05:26 AM   #1
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default 14 Centuries of War Against European Civilization

http://globalpolitician.com/25885-islam-west

Mr. Fregosi found that his book about the history of Islamic Holy War in Europe from the 7th to the 20th centuries was difficult to get published in the mid-1990s, when publishers had the Salman Rushdie case in fresh memory.
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-03-2010, 02:03 PM   #2
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

There you go have a read, lot's of stuff you never knew about I bet ya,
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-03-2010, 02:19 PM   #3
picha
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,382
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_spirit View Post
There you go have a read, lot's of stuff you never knew about I bet ya,
Look, don't blame the muslims blame Allah. I'm actually starting to think you might actually be an islamophobe.
picha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-03-2010, 02:24 PM   #4
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by picha View Post
Look, don't blame the muslims blame Allah. I'm actually starting to think you might actually be an islamophobe.
What are you suggesting some imaginary being mind controlled Billions of Muslims single handedly for 1400 years...that they have no free will..
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2010, 07:05 PM   #5
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

January 8, 2010 Islam's European Slave Trade


Islam’s European slave trade by Muslim Turks (eg Ottoman) and Tartars: Part G in Islam’s genocidal slavery.


http://www.australianislamistmonitor...=170&Itemid=67

Saturday, 02 January 2010 00:00 Circe


This article concentrates on the slave trade of pe

ople from Eastern Europe, Balkans, and Asia Minor/Byzantium: Remember, Mohammad (allah) demanded jihad/war until all the religion is allah’s—it cannot go away and nor can the associated slavery and dhimmitude. (see comments from 20th century Muslims and others on the ongoing desire for jihad Bostom p 94-104). Both Ottoman Turkey and Shiite Iran openly practised slavery in the 20th century. The last Ottoman sultan had a British captive in his harem, 20th century (Khan p325). Slavery continues throughout the Islamic world today and is brought by Muslims into the west. Europe, Asia Minor, the Balkans etc were initially attacked by Arab Muslims, then Muslim Turks and Tartars attacked central and eastern Europe (11th-15th century), Muslim Tartars attacked Poland and Muscovite Russia (15th-17th century); and Asia Minor was attacked by Seljuk and Ottoman Turks (11th-15thC ) while Persia, Armenia, and Georgia were attacked by many Muslim groups including Shiite Safavids.
From the 11th century, particularly as Arab power was waning, the Turks moved out into the middle-east eg Syria, Palestine and spread through Asia Minor (much of today’s Turkey) to North Africa and into the Balkans/Eastern Europe.

Islamic slavery, destruction, conquest and dhimmitude
Bat Ye’r notes:

“The two waves of Muslim expansion, the Arab from the seventh century and the Turkish from 4 centuries later-are remarkably similar....the great Arab and Turkish conquerors used the same military tactics and the same policies of consolidating Islamic power. This continuity resulted from the fact that the conquests took place within the framework of the common ideology of jihad and the administrative and judicial apparatus of the sharia- a uniformity that defies time, since it adapts itself to diverse lands and peoples, being integrated into the internal coherence of a political theology. In the course of their military operation, the Turks applied to the conquered populations the rules of jihad, which had been structured 4 centuries earlier by the Arabs and enshrined in Islamic sacred law. (Bostom p 60)”


Malik Shah (1072-1092) During his reign the Seljuk Empire comprised Khorezm, Transoxiana, Khorasan, Persia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Irak, Syria and Anatolia.
In Anatolia (Asia Minor/Turkey), the Islamic frontier, during the 11th and 12 th centuries, ‘warriors of Islam’(ghazi) came to fight infidels and obtain booty in the Seljuk and Ottoman Turk jihad campaigns. These groups, including nomadic tribes were champions of Islam, dedicated to fighting the infidels around them.

“the ideal of gaza, holy war. Was an important factor in the foundation and development of the Ottoman state.,....continuous expansion of Dar al-Islam....until they conquered the whole world.” (contemporary Turkish scholar of Ottoman history, Halil Inalcik ...Bostom p 61) “From the very beginning....the Turks tried to consolidate their position by the forcible imposition of Islam. If (the Ottoman historian) Sukrullah is to be believed, those who refused to accept the Moslem faith were slaughtered and their families enslaved. “Where there were bells, Suleiman broke them up and cast them into fires. Where there were churches he destroyed them or converted them into mosques....” (quoted in Bostom p 63-64)

Dervishes worked to spread religious fervour, took part in military acts and were given land and privileges from rulers. The conquest of Asia Minor occurred over 4 centuries. It took the Turks about 2 centuries to conquer the Balkans (today’s Slovenia, Serbia, Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Greece, European part of Turkey, Bosnia-Herzegovina) with incalculable ruin of material goods,


Turkoman Archer
massacre, enslavement, exile, destruction of farming, destruction of trade, depopulation, reduced productivity, and destruction of the normal exchange of knowledge around the Mediterranean and through Christian and Jewish societies, plus colonisation by Muslims---as also occurred in the conquest of Asia Minor. The states of Byzantium, Bulgaria, Serbia...had reached a high level of economic and cultural development before the Muslim attacks. The conquest of the Balkan peoples was disastrous and for centuries trammelled their normal economic and social development (Angelov p 463) Yet it’s described as a blessing for the population (they had the chance to become Muslim) and we are fed lies of ‘peace’ and economic unity. The Turks didn’t have a ‘higher culture’ or better civic organisation—they were semibarbarian tribes bent of pillage and war, enriching themselves with ‘booty.’(estates, slaves, money, jewels) and rendered fanatical by the dogmas of Islam (Angelov p 463, 464, 465)

The conquest of the Balkan Peninsular by the Turks meant not only the massive destruction of productivity, the depopulation of the occupied regions, mass enslavement, and forced colonization, but also the founding of a new feudal system. This feudal system was the continuation, in a subsequent phase of development, of the Osmanli military feudalism that had been created in Asia Minor during the first half of the fourteenth century. In essence, this system did not modify the feudal ties that existed in the Balkan states at the time when they were conquered by the Turks, but compared with them, the system was at an inferior, barbarous level, having as its foundation brutal coercion and terror, since the Muslims had the privilege of resorting with impunity to violence against the Christian population and of subjecting it to unlimited exploitation. (Angelov p 506)


Turkish invasion of Christian lands was a disaster for Balkan peoples
Even a brief look at the date list, part H in the slavery series, shows the violence and oppression by the Muslims!

Byzantine historian Georgius Pachymeres, a contemporary of the events in the 1262-82 invasion north of the meander, (Paphlagonia, Caria in Asia Minor) described the ruination of towns and monasteries, the fleeing population and the conversion of land into a ‘Scythian desert. ’ He notes indiscriminate massacres, large scale enslavement, the merciless crushing of any resistance and the death of the entire male population where people refused to surrender. (Angelov p465, 466)
Other contemporary writers note the same acts of sadism and destruction throughout the conquest by the Turks and indeed on conquered populations until the 20th century. From the beginning of their conquests (ie Asia Minor), the emir’s family and clan/military leaders became the owners of vast tracts of land, slaves, towns and villages. The system of military fiefs (timaris) was developed. Some soldiers received land but had to remain in the military. Most however went to the rulers and military leaders.- one fifth went to the state/sultan just as Mohammad took a fifth for himself from the plunder and enslavement carried out by his crew. (The Koran demanded that Mohammad got a fifth even if he wasn’t actually in the raid –how convenient!!)

The incessant military campaigns fulfilled the desires of all to spread Islam and gain their just rewards of slaves and land. In depopulated areas, ‘slaves’ replaced local inhabitants in all areas of work/labour, and served in households and harems. Selling slaves enabled the seller to purchase precious objects from elsewhere.

Georgios Pachymeris 1242-c. 1310 one of the most important of the later Byzantine writers
Slaves were a source of ‘wealth’ for soldiers encouraging further conquest. The 14th century Ottoman state had only a rudimentary economy with underdeveloped commerce and trades and money was rare. (Angelov p 485-487). Enslavement served to weaken nations as populations were depleted and moved. Mass enslavements are documented.

The remaining populations were severely exploited peasants who laboured for others and were subjected to excessive taxes and fines. Similarly artisans were needed so, despite the routine massacres and deportations, the military was used to stop people fleeing and force them to remain.(Angelov p 470-471). The feudal class of Turks learnt they needed to keep the peasants to benefit from their surplus value and become wealthy. Muslim Turks ruled but were a minority population particularly in the Balkans where most of the population remained Christian. Allowing people to remain Christian was not ‘kindness’or ‘tolerance’, it was a practical and economic necessity as the non-Muslim population could be charged higher taxes ( the humiliating jizya or poll tax is more than the zakat –Durie p 169-178), extra fines and charges etc plus, any sign of rebellion could be met with death for the community or enslavement or forced mass movement or taking more children. Hence ordinary people lived in fear and were reduced to a servile, destitute state without the means to resist under the repressive dhimmi laws while wealth went to their Muslim overlords and their agents. (see articles on dhimmitude laws this site)



Battle of Kosovo 1389 - The battle of Kosovo was an important victory for the Ottomans. While losses were substantial, with both armies being virtually destroyed. on both sides and both sides lost their leaders, the Ottomans were able to easily field another army of equal or greater size, whereas Serbia could not.


Only during the brief period (1402-1413) of problems in the Turkish state did the Ottomans slow their enslavement but following 1413, taking slaves returned with a vengeance. (Angelov p 490). Eg 7,000 from Thessalonika in 1430 (Bulgaru p 567) In 1438, 60,000 Serbs were enslaved and taken to Anatolia (Sookhdeo p 268). Sources suggest that in the few years between 1436-1442, some 400,000 people were seized in the Balkans. Many of the captives died in forced marches towards Anatolia (Turkey) (Sookhdeo p 268). Contemporary chronicles note that the Ottomans reduced masses of the inhabitants of Greece, Romania, and the Balkans to slavery eg from Moree (1460)-70,000 and Transylvania (1438) - 60,000-70,000 and 300,000-600,000 from Hungary and 10,000 from Mytilene/Mitilini on Lesbos island (1462) (Bulgaru p 567) and so it continued (see timeline part H)!
The vicious destruction of Constantinople in 1453 shows the religious zeal of the Muslims, their hatred of Christians, massacres, destruction and pillage and of course, the enslavement of 50,000-60,000 people! (see part H for details
Slave trading centres existed in many areas eg the Turkish state (Adrianople/Edirne) and Balkan Peninsula, Crete, Cyprus, Catalogna, Syria and Italy eg Ancona. Slaves were shackled, marched and any lagging behind were killed (Bulgaru p 568)
Jobs for slaves:
Lovely boys and girls plus gold and silver objects were shared around as gifts between the sultan and high-ranking civil and military dignitaries (Angelov p 489) Handsome and strong boy slaves were also sent to the barracks to become ‘janissaries.’ Describing the palace of Ottoman ruler Bayezid (1389-1402) in Brousse, historian Dorcas notes:

“there one could find carefully selected boys and girls, with beautiful faces, sweet young boys and girls who shone more brightly than the sun. To what nations did they belong? They were Byzantines, Serbs, Walachians, Albanians, Hungarians, Saxons, Bulgarians, and Latins. Each of them sang songs in his own language, although reluctantly. He himself (the sultan) unceasingly gave himself over to pleasure, to the point of exhaustion, by indulging in debauchery with these boys and girls” (Angelov p 489, Bulgaru p567)
Remember, Mohammad took

The capture and sacking of Constantinople by Turkish troops under Mohammed II, 29th May 1453. The Turkish victory marked the end of the Byzantine Empire.
the pretty girls for himself and to share out to friends (see parts A, B in this series) The writings of the procurator of the court of the sultans (1433-1458) describes the ‘favourite youths,’ Christians and others numbering 400, kept in special conditions and guarded and trained to become the special loyal dignitaries, intimate with the sultan. And of course the harems of young girls..(Angelov p 494). Hence a tiny number of enslaved boys had the chance to become rich by attacking and plundering their own people or others or acting as administrators, providing they remained in the sultan’s intimate circle.


Most slaves laboured-farm work, building, rebuilding, digging, or they entertained or cleaned or served or provided a sexual service –they did everything while their Muslim rulers totally exploited them. An enormous number of slaves flowed from the Crimea, the Balkans, and the steppes of West/central Asia into Islamic markets (Khan p 321, Bostom p 93). White males were often castrated, females bred Muslims.
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2010, 07:08 PM   #6
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

Endless violence: A letter from Pope Eugene IV dated 1442 notes the Tu

The Aurub Bazaar, or Slave Market, Constantinople
rkish conquest of Thrace, Macedonia, Illyria, Albania, Bulgaria, Slavonia and the taking of slaves who were bound in chains, and killed along the way if they could nolonger walk (Angelov p 491) In response to Ottoman attacks on Byzantium, Emperor Manuel II (1391-1425) noted his conversation with a Persian Muslim scholar (dialogue 7, 26 dialogues with a Persian), stating:


Show me just what Mohammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached ...god is not pleased by blood- and not acting reasonably is contrary to god’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not of the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats...to convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any means of threatening a person with death... .(Sookhdeo p 256)
Remember the Muslim violence when Pope Benedict XVI quoted this in a lecture on the relationship between reason and faith, 12/9/2006, Germany. I defy anyone to show me a ‘prophet’ more perverted, sadistic, violent, misogynist, racist or intolerant than Mohammad who slaughtered any who defied him or wanted to leave.
In true Islamic fashion, beheadings were also popular with the Muslim Turks:
In 1396, the Ottoman sultan Bayezid I defeated a force of largely French Christian knights at Nicopolis (Bulgaria) and ordered that the 3000 who surrendered be decapitated:

“The next morning they were paraded before him, naked and in groups of 3 or 4. The mass beheadings began early in the morning and continued through the day”.(Sookhdeo p 158)

Massacre of the Christian prisoners taken an the Battle of Nicopol, in the presence of the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid I. Jean Froissart, Chronicles fol. 255v, Flandres, Bruges 15th Century

In 1499 Sultan Bayezid II after his conquer of Methone (Greece) ordered :
‘the execution of all those who were 10 years or older; and so it happened. They gathered their heads and bodies, put them together, and built a big tower outside the city, which can still be seen nowadays” (Chronicle cited in Bostom p 619)
No, he wasn’t just copying his earlier namesake, both were following the Koran! The Koran sanctions the beheading/throat slitting of infidels eg suras 47.4 (smite their necks) and 8.12 (smite over their necks)
And who can forget that great tale of Mohammad beheading all the males with pubic hair (700-900) (nd one woman) from the last Jewish tribe in Medina after they surrendered to him for the crime of remaining neutral in a battle; plus the usual enslavement of women and children, taking of concubines and property (Ishaq p 464-466).
Armenians were beheaded in the 1894-96 massacres (Bostom p 671).
Religiously sanctified beheading and throat slitting is big in Islam even today! Beheading occurs in the Islamic world now eg Saudi Arabia – where some 121 were beheaded in 2000, 75 in 2001, 50 in 2003 etc (Sookhdeo p 158); hostages have been beheaded and beheadings have also occurred in the west thanks to our Muslim immigrants.

Population transfers
Large-scale deportations and population transfers (surgun) accompanied the jihad campaigns of the Arabs, Seljuk and Ottoman Turks, and Safavides (Iran) (Bostom p 626). The practice removed recalcitrant groups, populated depopulated areas caused by Muslim attacks, and brought Muslims into areas to give support eg Turkmen from eastern Anatolia were moved and used as jihad warriors against Hungary and Austria and they were moved into Cyprus, Greece, and Serbia to help control Christian populations. Muslims were moved into Albania.

Bayezid II

Armenia Christians, Orthodox Christians and Jews were forcibly settled in depopulated Constantinople-centre of Christian learning (taken 1453 –see date list for details) so the city could actually function and be fed. This is claimed as a sign of ‘Islamic tolerance’ and particularly kindness to Jews but don’t ask why Constantinople was depopulated in the first place and don’t enquire too deeply about the actual lives of dhimmitude led by the non-Muslims. We are told they were allowed to live with their own laws under the guidance of their patriarch.....there is no mention of the monumentally repressive dhimmitude laws (see articles on dhimmitude) that totally controlled them or the constant threat of death should they annoy a Muslim or the ban on open expression of their religion. As for the 'patriarchs', they were in effect agents of the Islamic rulers who kept the non-Muslim population under control, stopped rebellion or complaint and extracted the heavy taxes for their Muslim rulers. Hence people were detached from their family, country and history and subjected to total Islamic control and exploitation.


Unending Dhimmitude for the conquered people: (see articles on dhimmitude this site including laws)
Initially in some areas, vassals were used but eventually direct Ottoman rule generally occurred. There were constant battles and uprisings (see date list part H). Conquered people lived under the repression of Islam’s dhimmitude law and this continued into the

The long lines deporting Armenians to the arid deserts of Der el Zor resulted in rapes, infant drownings, slashing of bodies, live in burials, torture, starvation and finally death.
19th (or later) century. Many activities, occupations and trades were forbidden to Christians (Bostom p 66). In Sarajevo in 1794, the Serbian Orthodox church warned people not to sing anywhere as the village was Turk! (Bostom p 68) Efforts by European powers to moderate the abuse of Christians and other non-Muslims, was met with stern resistance (eg 19th century). In Islam, non-Muslims cannot be equals with Muslims.

The Greek revolution of 1821 was the culmination of the resistance to Muslim Ottoman domination which was:
“characterised by economic spoliation, intellectual decay and cultural retrogression........restrictions of all kinds, unlawful taxation, forced labour, persecutions, violence, imprisonment, death, abductions of girls and boys and their confinement to Turkish harems, and various deeds of wantonness and lust.......they defied every sense of human decency...(Vacalopoulos in Bostom p 69-70)
Efforts by European powers to abrogate the Ottoman dhimmi system weren’t implemented in any meaningful way between 1839 and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after WW1. It was noted that Muslim Turkey still regarded others as inferior and the fanaticism of the early days continued. The 1860’s reports by British consuls (pals with Turkey!!) in the Ottoman Empire, reveal the continuing persecution of Christians, massive discrimination and judicial ‘imbalance.’ The Tanzimat reforms (1839-1876) were false eg the repressive, inequitable ‘poll tax’ was simply replaced by a new tax at a higher rate for non-Muslims! (Encyclopaedia Britannica V 13, p 786 which also notes that ‘reforms’ were ‘signed’ at times when Turkey needed European support- see part H). Turkish dhimmi laws may have been revoked on paper at the end of the 19th century, but the religiously supported attitudes and practices remained. The reforms failed because of Islam:
“the intense Muslim feeling which could sometimes burst into an open fanaticism....the innate attitude of superiority..Islam was a way of life......it prescribed man’s relations to man....and was the basis for society, for law and for government. Christians were therefore inevitably considered second-class citizens in the light of religious revelation....summed up in ...KAFIR, which means unbeliever or infidel with emotional and quite uncomplimentary overtones....Familiar association with heathens and infidels is forbidden to the people of Islam......equality was not attained in the Tanzimat p

Delacroix's painting of the massacre at Chios (1822) shows sick, dying Greek civilians about to be slaughtered by the Turks.
eriod (1839-1876) nor after the YoungTurk revolution of 1908.” (Roderick Davidson in Bostom p 73-74)

Any attempt to emancipate the dhimmi people or claim equality resulted in extreme violence with massacres across the Ottoman empire –Turkey, Balkans, middle-East, into Africa eg Bulgarian massacres 1876; Armenian massacres 1894-1896, 1909 and outright genocide during WWI where possibly 1.5 million perished. The Balkan wars of Independence (1912-13) and the defeat in WWI halted Ottoman aggression and dhimmitude for the conquered people (but it begins again today in Turkey!). As far as Muslims are concerned, any non-Muslim who failed to act submissively had no protection for his life, his family, his property etc which all became fair game for Muslims. 19th century Ottoman Grand vizier Mustafa Resid opposed the reforms claiming the complete emancipation of the non-Muslim subjects, appropriately destined to be subjugated and ruled, was entirely contradictory to the 600 year tradition of the Ottoman Empire. He predicted a great massacre if equality was granted to non-Muslims! (quoted in Durie p 159).

In Bosnia (and the Balkans in general) in the 19th century extreme discrimination against Christians remained –the honour, property or lives of Christians weren’t safe and the law didn’t protect Christians (Sookhdeo p 268) In 1804, the Ottoman Janissaries massacred Serbian leaders, the ‘Massacre of the Serbia Knights,’triggering an uprising against Turkish rule.(Durie p 158)
In 1850 - the sultan’s army put down resistance. Serbs and Croats continued under repressive dhimma regulations which were part of state legislation and an integral part of local political and economic conditions (Durie p 185)

1876: Ottomans’ massacre the Bulgarians: Modern Bulgarian historians estimate 30,000 murdered, with 3,000 orphaned children, thousands of Bulgarians imprisoned or exiled and 60-80 villages destroyed and another 200 hundred plundered and 300,000 livestock (cattle, sheep, goats) and countless personal goods taken as ‘booty’ from a defenceless population long exploited during centuries of oppressive Ottoman rule. A 1986 analysis found that the Ottomans seemed aware of the possible uprising and sent a variety of Muslim fighters not only against the rebels but against ordinary, unarmed civilians. Reports (1876) note that girls and women were stripped, gang-raped and usually killed, people were burnt alive, children ‘spitted’ on bayonets, pregnant women ripped open and their unborn baby killed...... (Bostom p 664-666)(see detail with eyewitness reports in date list part H.) An Ottoman fatwa of 1915 –believed to be written by sheikh Shawish—entitled Aljihad (Holy war)-spells out in detail:

http://grendelreport.posterous.com/i...an-slave-trade


Last edited by eternal_spirit; 08-07-2010 at 07:11 PM.
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-07-2010, 07:51 PM   #7
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

Just as the current Islamic regime in Sudan enslaves it's southern Christians, and gives them the choice of "convert or die," the Islamic armies that overran the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe gave their captives the simple choice of conversion, death, or slavery. Two hundred years ago American sailors sailing the Mediterranean faced the same choice when their unprotected ships were captured by the Islamic "Barbary Pirates" of North Africa. In The Jerusalem Quarterly (1987; Vol. 42, Pp. 84-85), the scholar Bat Ye'or described the impact Arab Muslim conquests had on indigenous Jews and Christians of the Middle East: "Muslim chroniclers described the ongoing jihad (holy war), involving the destruction of whole towns, the massacre of large numbers of their populations, the enslavement of women and children, and the confiscation of vast regions. This picture of catastrophe and destruction corresponds to the period of gradual erosion of Palestinian Jewry. According to [the Muslim chronicler] Baladhuri (d. 892 C.E.), 40,000 Jews lived in Caesarea alone at the Arab conquest, after which all trace of them is lost."
The four centuries from 640 and 1240 C.E., she further observes: ".. witnessed the total and definitive destruction of Judaism and Christianity in the Hijaz (modern Saudi Arabia), and the decline of once flourishing Christian and Jewish communities in Palestine (particularly in Galilee for the Jews), Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, and Persia. In North Africa, the Christians had been virtually eliminated by 1240 C.E., and the Jews decimated by Almohad persecutions… notwithstanding some brighter intervals, these six centuries witnessed a dramatic demographic reversal whereby the Arab-Muslim minority developed into a dominant majority, resorting to oppression in order to reduce the indigenous populations to tolerated religious minorities."
After conquering the Middle East and North Africa, Muslim armies turned their attention in 711 AD to Europe, by crossing the Strait of Gibraltar and conquering Spain. A decade later, Abd-er Rahman, the governor of Spain, led an infantry force of 60,000 to 400,000 Islamic soldiers over the Western Pyrenees to France. At the Battle of Poitiers, south of Tours, on October 10, 732, Islamic expansion in the West was stopped by Charles Martel ("The Hammer"), and the Celtic army of the Franks, when Abd-er Rahman was killed.
In the East, the Seljuk Turks defeated the Byzantines at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071, just five years after the invasion of England by the Norman William the Conquerer. At the Council of Clermont in 1095, Pope Urban II laid upon the French the Christian duty to recapture the Holy Land from the Turks, thus initiating the First Crusade. Slavery was declared to be illegal throughout Christianity by the Pope in 1098. At about the same time, Christian armies began a 400 year reconquest of Spain.
A century later, in 1187, Sultan Yusuf ibn Ayyub (Saladin), proclaimed a new Islamic Jihad against Christian Crusaders and recaptured Jerusalem. On July 4, 1187, Saladin (Salah al-Din) completely annihilated the 20,000-man Crusader army at the battle of the Horns of Hattin, driving the Christians from the Holy Land until the 20th century. In 1190 Richard Coeur De Lion ("heart of the lion") joined the Third Crusade, and conquered Cyprus the next year, while en route to Jerusalem. The Crusaders were unable to liberate the Holy Land, but were able to negotiate a truce with Saladin in 1192 which gave Christian pilgrims increased access.
By the early 13th century, most of Anatolia (present-day Turkey) had been conquered by Islamic forces, and in 1291 the Crusaders were completely expelled from Islamic territory. In 1301 the Ottoman Empire, which eventually reached from the Persian Gulf to Vienna, was born when Osman, a Turkish warrior chief, declared himself Sultan.


In the fourteenth century, Eastern Europe was invaded by the Islamic armies of Emir Murad I. They destroyed everything in their path, and forcibly converted or killed all that stood in their way. Of those who refused to convert to Islam, the women were first raped and then sold into slavery, along with their children. The men not killed on the battlefield were castrated and blinded to make them docile slaves. Many Christian cities, along with their inhabitants, were burned to the ground by the invaders. The Turks nailed some 12,000 Serbians to crosses in mockery of their Christian Faith.
The Islamic invasion of Eastern Europe seemed unstoppable until 1389, when they reached the Kosovo Plain, in Serbia. Under the Serbian Prince Lazar, some 77,000 Christian knights and soldiers made a vow to one another and to Christ to die rather than "convert or die" under Islam. Upon hearing of the death of the Prince, a group of knights, outnumbered two hundred to one, charged through the enemy lines to the center of the enemy camp and killed the Emir.
Though they were themselves decimated, the Serbs killed so many Islamic soldiers that the Islamic advance into Europe was halted. This battle is considered by many Christian historians to be the single greatest sacrifice of Christian martyrs killed in a single day. Serbia remained in Muslim hands until the 19th century.
In 1453, after many years of resistance, Constantinople was finally conquered by the Ottoman Empire. Forty years later, in 1492, Islamic forces were finally defeated in Spain by the Christians, with legendary leaders such as "El Cid". Four hundred years of warfare between Muslim and Christian might help explain the Spanish intolerance for religious "heresy" exemplified in the Spanish Inquisition, and their forceable conversion of natives in the New World.

Meanwhile, Islam contined to expand in the East when the Turks, under their leader Suleiman the Magnificent, marched across the Danube River to defeat the Hungarians at the Battle of Mohacs, in 1526. Within three years they were at the gates of Vienna.
In 1529, in his treatise "On War Against the Turk," Martin Luther exhorted the rulers of Europe to put aside their petty rivalries and unite against the threat posed by Islam. He said that self-defense against the Muslim "abomination," who he called "blasphemers against Christ," was a divinely ordained application of the sword.
"Doubtlessly they know better than I how cruelly the Turk treats those whom he takes captive. He treats them like cattle, dragging, towing, driving those that can move, and killing on the spot those that cannot move, whether they are young or old."
Luther's call for unity was answered by an alliance of German, Austrian and Polish forces, which ended the siege of Vienna in 1529, that same year. With the death of Suleiman in 1566, Ottoman expansion ended for a time, until 1683, when they began the second Seige of Vienna. After they had forced a breach in the city walls, they were only able to occupy parts of the city for several weeks before being expelled by an alliance of European forces. Peace was finally established with the Peace of Karlowitz, signed in 1699, which gave the Ottoman Empire Macedonia and the Balkans, and Austria the provinces of Hungary and Transylvania.
Throughout these centuries of conflict between Christian and Muslim, besides the perils of land travel, any Christian Crusader or pilgrim who sailed the Mediterranean to the Middle East risked capture and enslavement by Muslim pirates. Among those captured was St. Vincent de Paul and Miguel de Cervantes, the author of Don Quixote. Both of these famous men, and many lesser ones, were ransomed over the course of centuries by the Roman Catholic Religious Order of Trinitarians.
Pope Innocent III, the founder of city hospitals, established the Order in 1198 as the Ordo de Redemptione Captivorum (Order for the Redemption of Captives). It's members were more generally known as Trinitarians, but they were sometimes called Mathurins, from the name of their first church in Paris. The Order was organized to collect and distrbute funds for the relief and ransom of Christian captives, and originally devoted one third of their income for this purpose.




In 1200 the first ransomed captives arrived from Morocco. The Order spread throughout Southern France, Spain, Italy, England, Saxony, and Hungary, and they eventually became the accredited agents for the ransoming of prisoners.
The Western movement for the abolition of slavery is believed to have grown out of this tradition of Christian charity and ransoming of slaves.
"The Knights Hospitaller, also known as the Knights of St. John, began their occupation of Rhodes in 1309. They began a new identity as the "Knights of Rhodes" and began to engage the Barbary Pirates in naval warfare, as part of their greater war on the Ottoman Empire.
"To protect Rome from Islamic invasion, in 1530 Charles V deeded the island stronghold of Malta to the knights. The newly christened "Knights of Malta" widened their war against the pirates and their Ottoman masters to include the entire Mediterranean. From the 16th century until 1798, Malta served as a bastion defending Europe against the corsairs and pirates of Algeria and Barbary..." By the time of the "Age of Discovery" in the sixteenth century, Hapsburg Spain and the Ottoman Turks were coming into conflict over who would control the Mediterranean. The lure of power, money, and slaves brought many adventurers from around the Mediterranean to the North African coastal towns. One of them, Khair ad Din, known as Barbarossa ("Red Beard"), seized Algiers in 1510, with the stated purpose of protecting it from the Spaniards.

He was subsequently appointed regent over the territory, after recognizing the sovereignty of the Ottoman Sultan over the African coast.
The Barbary Coast of Northern Africa consisted of the four states of Algiers, Morocco, Tripoli, and Tunis. The "Barbary Pirates" had for centuries captured vessels sailing the Atlantic and the Mediterranean. They occasionally raided coastal villages to capture Christian slaves, such as a village in southern Ireland, which was said to have been entirely captured by Muslim raiders.

Earning their living by blackmail, tribute, piracy and slavery, the Barbary Pirates received yearly sums of money, ships, and arms from foreign powers. Those who payed their tribute were allowed to sail unmolested along the Barbary Coast, and trade in the African ports.

Those who did not had their ships seized and their crews held for ransom or sold into slavery. In 1662, England agreed to pay an annual tribute, in return for free passage along the Barbary Coast.
Religion was a factor, just as it is now. The Barbary Pirates were Muslims. Those they preyed upon were exclusively Christians, and if not released through the payment of tribute, faced slavery or worse. Those few who converted to Islam escaped slavery, and were treated as equals. If any Christian dared to blaspheme Allah, he risked being impaled or roasted alive. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, serving at the time as European Ministers, asked the ambassador from Tripoli why his government sanctioned such savagery. He replied that the Koran stated that non-Muslims were "sinners," and Muslims had a "...right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners."
"Contemporary scholars estimate that over 1 million white Christians from France and Italy to Spain, Hol­land, Great Britain, the Americas, and even Iceland were captured between 1500 and 1800. The blood­curdling tales of brutality and horror that awaited Christians unlucky enough to fall victim to the Bar­bary Pirates were widely known, although sometimes wildly exaggerated." Victory in Tripoli: Lessons for the War on Terrorism by Joshua E. London
By the 18th Century, the fearsome reputation of the Barbary Pirates, and self-interest, had led most of the European powers to routinely pay the tribute demanded. The Europeans, who had strong navies, found it easier to pay tribute to the Barbary states than to try to suppress it, since it achieved the strategy of reserving the Mediterranean to those who were wealthy. During the Colonial period, the American colonies, under the protection of Great Britain, developed a prosperous trade throughout the Mediterranean.
For the duration of the War of Independence, American ships sailed under the protection of the 1778 alliance with France, which directed French vessels to protect "American vessels and effects against all violence, insults, attacks, or depredations, on the part of the said Princes and States of Barbary or their subjects." At the conclusion of the war in 1783, American shipping was once more left defenseless, so in 1784 Congress appropriated $80,000 in tribute money to the Barbary states, and directed Jefferson and Adams to begin negotiations.
The first American ship to be captured was the brig Betsey, captured in the Atlantic by Moroccans in 1784. America was a new nation, and the Moroccans had never before seen an American flag. Any Christian ship was assumed to be fair game, however, as it was taken for granted that they were at war with every Christian nation, unless a peace treaty had been signed.
Morocco, however, out of all the Barbary States, had a stable dynasty, with control over the interior, a regular food supply, and extensive Saharan trade routes. As a trading nation, the Emperor of Morocco was willing to negotiate a treaty, and one was signed, freeing the Betsy and her crew after six months of imprisonment. Morocco became the first neutral nation to recognize the United States.
Two ships, the Maria of Boston and the Dauphine of Philadelphia, were captured by Algiers in 1785, and their crews of 21 men enslaved. A ransom of almost $60,000 was demanded by the dey of Algiers, but it would be ten years before the surviving eleven were released.
The nation's first Secretary State, Thomas Jefferson, told Congress it must choose "...between war, tribute and ransom." He believed war was the only reasonable choice, and advocated the creation of a navy. Tribute paid to the pirates was "money thrown away," and the only thing they truely understood was gunpowder and shot. Just as Luther 250 years earlier, Jefferson called for a united military alliance among the European powers, along with America, to blockade North Africa and provide for a military solution against the pirates. Europe chose to continue paying tribute.
"Would to Heaven we had a navy to reform those enemies to mankind, or crush them into non-existence," said George Washington in 1786. Said one American envoy, "There is but one language which can be held to these people, and this is terror."
By 1794, Algiers had captured 11 American vessels and taken over 100 prisoners. In 1795 Congress agreed to their ranson by authorizing a payment of cash, munitions, a 36-gun frigate, and an annual tribute of $21,600 worth of naval supplies. In 1799, agreements were negotiated with Morocco, Algiers, and Tunis. Tripoli agreed not to attack American shipping, in return for an annual tribute of $18,000.
The Barbary Pirates, though discriminating against Christians, were businessmen, much like the Mafia. It was reported that ransom rates were set at a fixed price: $4,000 for a passenger, $1,400 for a cabin boy. In the coastal towns of Salem, Newport, and Boston, the names of those who were captured by the Barbary Pirates were read aloud each Sunday in the churches, just as those who were lost at sea. Most of the ransom had to be raised privately, as Congress was unable or unwilling to pay the full asking price.
By 1800 a new slogan was beginning to appear across the new country, "Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute."
"By 1800, the annual tribute and ransom payments first agreed in the mid-1780s amounted to about $1 million--20% of the federal budget. (For fiscal year 2007, 20 percent of U.S. revenues would equal $560 billion.)" The Colonial War Against Islam
Finally in 1801, with Jefferson as the new President, the country had enough. Three months after Jefferson's inauguation, after refusing to pay Tripoli's demand for immediate payment of $225,000 and an annual payment of $25,000, the Bashaw of Tripoli cut down the flagstaff at the U.S. consulate and declared war. Jefferson ordered the frigates President, Essex, and Philadelphia and the sloop Enterprise, under Commodore Richard Dale, to patrol the North African coast and to bombard Tripoli.
In September, 1803 Captain Edward Preble was given command of the American fleet. He soon convinced the Sultan of Morocco to stop preying on American shipping by sailing the Constitution into the harbor of Tangiers, and pointing the cannon at the Sultan's palace.
On October 31, William Bainbridge, captain of the Philadelphia, attempted to blockade Tripoli, but ran aground on a sandbar two miles offshore in the Bay of Tripoli, while pursuing a Muslim corsair. The crew worked for hours trying to get free of the sandbar, but were unseccessful. Finally, surrounded by smaller craft, and unable to fire effectively because of the tilt of the craft, Bainbridge threw his cannon overboard and surrendered to prevent his crew being slaughtered. The crew of 309 were enslaved and forced to work on the fortifications of Tripoli.
Captain Preble attempted to ranson the crew of the Philadelphia with an offer of $50,000, and then $100,000, but was refused. There was little he could do. The harbor fortress of Derna (Tripoli) was manned by approximately 25,000 soldiers, with 115 cannon. There were 24 Muslim warships guarding the harbor, besides the Philadelphia, which the Muslims had refloated and were rigging for their own use. Preble had 1,060 men under his command, aboard seven ships, of which only the Constitution had heavy guns.
In December, the Captain of the sloop Enterprise, Lt. Stephen Decatur, captured an enemy ketch, a small four-gun vessel which could be rowed. On the night of February 15, 1804, with 74 volunteers disguised as North Africans, he used this captured vessle to slip into Tripoli harbor. Coming alongside the Philadelphia in the dark, and using grappling hooks to draw the ships together, his men used tomahawks to kill twenty Muslim guards, and chased the rest overboard. They then set the ship on fire, and escaped from the harbor unscathed, under bombardment from the harbor fortress.
For this successful operation, Lt. Stephen Decatur, then just 25 years of age, was given promotion to the rank of Captain, the youngest man in U.S. Navel history to be so honored.
On August 3 that same year, Captain Preble and his squadron began a bombardment of Tripoli harbor. In engagements with the enemy, American sailors participated in fierce hand-to-hand fighting, capturing three Barbary gunboats and sinking one. In one engagement, outnumbered three to one, they killed twenty-one pirates and took 15 prisoners. Their commander, Lt. John Trippe, killed the Turkish captain with a pike, after suffering eleven wounds.
The only American casualty during these actions was Captain Decatur's younger brother, James, who was murdered by the captain of a pirate ship, after it had feigned surrender. Decatur challenged the Muslim murderer to a duel, and killed him in what was described as savage hand-to-hand combat.
Over time, Captain Preble and his sqadron returned five times to bombard Tripoli, but because of a lack of manpower, could not make a landing and seize the fortress. His successor, Captain Samuel Barron, commanded the largest fleet to sail under the American flag up to that time: six frigates, seven brigs, and ten gunboats.
William Eaton, an ex-Army officer appointed consul to Tunis in 1798, along with special diplomat James L. Cathcart tried to work out a settlement. They believed that to effect a peace with Tripoli, they needed to reinstate the exiled Hamet Karamanli to the throne. This ruler had been overthrown and exiled by his brother Yusuf. Eaton returned to the states to present their plans to Congress. In 1804, with $20,000 in cash, the brig Argus, and a force of nine men, he returned to the Mediterranean with the new title "Navy Agent to the Barbary States" and permission to carry out his plans.
In 1805, in Alexandria Egypt, he recruited an army of 300 Arab mercenaries, three dozen Greeks, and ten Americans, including eight United States Marines, command by 1st Lt. Presley O'Bannon. On March 8, 1805, they left Alexandria and headed West, marching overland through 500 miles of desert, supported by the Argus offshore. On April 27 they stood before the walls of the fortress of Derna (Tripoli), and Eaton ordered the attack. The U.S.marines and Greek mercenaries charged the walls and managed to take the town, which was the first city in the Old World to be captured by Americans.
Eaton was wounded by a musket ball through the wrist, and two marines and twelve Greeks were causualties. Lieutenant O'Bannon was cited for bravery in the battle for Derna, and presented the "Mameluke" sword, still carried by Marines officers today. This battle is further remembered by the line in the Marine Corp Hymn "From the Halls of Montezuma, To the Shores of Tripoli."
Though Eaton had won the battle and the city, or perhaps because of it, a settlement was negotiated with Yusuf, the ruler of Tripoli, which released all Christian prisoners and ended the practice of seizing ships and taking slaves. The other Barbary coastal cities were not subdued, however. Algiers captured three ships in 1807, and received a ranson of $18,000 for the release of the crews.
For the three years of the War of 1812 (1812-1814) English warships were dominant on the High Seas and the Mediterranean. With the American Navy no longer a threat, the Dey of Algiers announced his new "...policy to increase the number of my American slaves." In August of 1812 Algiers captured the brig Edwin and enslaved its crew, who suffered for three years until the war's end.
Finally, on March 2, 1815, Congress approved action against Algiers, and Commodore Decatur and Commodore Bainbridge were each given command of a naval squadron. Decatur captured the Dey's flagship, along with 486 prisoners, and sent an ultimatum: "Free every slave at once, pay an indemnity of $10,000 to the survivors of the brig Edwin, and cease all demands for tribute forever."
After the conclusion of the Napoleonic wars, which ended in 1815, inspired by America's example, Great Britian and Holland ended their policies of appeasement by bombarding Algier's fleet and fortresses. Franch began it's long colonial relationship with North Africa by conquering Algiers and making Tunis and Morocco protectorates. Italy overthrew the Bashaw of Tripoli and formed the new state of Libya. It was 19th century colonialism that finally put an end to centuries of North African piracy, just as it was the Western nations that finally ended the Slave Trade.
Unfortunately the slave trade, taking of captives for ranson, and terrorism lives on Islamic societies.



http://www.zianet.com/web/barbary.htm

Last edited by eternal_spirit; 08-07-2010 at 07:55 PM.
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 11:37 AM   #8
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

On this basis Islam started the centuries long war. Note the dates First Crusade: 1095

ii. The Second Major Wave of Jihad: MUSLIM 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/Muslim) 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.)
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.

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.
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.

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

MORE HERE
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 11:59 AM   #9
picha
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,382
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_spirit View Post
On this basis Islam started the centuries long war. Note the dates First Crusade: 1095

ii. The Second Major Wave of Jihad: MUSLIM 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/Muslim) 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.)
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.

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.
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.

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

MORE HERE
And to think after all that idiot politicians decided to let millions of them back in again.
picha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 12:34 PM   #10
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by picha View Post
And to think after all that idiot politicians decided to let millions of them back in again.
Sad thing is few know about the history & the bravery of those who fought Islam off.
Or that the Koran/hadiths are a manual on warfare & a plot for world domination.
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 12:54 PM   #11
picha
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,382
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_spirit View Post
Sad thing is few know about the history & the bravery of those who fought Islam off.
Or that the Koran/hadiths are a manual on warfare & a plot for world domination.
It annoys me the way that just because its classified as a religion its seen to be fundamentally good and entitled to be respected when neither is actually true.

Last edited by picha; 07-05-2011 at 12:54 PM.
picha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 01:14 PM   #12
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

History of Jihad against the Italians in Rome & Sicily (812 -1571)

by History of Jihad
15 May, 2007

The fierce struggle of how the Franks, Normans, Venetians and the Knights of Malta doughtily faced the Arabs and the Turkish Jihadis on land and sea, finally defeating them in both theaters..


Many of us would be startled if we are told that in the 9th century, an Arab fleet based in Sicily sailed up the Tiber and occupied and sacked Rome and the Vatican for days together till they were defeated and expelled by the papal militia along with the armies of the Holy Roman empire and Frankish contingents.

This attack was brief, mercifully very brief, but the Arabs could reach Rome - a feat that even Hannibal could not achieve! To be precise the Arab attack took place on August 28, in the year 846 CE when the Arabs arrived at the mouth of the river Tiber and sailed into Rome.
The Arabs did not succeed in entering the fortified inner city of Rome that was defended by the Romans, but the churches of St. Peter and St. Paul, in today’s Vatican that lay outside the fortified boundaries of Rome, were violated by the Arabs. The Pope Leo IV had to briefly flee Rome and appeal for help from the neighboring kingdoms.
______________________________


After the Muslim occupation of Sicily, the Christian resistance began immediately to recapture the island. The Franks tried to take back the island in the 9th century, but failed. By the 11th century, the baton of resistance to the Saracens was taken up by the Normans. The Normans undertook an attempt to liberate Sicily by sending in an expeditionary assault in 1068 with just sixty knights. But with their shock tactics, they gave a stunning blow to the Arab chieftain Ayub ibn Temim at the Battle of Misilmeri (then called by the Arabs Menzil el Emir), outside Palermo.
__________________________________

In response to the Papal plea for help, an army started the descent by land from Civitavecchia in direction of Rome. Another army began the march from Portus and Ostia.
Uselessly Saxons, Longobards, Frisians and Franks defended St. Peter up to the last man. The Arabs brought away all the treasures of St. Peter, they tore the silver leaves of the doors, the gold foils of the floor of the confession, devastated the bronzy crypt of the apostle, took the gold cross that stood on the grave of Peter. They laid waste all the churches of the district Suburb.
The marquis Guy of Spoleto, arrived to help Rome, and with small band of bravehearts succeeded in defeating the Arabs who withdrew partly towards Civitavecchia and partly towards Fondi, following the Appian Way.
During their retreat, the Arabs' in flight, inflicted ruin and devastation in all the Roman countryside. At Gaeta, the Longobard army clashed again with the Arabs. Guy of Spoleto found himself in serious difficulties, but the Byzantine troops of Cesarius, son of Sergius, magister militum in Naples, arrived in time. But in November of 846 a storm provoked numerous damages to the ships of the Arabs, some of which were shipwrecked on the coast.
Taking advantage of this Arab retreat, the Pope Leo IV, in consequence of the attack against St. Peter, in 848 undertook the construction of the Civitas Leonina to protect the Vatican hill. The enclosing walls were completed in June 27 in the year 852 CE.
______________________________

The fortress of Palermo whose name derived from the Arab Balarm - defines its origins as an Arab city. Palermo, when it was an Arab emirate for five hundred years, was described as "the city of the 300 mosques, very few of which survive today, with most of them having been converted into Churches by the Franks who liberated Palermo.
__________________________________

The Arabs to the assault of the coasts and the Italian islands (813)
The Arab attack on Italy began in 813 when they attacked and occupied Centumcellae (Civitavecchia) by surprise. Ischia and Lampedusa were also devastated and occupied. The Arabs also attacked Sardinia and Corsica in the same year.
The Arabs attack on Ancona (848)
In 848 the Arabs ransacked Ancona.
The Arabs defeated in the naval battle of Ostia (849)
But in 849 it was rumored of the organization of a great Arabic fleet that would have attacked Rome from Sardinia. In response to this rumor, a league was constituted among the maritime cities of the South: Amalfi, Gaeta and Naples gathered their fleets to the mouth of the river Tiber near Ostia.
When the Arabic ships appeared on the horizon the Italian fleet, led by Cesarius, attacked. The Arabs were defeated. The survivors were made prisoners and enslaved. These Arab slaves were conscripted to contribute with their work to the reconstruction of what they had destroyed three years before! And so justice prevailed.
But in consequence of these attacks of the Arabs, the Christian population abandoned Ostia, and withdrew to Portus where there created some fortifications to ward off further Arab attacks. Portus survived as a Christian Corsican colony thanks to these fortifications.
The Arabs attack Canosa (856)
In 856 the Arabs attacked and destroyed the Cathedral of Canosa in Puglia.
The Arabs assault against Ascoli (861)
In 861 the Arabs occupied Ascoli in Marche, they destroyed all the Churches and slaughtered the children, while they carried off the adults as slaves. The women were forced into Harems of the Arabs as sex slaves.
The Arabs besiege Salerno (872)
In 872 the emperor Ludovicus II attacked and freed Salerno from the Arabs who had been besieging the fortified town for six months.
The Arabs in Latium and in Umbria (876)
Despite these reverses at the hands of the Franks and Italians, the Arabs regrouped and again attacked Rome in 876. Before reaching the city, the Arabs ransacked the surrounding villages, the farmers slaughtered, the villages and churches knocked down. The Roman countryside was turned by the marauding Muslim Arabs into an lifeless desert.
In response to this carnage, John VIII fitted out a fleet and led it to the victory against the Arabs at Circeo. 18 vessels were captured and 600 Christian slaves were freed from Muslim captivity. But inspite of this defeat, the Arabs regrouped and continued to devastate Latium both along the coast and in the hinterlands. In these attacks they overran and destroyed the significant town of Subiaco for the second time.
The Arab invaders arrived at around Tivoli which defended itself by resisting the Arab assault on the castle of Saracinesco. A reporter Benedict of Saint Andrea of the Soratte wrote: "regnaverunt Agareni in romano regno". “Narni, Nepi, Orte, the countries of the Tiburtino, the valley of the Sacco, the lands of Tuscia, the Argentario mountain fell into the hands of the infidels.”
______________________________

In 1127, Roger II the son of Count Roger, led a second invasion of Malta; having overrun the Island he placed it under a more secure Norman domination under the charge of a Norman governor. He also garrisoned with Norman soldiers the three castles then on the islands. From about this period the Maltese moved back gradually into the European orbit to which they had belonged for a period of five hundred years prior to the Arab interlude.
After the Norman liberation, there were no Muslims left in Sicily, Malta, Sardina and other surrounding islands that had been under Muslim occupation. All the Muslims were reconverted to Christianity. This ensured that the population forgot about the Islamic interlude. The Normans acted as an exorcist to exorcize the influence of Islam on the population and returned the lands to Christendom.
__________________________________

The Arabs in Campania (881)
In 881 the Bishop of Naples Athanasius played traitor when to compete with against Rome and against Byzantium he entered into an alliances with the infidel Arabs. As part of this nefarious alliance, the Arabs established at the feet of Vesuvius and at Agropoli, near Paestum.
Another traitor, Docibile, the duke of Gaeta, enemy of the Pope, granted the Arabs the right to settle near Itri, then on the right bank of Garigliano near Minturno. The Arabs built a castle, from which they conducted repeated raids on the countryside. They attacked the monasteries of Montecassino and St.Vincenzo and set them on fire.
The Arabs at Farfa (890)
In 890 the Arabic troops set siege to the Abbey of Farfa, in Sabina. The Abbot Peter resisted for six months then he was forced to surrender due to lack of food supplies for his flock. In consequence the Arabs slaughtered the inhabitants who had surrendered in good faith. The Arabs occupied Farfa and made it their base in Sabina.
The Arabs defeated and expelled from Latium and Garigliano in the year 916 CE
Mercifully, in the 10th century the Kingdom of Italy was reconstituted. In December of 915 CE Berengarius was crowned by the pope John X. And in April in the spring of 916 the struggle against the Arabs acquired a new impulse.
Berengarius put at disposal the Tuscan troops of the marquis Adalbertus and those Umbrian of the marquis Albericus of Spoleto. The Byzantine emperor Constantine sent his own fleet to the orders of the strategist Nicolaus Picingli. Landulf, prince of Capua and Benevento, Gaimar, prince of Salerno, and the dukes of Gaeta and Naples entered the alliance. Pope John X personally put himself to the head of the land troops.
The Longobards of Rieti, led by Agiprandus, advanced towards Sabina and liberated it. The troops of Sutri and Nepi defeated the Arabs near Baccano on the Cassian Way. Pope John X carried off another victory between Tivoli and Vicovaro. The Arabs were forced to withdraw to their fortress at Garigliano.
In June 916 CE, another attack was launched against the Arabs. For three months the Arabs resisted waiting for reinforcements from Sicily. When the reinforcements were intercepted and defeated the Arabs occupying the besieged fortress at Garigliano escaped from the fortress when the Italians stormed into it. The fleeing Arabs tried to flee into the mountains, but they were overtaken and defeated by the Italian troops. Italy had convincingly defeated the assault of the Arabs on Italy. But Sicily was still prisoner of the infidels. The attack and occupation of Sicily is one painful but less known chapter in Italian history.
______________________________

The Turks launched two attacks against the island in 1547, and again in 1551 and again in 1565 till they were finally routed decisively at the naval battle of Lepanto in 1571. The Turks had a policy of ravaging the Maltese countryside to terrorize the peasantry, while they ignored the fortified towns. They turned their attention to the island of Gozo and carried away the entire Christian population into slavery, the children being brought up as Muslims who were to be thrown into battle as suicide warriors named Janissaries (from Jan = life and Nisar = given away).
__________________________________

The Arab occupation of Sicily
The Arab attack on Sicily in the 7th century initially was confined to the coastal zone and the smaller islands off the coast. But gradually the Arabs established their based at Palermo and from there proceeded to attack and occupy the entire island of Sicily.
But before this could happen, Sicily resisted for many decades and forced the armies of the invaders to retreat albeit temporarily. But the Sicilians finally had to surrender and accept Muslim rule over their homeland. Once the Arabs overran Sicily they set about the Islamification of Sicily through the destruction of churches and ertection of Mosques over the sites, they changed the composition of the population with the hundreds of thousand of Muslim immigrants who destroyed a civilization that had lasted from the 8th century before Christ had contributed to the creation of the identity of the West.
After the rampage in Sicily, the Arabs used it as a base to attack Italy (they overran Ponza, Gaeta, Ancona, Ascoli, and Civitavecchia) and eventually they also occupied Salerno, Naples, Bari, Brindisi, Taranto. Finally they resolutely headed for Rome to strike to the heart the Christianity.
The infidels profaned St. Peter but the Aurelian walls resisted to the assault and Rome within its fortified walls was safe.
To resist the initial attacks Pope John X, himself formed an army of Italians of various origin (Romans, Greeks, Longobards, Franks, etc.), speaking different languages but united by faith and culture. This army eventually defeated and drove from Lazio and Campania, the Arabs, who after their brief attack and occupation of Rome had constituted a Muslim state near the Garigliano.
The Arabs conquer Sicily after a sustained and bloodied assault (827-965)
In 805 the Byzantine governor of Sicily stipulated an essay with the Aghlabidi rulers of Tunisia. In 813 the Byzantine governor of Sicily signed a decennial truce with the Arabs.
But resistance to the Muslims began almost immediately. In 827 the Byzantine admiral Euphemius who had earlier surrendered to the Muslims, rebelled and killed the Muslim governor of Sicily. He conquered Syracuse and proclaimed himself emperor independent of Byzantium. But when the troops faithful to Byzantium, led by the Armenian general Palata, resumed the control. Euphemius fled to Africa.
______________________________

In 1571, Don John of Austria commanding the fleet of the Holy League, met the Ottoman Turks in the waters at the mouth of the Gulf of Patros. Don John of Austria met his fleet off Messina and saw that he had 300 ships, great and small, under his command. The Pope himself had outfitted twelve galleys and the depth of his war chest had paid for many more. The next largest contingent was that of Venice.
Although they were no longer the dominating power of yesteryear, the Venetians could still assemble a fleet of more than a hundred vessels beneath the winged Lion of St. Mark’s standard. The Venetians provided the technological cutting edge that was to win the battle.
__________________________________

Then Euphemius proposed to the Aghlabide emir of Kairuan, Ziyadat Allah I, to conquer Sicily and to make it tributary province. In exchange he asked to be recognized as governor with the title of emperor.
On June 17th 827, the Saracen general Asad ibn al-Furat with an army of 10,000 soldiers and 7000 cavalrymen disembarked at Mazara del Vallo. The general Theodorus stopped and defeated the Arab army before it reached Syracuse. So a new Arab army was sent to the help of the Arabs who decided to head for Palermo rather than Syracuse. On September 11th 831 Palermo fell. In 835 the Arabs took Pantelleria and in 843 Messina.
But Enna and Cefalù fought for years before being conquered, razed to the ground and burnt. Cefalù fell in 858. Enna fell in 859 through treason. Then it was the turn of Malta.
Syracuse was conquered only in 878. The Arabs massacred the entire Christian population. The Greek language was replaced by the Arabic. Christianity was replaced by the Islam. The bloodied sword of Islam dominated from Palermo, Sicily’s new capital. Sicily was lost for the next few centuries.
Syracuse never regained the role, that it had had for 1500 years, of being the primary city of Sicily. The glorious history of ancient Sicily finished in the bloody struggle with the Muslims.
But the Muslim occupation was never complete. Some hotbeds of resistance kept recurring. Taormina resisted up to 902, it was finnaly overrun and then was burnt and all its inhabitants killed. Rometta, on the mountains west of Messina, was the last to fall in 965.
An African Muslim army in 938-940 devastated wide zones of the southwest of Sicily, but at that point there was nothing more to be plundered.
In the cities that had opposed resistance all the residents were killed and the women and the boys reduced in slavery. The women and the most beautiful boys were sent to Africa for the pleasure of the conquerors and their co-religionists.
______________________________

Sicily had been under Muslim occupation for nearly three centuries from 812 up to 1071. The population had been wholly converted to Islam, and there was not a single church left standing. They had either been reduced to rubble or burnt and had been converted into Mosques.
__________________________________

The inhabitants of the Sicilian cities that had surrendered without fighting could keep on practising the Christian religion but:
- they had to bring identification marks on their suits and on their houses;
- they had to pay more taxes (Jaziya);
- they could not occupy positions that entailed authority over the Muslims;
- they could not marry a Muslim (but a Muslim could marry a Christian);
- they could not build new churches;
- they could not ring Church bells;
- they could not organize processions;
- they could not read the Bible within the earshot of a Muslim;
- they could not drink wine;
- they had to get up when a Muslim entered the room;
- they had to let the Muslims pass first in the public road;
- they could not bear weapons;
- they could not ride horses;
- they could not saddle their mules;
- they could not build great houses as those of the Muslims.
The Christian women could not have access to the baths.


______________________________

After the victory at the battle of Palermo, all mosques that had been churches (before the Arabs' arrival two centuries earlier) were re-converted into Churches. But even after the conquest of Palermo, the Normans had liberated only a part of Sicily, the rest of the island still lay under Arab occupation.
Illustration courtesy: Nafpaktos
__________________________________

After the Arab conquest, hundreds of thousand of Muslims immigrated to Sicily. The juridical advantages granted to them, the availability of lands seized to the Christians, the possibility to have labor at low cost (Christians driven to hunger because of plunderings), the abundance of slaves (girls and boys) constituted an irresistible attraction for people who lived in the desolation of the desert. The Africans found in Sicily a terrestrial heaven, the Christians found it to have become the proverbial hell.
The Arabs at Centumcellae (829)
In 829 the Arabs destroyed Centumcellae.
The Arabs at Naples (836)
In 836 the Longobards of the dukedom of Benevento laid siege to Naples, a Byzantine city. Shamelessly, the Neapolitans asked help to Ziyadat Allah I, aghlabide emir of Tunisia. Taking advantage of this intra-Christian war, Ziyadat sent a fleet that forced the Longobards to interrupt the siege.
The Arabs at Subiaco (840)
In 840 the Arabs devastated the monastery of Subiaco.
The Arabs conquer Bari (840-871)
In 840 the Longobard Radelchi, duke of Benevento, was engaged in fighting against the rival Siconolfo. The Arabs intervened and they took advantage for conquering Bari. But in 871 the Carolingian emperor Ludovico II succeeded in freeing the city.
The Arabs at Ponza and Capo Miseno (845) In 845 the Arabs took possession of Capo Miseno, in the gulf of Naples, and of Ponza, to make of them bases in view of an attack against Rome.
The Arabs at Brindisi and Taranto (846-880)
In 846 the Arabs ransacked Brindisi and conquered Taranto. But in 880 the Byzantine emperor Basil I the Macedonian succeeded in freeing Taranto.

______________________________

With the fall of Constantinople in 1453, the prospect of the conquest of Europe was reignited in Muslim hearts. This prospect had been defeated at the battles of Poitiers and Palermo and had been rolled back by the Reconquista in Spain.
After the conquest of Constantinople, the Ottomans now moved toward Malta which had remained a peaceful Christian bastion for more than four centuries after its liberation by the Normans in 1127. In the meanwhile Malta had become the base for the Crusader knights of Malta and it played an important role as a transit point for the crusaders to go to the holy land.
So Malta was a marked fortress for the Muslims who bided their time to seek revenge when they could again come within striking distance. This was the second Muslim lunge at Italy.
__________________________________

But in spite of their raids into Italy, the sustained Muslim occupation of a part of Italy was in Sicily when the island was tyrannized by the Muslim for three centuries.
By the mid 7th century, after overrunning North Africa, the Arab Muslims turned their attention towards the North Mediterranean coast in an effort to invade the Byzantine Empire from the West. By then the Arabs, who already controlled the North African coast and Spain, considered Sicily a highly strategic step for their expansion towards the north of Italy and an advance into Europe.
The Arabs who had started developing pretensions of becoming a naval power, sent a fleet to Sicily and conquered the undefended fortress of Palermo in Sicily in 830. With Sicily as a base they started harassing the mercantile shipping in the Mediterranean, and more importantly they tried repeatedly to invade Italy from Sicily.
The Battle of Palermo
The Christian resistance began immediately to recapture the island of Sicily. The Franks tried to take back the island in the 9th century, but failed. By the 11th century, the baton of resistance to the Saracens was taken up by the Normans. The Normans undertook an attempt to liberate Sicily by sending in an expeditionary assault in 1068 with just sixty knights. But with their shock tactics, they gave a stunning blow to the Arab chieftain Ayub ibn Temim at the Battle of Misilmeri (then called by the Arabs Menzil el Emir), outside Palermo.
This was followed by the main Norman assault in 1071, when they attacked and defeated the Arabs at Palermo. This fortress whose very name derived from the Arab Balarm - defines its origins as an Arab city. Palermo, when it was an Arab emirate for five hundred years, was described as "the city of the 300 mosques, very few of which survive today, with most of them having been converted into Churches.
Norman Valor drove the Arab Muslims from Sicily
The Battle of Palermo stands as one of the most astounding Norman escapades in Italy against the Muslims. It rivals the Battle of Hastings (1066) in importance. Socially, the Normans' occupation of Arab Palermo was far more significant than their conquest of Saxon London, as it brought Sicily back into the European orbit, a development which eventually established an Italianate presence in the central Mediterranean.
The Normans had taken Messina during an early morning battle in Spring 1061. In the ten years since, they had sought to consolidate their control of Sicily and the southern part of the Italian Peninsula, fighting the Arabs in a string of skirmishes. At Palermo, the Arabs were again led by their wily and intrepid commander Ayub ibn Temim and the Normans by a young and energetic leader named Robert Guiscard de Hauteville and his younger brother, Roger de Hauteville.
But the Normans with their conquests in other parts of Europe, notably England, where they fought the battle of Hastings in 1066 and defeated the Saxons, were chronically short of trained knights. (Indeed, it would be years following the Battle of Palermo before they could wrest back control of Enna, from the Muslims. Enna had been an Arab-Muslim stronghold in east-central Sicily
In 1072 Palermo had something over a hundred thousand residents. On the morning of January 5, 1072 Robert's cavalry attacked the al Kasr district (high ground near what became the cathedral, Piazza Vittoria and the Norman Palace). Fighting was fierce, and penetrating the walls seemed like an impossible feat. Leaving his brother, Roger, to maintain the attack on al Kasr, Robert and some knights attacked al Khalesa, the administrative district on the coast, built around the emir's fortress.
Re-conversion of Mosques into Churches and of the Muslim populace into Christianity rolled back the Jihad in its entirety
This was taken by nightfall, though most of the adjacent al Kasr district, further inland, remained in Saracen hands. Nevertheless, a Saracen delegation surrendered to the Normans the following morning. Specifically, the Normans first entered al Khalesa over a wall near what is now the Spasimo. (In a corner of this structure there remain the vestiges of an eight-century Mosque that the Normans changed into a church. The traces of this change can be seen clearly even today.)
______________________________

Sicily had been under Muslim occupation for nearly three centuries from 812 up to 1071. The population had been wholly converted to Islam, and there was not a single church left standing. They had either been reduced to rubble or had been burnt and converted into Mosques. When the Normans retook Sicily, they reversed history in equal measure and with equal ruthlessness.
__________________________________

The ceremonial entry of the Norman Christians into Palermo took place on January 10, 1072 with a Greek Rite mass celebrated by the Orthodox bishop Nicodemus of Palermo in the old cathedral (on the site of the present one), that had then been hastily re-converted into a church from its use as a mosque.
Here was a historic juncture where Robert and Roger chose to defy convention and their own Christian tradition. All mosques that had been churches (before the Arabs' arrival two centuries earlier) were re-converted into Churches. But even after the conquest of Palermo, the Normans had liberated only a part of Sicily, the rest of the island still lay under Arab occupation.
But in spite of the Norman attack, the Arabs in Sicily were divided, and taking advantage of the situation, Count Roger, after a series of campaigns, subdued the rest of the island and brought it under Norman Rule. Count Roger also invaded other islands to make sure his southern flank was secure from a possible Arab attack, having reduced the Arabs to a state of vassalage and releasing the foreign Christian slaves, he returned to Sicily without even bothering to garrison his prize.
In 1127, Roger II the son of Count Roger, led a second invasion of Malta; having overrun the Island he placed it under a more secure Norman domination under the charge of a Norman governor. He also garrisoned with Norman soldiers the three castles then on the islands. From about this period the Maltese moved back gradually into the European orbit to which they had belonged for a period of five hundred years prior to the Arab interlude.
Lessons from the Battle of Palermo
Sicily had been under Muslim occupation for nearly three centuries from 812 up to 1071. The population had been wholly converted to Islam, and there was not a single church left standing. They had either been reduced to rubble or had been converted into Mosques. When the Normans retook Sicily, they reversed history in equal measure and with equal ruthlessness. After the Norman liberation, there were no Muslims left in Sicily, Malta, Sardina and other surrounding islands that had been under Muslim occupation.
This ensured that the population forgot about the Islamic interlude. The Normans acted as an exorcist to exorcize the influence of Islam on the population and returned the lands to Christendom.
The second Muslim lunge at Italy
Although Sicily was never directly threatened again, the shadow of the Islamic Jihad loomed once again over Italy when the Ottoman Turks started moving into the Mediterranean after 1500 A.D. With the fall of Constantinople in 1453, the prospect of the conquest of Europe was reignited in Muslim hearts. This prospect had been defeated at the battles of Poitiers and Palermo and had been rolled back by the Reconquista in Spain.
After the conquest of Constantinople, the Ottomans now moved toward Malta which had remained a peaceful Christian bastion for more than four centuries after its liberation by the Normans in 1127. In the meanwhile Malta had become the base for the Crusader knights of Malta and it played an important role as a transit point for the crusaders to go to the holy land.
So Malta was a marked fortress for the Muslims who bided their time to seek revenge when they could again come within striking distance.

Turks ravaged the Maltese peasantry to instill terror
And so as if to prove the point, the Turks launched two attacks against the island in 1547, and again in 1551 and again in 1565 till they were finally routed decisively at the naval battle of Lepanto in 1571. The Turks had a policy of ravaging the Maltese countryside to terrorize the peasantry, while they ignored the fortified towns. They turned their attention to the island of Gozo and carried away the entire Christian population into slavery, the children being brought up as Muslims who were to be thrown into battle as suicide warriors named Janissaries (from Jan = life and Nisar = given away).
That same year the Turks drove the Knights out of Tripoli. These attacks stung the Knights into feverish activity to improve the islands' defenses in anticipation of another, and possibly bigger, attack. On the 18th May, 1565, the Ottoman Turks and their allies pitted 48,000 of their best troops against the islands with the intention of invading them, and afterwards using them as a base to make a thrust into Southern Europe by way of Sicily and Italy.
Pan-European Christian alliance defeats the Turkish Jihad
At the battle of Malta, against the Turks were drawn up some 8,000 men: 540 Knights; 4,000 Maltese; and the rest made up of Spanish and Italian mercenaries. Landing unopposed, the first objective of the Turks was to secure a safe anchorage for their large invasion fleet, and with that in mind, launched their attack on St.Elmo. After a heroic resistance of thirty one days the fort succumbed to the massive Turkish bombardment and continuous cavalry charges.
______________________________

The Turkish fleet under the command of Ali Pasha had been reinforced by a Calabrian traitor fisherman who had turned Moslem. His name was Uluch Ali and he was now the Bey of Algiers, that notorious nest of the Muslim corsairs feared by all Christian ships plying their trade in the Mediterranean. Don John moved his force towards the anchorage of Lepanto where he knew the Turks to be waiting and during the night of October 6th, with a favorable wind behind him, Ali Pasha moved his fleet westward towards the mouth of the Gulf of Patras and the approaching ships of the Holy League.
The action that was to follow was the biggest naval engagement anywhere on the globe till then.
__________________________________

After the fort had been reduced, the Ottomans turned their attention to the two badly fortified towns overlooking the harbor. Subjected to a ceaseless bombardment, the Christian forces held back the enemy behind the crumbling walls, and against all odds, kept the enemy at bay until a small relief force of some 8,000 troops arrived from Sicily (a smaller relief force of 600 men had previously landed at about the time that St.Elmo had fallen).
These attacks in addition to their losses from disease, fire and steel, totally demoralized the Turks. Added to this was the fact that their supplies were running low. The Turkish invaders were in no position to offer further battle, and the Turks retreated never again to attempt another invasion in that part of the Mediterranean.
The Battle of Lepanto
In 1571, Don John of Austria commanding the fleet of the Holy League, met the Ottoman Turks in the waters at the mouth of the Gulf of Patros. Don John of Austria met his fleet off Messina and saw that he had 300 ships, great and small, under his command. The Pope himself had outfitted twelve galleys and the depth of his war chest had paid for many more. Don John's eye must have gazed with pride on the 80 galleys and 22 other ships that had been provided by his half-brother Philip II of Spain.
Each of these Spanish galleys held a hundred soldiers on top of the rowers who propelled the ship through the water and no less than 30,000 men in the service of Spain would fight at Lepanto. The next largest contingent was that of Venice.
Although they were no longer the dominating power of yesteryear, the Venetians could still assemble a fleet of more than a hundred vessels beneath the winged Lion of St. Mark’s standard. The Venetians provided the technological cutting edge that was to win the battle.
The Turkish fleet under the command of Ali Pasha had been reinforced by a Calabrian traitor fisherman who had turned Moslem. His name was Uluch Ali and he was now the Bey of Algiers, that notorious nest of the Muslim corsairs feared by all Christian ships plying their trade in the Mediterranean. Don John moved his force towards the anchorage of Lepanto where he knew the Turks to be waiting and during the night of October 6th, with a favorable wind behind him, Ali Pasha moved his fleet westward towards the mouth of the Gulf of Patras and the approaching ships of the Holy League.
______________________________

The Turkish flotilla initially arrayed in a giant crescent-shaped formation, quickly sliced into three sections by two concentrated charges of the Venetian navy. The centre, under Ali Pasha, nevertheless pushed forward and the action opened when the cannon of Don John's two centre galleasses (gunships) began to do great execution among Ali Pasha's advancing ships.
Seven or more Turkish galleys went down almost immediately as a result of the longer range of the Christian fleet. The Turks were not lacking in murderous instinct, however, and they pressed on in the face of intense fire from the galleasses, the galleys' guns and crossbowmen on the Christian decks.
__________________________________

The action that was to follow was the biggest naval engagement anywhere on the globe till then. The Turkish flotilla initially arrayed in a giant crescent-shaped formation, quickly sliced into three sections by two concentrated charges of the Venetian navy. The centre, under Ali Pasha, nevertheless pushed forward and the action opened when the cannon of Don John's two centre galleasses (gunships) began to do great execution among Ali Pasha's advancing ships.
Seven or more Turkish galleys went down almost immediately as a result of the longer range of the Christian fleet. The Turks were not lacking in murderous instinct, however, and they pressed on in the face of intense fire from the galleasses, the galleys' guns and crossbowmen on the Christian decks.
______________________________
At Lepanto, in a wild melee of attack, retreat and counterattack played out on decks awash with the blood of the slain, the air rent by the screams of the wounded and dying seamen from both sides, the Spaniards forced their way onto the Turkish galley three times. Twice they were beaten back but finally they stormed the Turkish poop and a wounded Ali Pasha was beheaded on the spot. His head was spitted on a pike and held aloft for all the Turkish fleet to see and the Ottoman battle flag, never before lost in battle, was pulled down from the mainmast. The Muslim centre broke and retired as best it could, their courage forgotten in face of the grisly sight of their admirals head held aloft by the elated Spaniards. Amen.
__________________________________

Christians follows Muslim tactics and outdo the Muslims
Ali Pasha tried to come alongside the Christian ships in the hope of boarding. Here the legendary steadfastness under fire of the 16th and 17th century Spanish infantryman came to the fore and attack after attack was beaten off by killing shots from their guns and engaging in hand to hand combat by the Spanish swordsmen. Then Don John gave the order to board Ali Pasha's flagship.
In a wild melee of attack, retreat and counterattack played out on decks awash with the blood of the slain, the air rent by the screams of the wounded and dying seamen from both sides, the Spaniards forced their way onto the Turkish galley three times. Twice they were beaten back but finally they stormed the Turkish poop and a wounded Ali Pasha was beheaded on the spot. His head was spitted on a pike and held aloft for all the Turkish fleet to see and the Ottoman battle flag, never before lost in battle, was pulled down from the mainmast. The Muslim centre broke and retired as best it could, their courage forgotten in face of the grisly sight of their admirals head held aloft by the elated Spaniards. Amen.
______________________________

Lepanto was a battle to death for both sides. Negotiations were never on the agenda. The options were fight, flight or death. The first mistake made by Rodrigo in Spain when he faced the first Muslim Jihad in 711, he had tried to walk his way out by negotiating his freedom, only to be betrayed and having his head sawed off to be paraded before the Visigothic Spanish army – a grisly sight that numbed and demoralized the Visigoths at the Battle of the Guadalete river between the Muslims and the Visigothic Spaniards.
From Guadalete to Palermo, the Christians had come a long way, learning what their enemy was all about. Once having seen the bestiality of the Muslims, the Christians never forgot nor forgave the Muslims.
__________________________________

Lessons of the Battle of Lepanto
The Christians had now learnt their lessons. Lepanto was a battle to death for both sides. Negotiations were never on the agenda. The options were fight, flight or death. The first mistake made by Rodrigo in Spain when he faced the first Muslim Jihad in 711, he had tried to walk his way out by negotiating his freedom, only to be betrayed and having his head sawed off to be paraded before the Visigothic Spanish army – a grisly sight that numbed and demoralized the Visigoths at the Battle of the Guadalete river between the Muslims and the Visigothic Spaniards.
From Guadalete to Palermo, the Christians had come a long way, learning what their enemy was all about. Once having seen the bestiality of the Muslims, the Christians never forgot nor forgave the Muslims. And so “mercy” was a quality not much in vogue any longer in the wars between the crescent and the cross.
______________________________


Beheading and sticking the severed head on to a pike and parading it were unchristian and uncivilized practices, but it was the Muslims who had introduced them into Europe, and the Christians were quick to learn and use them against the Muslims. A lesson we need to relearn, not to behead and stick the head once again on a pike, but to unleash a nuclear and neutron assault on the enemy, before he does it to us at New York, London, Madrid, Toronto, Sydney, Tokyo, Paris, Moscow, Berlin or in any city in the civilized world.
__________________________________

The Christians were quick to learn the tactics of foul warfare from the Muslims and turn their new learning against a ruthless adversary. Apart from the bravery of soldiers on both sides, the tactic that clinched victory was the gruesome act of beheading of the Turkish Admiral Ali Pasha and his deputy Uluch Ali.
Beheading and sticking the severed head on to a pike and parading it were unchristian and uncivilized practices, but it was the Muslims who had introduced them into Europe, and the Christians were quick to learn and use them against the Muslims. A lesson we need to relearn, not to behead and stick the head once again on a pike, but to unleash a nuclear and neutron assault on the enemy, before he does it to us at New York, London, Madrid, Toronto, Sydney, Tokyo, Paris, Moscow, Berlin or in any city in the civilized world.
The engagement at Lepanto had lasted for more than four hours and when the smoke finally cleared it became apparent that this was a major victory for the Holy League and a bitter defeat for the Ottoman Turks. Almost 8,000 of the men who had sailed with Don John were dead and another 16,000 wounded.
On the brighter side 12,000 Christian galley slaves had been released from their servitude to the Ottomans. The Turks and Uluch Ali's Algerines had suffered much more grievously. Of the three hundred and thirty Turkish ships, fewer than fifty managed to escape and most of them were burned because they could not be made sufficiently seaworthy for further use; one hundred and seventeen Muslim galleys were captured intact and the rest were sunk or destroyed after they had been run ashore by the fleeing Turks.
More than fifty thousand of the seventy-five thousand men who had entered the battle on the Muslim side were killed, five thousand were taken prisoner (with at least twice that number of Christian galley slaves liberated), and only a few were able to escape either by ship or by swimming ashore. Turkey, for the first time in several centuries, was left without a navy
The day belonged to Don John, the Holy League and Christendom. When the news of the victory broke, church bells were rung all over in Europe in a spontaneous outburst of joy and thanksgiving. The victory at Lepanto, put paid any further Turkish adventure to invade Italy by sea. More so it left the European powers without any formidable rival on the seas, paving the way for aggressive and bolder forays by the European maritime powers to sail across all the oceans and establish colonies in the Americas, Australia, Africa and Asia.
The Jihad had a penultimate break at Lepanto, the final one was to come a century later at Vienna in 1683, that put paid all attempts of the Muslims to overrun Europe. Muslim rule was thenceforth confined to the south eastern corner of Europe in the Balkans where the seed of Islam was not uprooted when the Christians liberated those lands between 1850 and 1920.
______________________________

The overarching relevance of the Battles of Palermo and Lepanto was that they saved the Italian mainland from a Muslim invasion and so also indirectly prevented (or should we say delayed) the Islamization of Europe (or Eurabia) when there was no power strong enough in Central Europe in the 10th to the 15th centuries to resist a successful Muslim onslaught.
But modern Europeans have become enfeebled by modernism and liberalism, qualities that the Muslim immigrants will have nothing to do with. And if we do not wake up and reinvent the spirit of Palermo, we shall lose our homelands to the Muslims in a few decades from today. What the Muslims failed to achieve on the battlefields of Lepanto and Palermo, they will achieve through lax immigration laws, and the sacrifices of our brave knights at Lepanto and Palermo would ultimately prove to have been in vain.
__________________________________

Modern liberalism has set the lethargy in motion that prevents the immediate decimation of the Muslims who are a perennial threat to civilization
Modern liberalism had set the lethargy in motion a lethargy that came to roost at Mostar and other cities in the Balkans which saw the slaughter by the Muslims and Christians of each other. Howsoever ideal may liberalism be, it is of no value when dealing with the blood-thirsty Muslims. This is the lesson which the Serbs and Croats learnt in the 1990s. But these being Christian lands originally, it was the Muslim who were the occupiers and even if we forget the concept of anyone being an occupier, since the world belongs to all humans, with their beastlike behavior, the Muslims became unwelcome citizens wherever they attacked ravaged and imposed their beastlike cult on their unwilling victims. The Muslims have quarreled and fought with everyone wherever they went, and when there were no non-Muslims around, they fought among themselves. Such is the beastlike legacy that Islam has given the modern age.
But the overarching relevance of the Battles of Palermo and Lepanto was that they saved the Italian mainland from a Muslim invasion and so also indirectly prevented (or should we say delayed) the Islamization of Europe (or Eurabia) when there was no power strong enough in Central Europe in the 10th to the 15th centuries to resist a successful Muslim onslaught.
But modern Europeans have become enfeebled by modernism and liberalism, qualities that the Muslim immigrants will have nothing to do with. And if we do not wake up and reinvent the spirit of Palermo, we shall lose our homelands to the Muslims in a few decades from today. What the Muslims failed to achieve on the battlefields of Lepanto and Palermo, they will achieve through lax immigration laws, and the sacrifices of our brave knights at Lepanto and Palermo would ultimately prove to have been in vain, unless we not only stop the Muslims from immigrating in to Italy and other parts of the Western World, but also take the war into the enemy's heartland as did our Crusader forebears and destroy once and forever the barbaric creed of Islam, to remove threat it presents not only to Italy and to the Western Civilization, but also to the world at large and save our generation and all future generations from the scourge of Islam. Do we have it in us to do that?
The answer to this poser decides if civilization wins or barbarism wins.


http://www.islam-watch.org/HistoryOf...ome-Sicily.htm
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 01:44 PM   #13
john devine
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Earth
Posts: 2,869
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

ES, very interesting thread with a ton of information to get through before i can join the thread and comment on it.

so far i have only quickly browsed through it.

i found this comment to be particularly interesting:

Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_spirit View Post
Beheading and sticking the severed head on to a pike and parading it were unchristian and uncivilized practices, but it was the Muslims who had introduced them into Europe, and the Christians were quick to learn and use them against the Muslims. A lesson we need to relearn, not to behead and stick the head once again on a pike, but to unleash a nuclear and neutron assault on the enemy, before he does it to us at New York, London, Madrid, Toronto, Sydney, Tokyo, Paris, Moscow, Berlin or in any city in the civilized world.
what you would like to happen today is very unchristian, anti-christian and totally insane imho.
john devine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 01:57 PM   #14
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,206
Likes: 6 (6 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by john devine View Post
ES, very interesting thread with a ton of information to get through before i can join the thread and comment on it.

so far i have only quickly browsed through it.

i found this comment to be particularly interesting:



what you would like to happen today is very unchristian, anti-christian and totally insane imho.
Not my words or beliefs.
I'd like to see peace. There has been times of peace & alliances in the past to trade & share knowledge with the Muslim world/Empires.

Including war alliances - Britain/Germany/Ottoman Muslims vs France (Napoleon) & allies.

The point needs to be told that history is relevant to the present & future I see far too much blame put on Europeans for all the world's evils.

The campaign against my people has been in full overdrive via the media & indoctrination (education) system with its biased & sometimes falsified version of history & omission of certain facts.

When Europe in reality was the most advanced civilisation & invented all the technology & advances in science over the past so many centuries - which most of the planet makes use of.

Last edited by eternal_spirit; 07-05-2011 at 02:00 PM.
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 02:09 PM   #15
drakul
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,854
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_spirit View Post
January 8, 2010 Islam's European Slave Trade


Islam’s European slave trade by Muslim Turks (eg Ottoman) and Tartars: Part G in Islam’s genocidal slavery.


http://www.australianislamistmonitor...=170&Itemid=67

Saturday, 02 January 2010 00:00 Circe


This article concentrates on the slave trade of pe

ople from Eastern Europe, Balkans, and Asia Minor/Byzantium: Remember, Mohammad (allah) demanded jihad/war until all the religion is allah’s—it cannot go away and nor can the associated slavery and dhimmitude. (see comments from 20th century Muslims and others on the ongoing desire for jihad Bostom p 94-104). Both Ottoman Turkey and Shiite Iran openly practised slavery in the 20th century. The last Ottoman sultan had a British captive in his harem, 20th century (Khan p325). Slavery continues throughout the Islamic world today and is brought by Muslims into the west. Europe, Asia Minor, the Balkans etc were initially attacked by Arab Muslims, then Muslim Turks and Tartars attacked central and eastern Europe (11th-15th century), Muslim Tartars attacked Poland and Muscovite Russia (15th-17th century); and Asia Minor was attacked by Seljuk and Ottoman Turks (11th-15thC ) while Persia, Armenia, and Georgia were attacked by many Muslim groups including Shiite Safavids.
From the 11th century, particularly as Arab power was waning, the Turks moved out into the middle-east eg Syria, Palestine and spread through Asia Minor (much of today’s Turkey) to North Africa and into the Balkans/Eastern Europe.

Islamic slavery, destruction, conquest and dhimmitude
Bat Ye’r notes:

“The two waves of Muslim expansion, the Arab from the seventh century and the Turkish from 4 centuries later-are remarkably similar....the great Arab and Turkish conquerors used the same military tactics and the same policies of consolidating Islamic power. This continuity resulted from the fact that the conquests took place within the framework of the common ideology of jihad and the administrative and judicial apparatus of the sharia- a uniformity that defies time, since it adapts itself to diverse lands and peoples, being integrated into the internal coherence of a political theology. In the course of their military operation, the Turks applied to the conquered populations the rules of jihad, which had been structured 4 centuries earlier by the Arabs and enshrined in Islamic sacred law. (Bostom p 60)”


Malik Shah (1072-1092) During his reign the Seljuk Empire comprised Khorezm, Transoxiana, Khorasan, Persia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Irak, Syria and Anatolia.
In Anatolia (Asia Minor/Turkey), the Islamic frontier, during the 11th and 12 th centuries, ‘warriors of Islam’(ghazi) came to fight infidels and obtain booty in the Seljuk and Ottoman Turk jihad campaigns. These groups, including nomadic tribes were champions of Islam, dedicated to fighting the infidels around them.

“the ideal of gaza, holy war. Was an important factor in the foundation and development of the Ottoman state.,....continuous expansion of Dar al-Islam....until they conquered the whole world.” (contemporary Turkish scholar of Ottoman history, Halil Inalcik ...Bostom p 61) “From the very beginning....the Turks tried to consolidate their position by the forcible imposition of Islam. If (the Ottoman historian) Sukrullah is to be believed, those who refused to accept the Moslem faith were slaughtered and their families enslaved. “Where there were bells, Suleiman broke them up and cast them into fires. Where there were churches he destroyed them or converted them into mosques....” (quoted in Bostom p 63-64)

Dervishes worked to spread religious fervour, took part in military acts and were given land and privileges from rulers. The conquest of Asia Minor occurred over 4 centuries. It took the Turks about 2 centuries to conquer the Balkans (today’s Slovenia, Serbia, Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Greece, European part of Turkey, Bosnia-Herzegovina) with incalculable ruin of material goods,


Turkoman Archer
massacre, enslavement, exile, destruction of farming, destruction of trade, depopulation, reduced productivity, and destruction of the normal exchange of knowledge around the Mediterranean and through Christian and Jewish societies, plus colonisation by Muslims---as also occurred in the conquest of Asia Minor. The states of Byzantium, Bulgaria, Serbia...had reached a high level of economic and cultural development before the Muslim attacks. The conquest of the Balkan peoples was disastrous and for centuries trammelled their normal economic and social development (Angelov p 463) Yet it’s described as a blessing for the population (they had the chance to become Muslim) and we are fed lies of ‘peace’ and economic unity. The Turks didn’t have a ‘higher culture’ or better civic organisation—they were semibarbarian tribes bent of pillage and war, enriching themselves with ‘booty.’(estates, slaves, money, jewels) and rendered fanatical by the dogmas of Islam (Angelov p 463, 464, 465)

The conquest of the Balkan Peninsular by the Turks meant not only the massive destruction of productivity, the depopulation of the occupied regions, mass enslavement, and forced colonization, but also the founding of a new feudal system. This feudal system was the continuation, in a subsequent phase of development, of the Osmanli military feudalism that had been created in Asia Minor during the first half of the fourteenth century. In essence, this system did not modify the feudal ties that existed in the Balkan states at the time when they were conquered by the Turks, but compared with them, the system was at an inferior, barbarous level, having as its foundation brutal coercion and terror, since the Muslims had the privilege of resorting with impunity to violence against the Christian population and of subjecting it to unlimited exploitation. (Angelov p 506)


Turkish invasion of Christian lands was a disaster for Balkan peoples
Even a brief look at the date list, part H in the slavery series, shows the violence and oppression by the Muslims!

Byzantine historian Georgius Pachymeres, a contemporary of the events in the 1262-82 invasion north of the meander, (Paphlagonia, Caria in Asia Minor) described the ruination of towns and monasteries, the fleeing population and the conversion of land into a ‘Scythian desert. ’ He notes indiscriminate massacres, large scale enslavement, the merciless crushing of any resistance and the death of the entire male population where people refused to surrender. (Angelov p465, 466)
Other contemporary writers note the same acts of sadism and destruction throughout the conquest by the Turks and indeed on conquered populations until the 20th century. From the beginning of their conquests (ie Asia Minor), the emir’s family and clan/military leaders became the owners of vast tracts of land, slaves, towns and villages. The system of military fiefs (timaris) was developed. Some soldiers received land but had to remain in the military. Most however went to the rulers and military leaders.- one fifth went to the state/sultan just as Mohammad took a fifth for himself from the plunder and enslavement carried out by his crew. (The Koran demanded that Mohammad got a fifth even if he wasn’t actually in the raid –how convenient!!)

The incessant military campaigns fulfilled the desires of all to spread Islam and gain their just rewards of slaves and land. In depopulated areas, ‘slaves’ replaced local inhabitants in all areas of work/labour, and served in households and harems. Selling slaves enabled the seller to purchase precious objects from elsewhere.

Georgios Pachymeris 1242-c. 1310 one of the most important of the later Byzantine writers
Slaves were a source of ‘wealth’ for soldiers encouraging further conquest. The 14th century Ottoman state had only a rudimentary economy with underdeveloped commerce and trades and money was rare. (Angelov p 485-487). Enslavement served to weaken nations as populations were depleted and moved. Mass enslavements are documented.

The remaining populations were severely exploited peasants who laboured for others and were subjected to excessive taxes and fines. Similarly artisans were needed so, despite the routine massacres and deportations, the military was used to stop people fleeing and force them to remain.(Angelov p 470-471). The feudal class of Turks learnt they needed to keep the peasants to benefit from their surplus value and become wealthy. Muslim Turks ruled but were a minority population particularly in the Balkans where most of the population remained Christian. Allowing people to remain Christian was not ‘kindness’or ‘tolerance’, it was a practical and economic necessity as the non-Muslim population could be charged higher taxes ( the humiliating jizya or poll tax is more than the zakat –Durie p 169-178), extra fines and charges etc plus, any sign of rebellion could be met with death for the community or enslavement or forced mass movement or taking more children. Hence ordinary people lived in fear and were reduced to a servile, destitute state without the means to resist under the repressive dhimmi laws while wealth went to their Muslim overlords and their agents. (see articles on dhimmitude laws this site)



Battle of Kosovo 1389 - The battle of Kosovo was an important victory for the Ottomans. While losses were substantial, with both armies being virtually destroyed. on both sides and both sides lost their leaders, the Ottomans were able to easily field another army of equal or greater size, whereas Serbia could not.


Only during the brief period (1402-1413) of problems in the Turkish state did the Ottomans slow their enslavement but following 1413, taking slaves returned with a vengeance. (Angelov p 490). Eg 7,000 from Thessalonika in 1430 (Bulgaru p 567) In 1438, 60,000 Serbs were enslaved and taken to Anatolia (Sookhdeo p 268). Sources suggest that in the few years between 1436-1442, some 400,000 people were seized in the Balkans. Many of the captives died in forced marches towards Anatolia (Turkey) (Sookhdeo p 268). Contemporary chronicles note that the Ottomans reduced masses of the inhabitants of Greece, Romania, and the Balkans to slavery eg from Moree (1460)-70,000 and Transylvania (1438) - 60,000-70,000 and 300,000-600,000 from Hungary and 10,000 from Mytilene/Mitilini on Lesbos island (1462) (Bulgaru p 567) and so it continued (see timeline part H)!
The vicious destruction of Constantinople in 1453 shows the religious zeal of the Muslims, their hatred of Christians, massacres, destruction and pillage and of course, the enslavement of 50,000-60,000 people! (see part H for details
Slave trading centres existed in many areas eg the Turkish state (Adrianople/Edirne) and Balkan Peninsula, Crete, Cyprus, Catalogna, Syria and Italy eg Ancona. Slaves were shackled, marched and any lagging behind were killed (Bulgaru p 568)
Jobs for slaves:
Lovely boys and girls plus gold and silver objects were shared around as gifts between the sultan and high-ranking civil and military dignitaries (Angelov p 489) Handsome and strong boy slaves were also sent to the barracks to become ‘janissaries.’ Describing the palace of Ottoman ruler Bayezid (1389-1402) in Brousse, historian Dorcas notes:

“there one could find carefully selected boys and girls, with beautiful faces, sweet young boys and girls who shone more brightly than the sun. To what nations did they belong? They were Byzantines, Serbs, Walachians, Albanians, Hungarians, Saxons, Bulgarians, and Latins. Each of them sang songs in his own language, although reluctantly. He himself (the sultan) unceasingly gave himself over to pleasure, to the point of exhaustion, by indulging in debauchery with these boys and girls” (Angelov p 489, Bulgaru p567)
Remember, Mohammad took

The capture and sacking of Constantinople by Turkish troops under Mohammed II, 29th May 1453. The Turkish victory marked the end of the Byzantine Empire.
the pretty girls for himself and to share out to friends (see parts A, B in this series) The writings of the procurator of the court of the sultans (1433-1458) describes the ‘favourite youths,’ Christians and others numbering 400, kept in special conditions and guarded and trained to become the special loyal dignitaries, intimate with the sultan. And of course the harems of young girls..(Angelov p 494). Hence a tiny number of enslaved boys had the chance to become rich by attacking and plundering their own people or others or acting as administrators, providing they remained in the sultan’s intimate circle.


Most slaves laboured-farm work, building, rebuilding, digging, or they entertained or cleaned or served or provided a sexual service –they did everything while their Muslim rulers totally exploited them. An enormous number of slaves flowed from the Crimea, the Balkans, and the steppes of West/central Asia into Islamic markets (Khan p 321, Bostom p 93). White males were often castrated, females bred Muslims.
ES - Excellent research. I have printed it out.

And YET how many college professors and so called Balkan/Turk history experts claim that overall `ISLAM WAS GOOD FOR THE BALKANS'. All during the Yugo civil wars of the 1990's that was all you heard. That is why NATO bombed Serbia - to make Serbian Kosovo an independent, radical Muslim state in the heart of Europe. Exscuse me I have to go throw up now.

Last edited by drakul; 07-05-2011 at 02:10 PM.
drakul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 02:13 PM   #16
goldennbrown
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 234
Likes: 12 (10 Posts)
Default

This is an excerpt from a very interesting and well-docuemented study on Islam :

"All Islamic civilizations followed, with minor variations, the same basic pattern of political evolution. This would start with a period of tribal egalitarianism, which did not, of course, extend to the conquered masses. This would be followed by a phase of increasing Oriental despotism, the first part of which might often be marked by a liberal outlook of tolerance and learning. Inevitably, however, there would follow a decline into a rigid and repressive despotism.

Islamic societies were invariably parasitic, consuming the economic and intellectual resources of indigenous non-Muslim populations. Under the conditions of an early Pax Islamica following the initial conquest, these resources, now liberated from chronic warfare and disorder, could engender a brilliant flowering of civilization which historians somewhat deceptively refer to as an ‘Islamic golden age’. The most brilliant of such golden ages occurred, a century after the first Arab conquests, in Baghdad. However, as the resources were consumed, Islam became more widespread and entrenched, and the pre-Islamic civilization was submerged, these golden ages always ended in a period of irreversible decline. There were additional reasons for the decline of Islamic civilization. The increasingly repressive political despotism sapped the energy and destroyed the initiative of both Muslims and dhimmis. The slave mentality inherent in Muslim theology became more ingrained. The fatalism of Islam eventually undermined intellectual curiosity. The continuing dependence on vast numbers of slaves destroyed the incentive for invention and innovation. The Muslim system of sexual slavery working at the highest levels of the governing class created a chronic condition of harem intrigue which weakened the administration of the state.

After three centuries of quiescence due to the technological dominance of the West, Islam is once again on the offensive. The re-emergence of Islam is due to the exhaustion of the West after a century of war, the petroleum windfall and the demographic explosion in Islamic countries at the same time as demographic collapse in the West. The most important factor, however, is the social suicide of the West. The betrayal of western civilization by members of its own elite is reminiscent of the pattern of treason that has, throughout history, facilitated the triumph of Islam.

(...)
After three centuries of suspended animation the Islamic meme has re-awakened with a vengeance. Muslim self-assertiveness has been on the rise throughout the 20th century and particularly so during the last three decades. There are a number of self-calming assertions touted by the progressive intelligentsia regarding the causes of the modern Islamic resurgence and the consequent strife and terrorism. The most fashionable theory, of course, is that Muslim grievances are almost entirely a result of the maltreatment of Palestinians by Israel. Occasionally, it is conceded that the Indian occupation of Kashmir, the Russian oppression of Chechnya or the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Kosovo by the Serbs are additional contributing factors. While this point of view may be ideologically comforting, it ignores the obvious fact that these local conflicts are too widespread to serve as an explanation for Muslim rage. Wherever the Muslim population reaches some critical mass, conflict follows. One is required to believe that Muslims are uniquely oppressed by whatever culture they live in the midst of, or adjacent to. Thus they are oppressed by Jews in Palestine, Orthodox Christian Serbs in the Balkans, Russians in Chechnya, Catholic Filipinos, Timorese Christians, Australian tourists in Bali, Hindus in Kashmir and India, Ibo Christians in Nigeria, Buddhists in Thailand, Communists in Sinkiang, secular authorities in Western Europe, Danish cartoonists, Lebanese Maronites, Greek Cypriots, Armenians in the Caucasus and, of course, office workers in New York. Furthermore, one must believe that Muslim Palestinians have lately been subject to oppression by their erstwhile Christian Palestinian allies, Egyptian Muslims are suffering at the hands of the Coptic minority and Arab Sudanese Muslims are oppressed by black Christians and animists and even by non-Arab black Muslims. Occam’s razor, it would seem, requires a more parsimonious explanation.

Another favorite reason purported to be the cause of Muslim rage is European and American imperialism. This ignores the obvious historical fact that the conflict between Islam and the West predates modern European imperialism as well as the very existence of the American nation. Equally spurious is the contention of some conservatives that Islamic fury is a result of the decadent life style characteristic of the modern West. In fact the anger of modern Islamist thinkers at the freedom of expression and at the easier relations between the sexes that characterizes western culture began decades before the beginning of the era of ‘anything goes’.

The real factors underlying the rise of modern Islam are more opportunistic. Moreover, the modern jihadist spirit was not caused by these factors, but simply released from centuries long suppression. Intra-civilizational western warfare which characterized much of the last century severely weakened the fabric of western civilization in the same way as the long Peloponnesian War fatally weakened the civilization of the Greek city states. These conflicts led to the twilight of European imperialism which allowed Muslim peoples to resume their cultural imperatives without external constraint. The end of European imperial might was accompanied by the last conflict within western civilization, that of the Cold War. American and Russian Cold War exhaustion, like the chronic Byzantine-Sasanian conflict, opened up a new avenue for Islamic expansion. Interestingly, during the course of this Cold War, both America and Russia, armed and empowered various Muslim and Arab clients, in the same way as Byzantium and Persia cultivated and armed various Arab tribal allies along their borders.

Also of great importance is the fortuitous accident of geology which caused a massive accumulation of petrodollars in the hands of certain Muslim ruling elites. The latter were often fanatical fundamentalists who used their windfall to fund Islamic proselytism, purchase the services of greedy western political, business and media leaders, and finance extremist Muslim groups. Another cause of the Islamic resurgence is demographic. The rapid growth of Muslim populations has been facilitated by modern technology and medicine brought to them by the hated West.

Above all, however, the revival of Islam in modern times is a direct result of western psychological and spiritual weakness [as well as of the MI6's and of the CIA's policies]. French novelist Jean Raspail emphasizes the importance of more subtle spiritual factors to the course of conflict between nations and cultures."http://islamicexpansionanddecline.blogspot.com/

Yet, Islam is only the tip of the iceberg. One cannot be said to have fully grasped the true danger of Islam so long as one has not grasped the true danger of the two other Abrahamic faiths Islam derives from, namely Judaism and Judeo-Christianity, insofar as they all share the same internationalist premisses as Free-masonry and democracy, Free-Masonry's political arm : a theocracy in disguise. If the West has become so drammatically weak that it has gone so far as to allow Muslims to preach in European countries, it is because the West was previously weakened by centuries of Christian rule and Christian anti-Western values.
goldennbrown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 02:25 PM   #17
drakul
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,854
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
The re-emergence of Islam is due to the exhaustion of the West after a century of war, the petroleum windfall and the demographic explosion in Islamic countries at the same time as demographic collapse in the West. The most important factor, however, is the social suicide of the West. The betrayal of western civilization by members of its own elite is reminiscent of the pattern of treason that has, throughout history, facilitated the triumph of Islam.


So true. And WHO is betraying the West to Islam?
drakul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 02:28 PM   #18
drakul
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,854
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
If the West has become so dramatically weak that it has gone so far as to allow Muslims to preach in European countries, it is because the West was previously weakened by centuries of Christian rule and Christian anti-Western values.
This however is BULLSHEIDO.

European civilization is CHRISTIAN civilization.
drakul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 02:47 PM   #19
goldennbrown
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 234
Likes: 12 (10 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Of associations some are public, and these are in accordance with the laws; others, again, secret, and maintained in violation of the laws; of this latter sort is Christianity. The Christians teach and practice their favorite doctrines in secret. They do this to some purpose, seeing they escape the penalty of death which is imminent; similar dangers were encountered by such men as Socrates for the sake of philosophy. Their “love-feasts“ had their origin in the common danger, and are more binding than any oaths.

The system of doctrine, viz., Judaism, upon which Christianity depends, was barbarous in its origin; in this case as in others, the Greeks are more skillful than any others in judging, establishing, and reducing to practice the discoveries of barbarous nations.

Their system of morals is only common to them with other philosophers, and no venerable or new branch of instruction, though their regulations respecting idolatry are peculiar to themselves. The Christians do not consider those to be gods that are made with hands, on the ground that it is not in conformity with right reason to suppose that images, fashioned by the most worthless and depraved of workmen, and in many instances also provided by wicked men, can be regarded as gods. That even this is a common opinion, and one not first discovered by Christianity, is shown by a saying of Heraclitus to this effect: “Those who draw near to lifeless images, as if they were gods, act in a similar manner to those who would enter into conversation with houses.” The Persians also were of the same opinion, according to Herodotus.

It is by the names of certain demons, and by the use of incantations, that the Christians appear to be possessed of miraculous power. And it was by means of sorcery that Jesus was able to accomplish the wonders which he performed; and foreseeing that others would attain the same knowledge, and do the same things, making a boast of doing them by help of the power of God, he excludes such from his kingdom. If they are justly excluded, while he himself is guilty of the same practices, he is a wicked man; but if he is not guilty of wickedness in doing such things, neither are they who do the same as he.
Celsus, A True Discourse.http://thriceholy.net/Texts/Celsus.html


Quote:
On Muhammad's pagan background, F. E. Peters wrote : "Contrary to the Muslim conviction that Muhammad was originally created by God as a believer in His Oneness, he is reported to have worshipped and offered sacrifices to Al-Uzza, an idol the pagans believed to be one of the three daughters of God (cf. 42:52). The Quraish venerated Al-Uzza highly, believing that her intercession on their behalf would be acceptable to God, her father. One of his uncles was named after this idol ; he was called Abd al Uzza, the slave of Uzza, before he was re-named Abu Lahab, the Father of Flame, by his Muslim foes.

According to a famous, though much edited, tradition, it was young Muhammad who was the pagan and Zayd ibn Amr who was the monotheist. Peters also quotes Zayd ibn Haritha, who is said to have narrated the following story to his son : The Prophet slaughtered a ewe for one of the idols (nusub min al-ansab) ; then he roasted it and carried it with him. (Muhammad and the Origins of Islam, p.126). While preaching the oneness of God, Muhammad continued, in one form or another, to venerate the idols - up to the time he conquered Mecca, when he finally had all the idols, housed inside and outside the Ka'aba, destroyed". (http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/a...mad_islam3.htm)

As a matter of fact, it is believed by some scholars that henotheism, the worship of only one god while not denying the existence of other gods, may have existed in pre-Islamic society and that Allah, or al-Ilah ("the god"), can be traced to Ilah, the South Arabian moon god, who was the 'father' of three deities popular at Mecca at the time of Muhammad's birth : Uhzza or al-Uzza, "the mighty one" (her sanctuary was in a grove of acacia trees to the south of Mecca) ; Lat, or al-Lat, "the goddess", the deity of the sun ; and Manat, the deity of good fortune. These were three different aspects of the same goddess : the warrior virgin, the Mother, and the crone, respectively. The Koran mentions these deities in Sura 53:19-20 : "Have ye seen Lat, and `Uzza, and another, the third (goddess), Manat?". Those three goddesses, represented by the waxing moon, the full moon, and the waning moon, respectively, are sometimes engraved together with Allah, represented by a crescent moon above them.
Interestingly enough, 'Allah' is of the feminine gender in classical Arab.

According to the soi-disant "Dr John Coleman, ex-MI6 officer", the Muslim Brotherhood is a Masonic sect created by British Intelligence's Middle East Division. Although, as ex-intelligence officers often do, "Dr Coleman" may be peddling disinformation, the fact remains nonetheless that the Muslim Brotherhood and Freemasonry are as alike as two peas in a pod ; their tenets are the same. The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Egypt, two years before R. Guénon was to settle down in Cairo, by the eldest son of a famous sheikh, Hasan al-Banna. Hasan, in his teenage years, had joined the Sufi sect of the Hasafiyya Brotherhood, and had set up, later on, the Hasafiyya Society for Welfare. However, Freemasonry was not a new element in the Arab world. "Freemasonry appeared in Egypt soon after Napoleon's conquest in 1798, when General Kleber, a French Mason and top commander in Napoleon's army, established the Lodge of Isis. French Masonry dominated Egypt until British lodges began to appear after the British occupation in 1882. Freemasonry was very popular in the first half of the twentieth century, and many important Egyptians were Masons, along with the British rulers and aristocrats who occupied the country. In fact the Egyptian monarchs, from Khedive Ismail to King Fouad, were made honorary Grand Masters at the start of their reigns. From 1940 to 1957 there were close to seventy Masonic lodges chartered throughout Egypt. At one time the leaders of the Nationalist and Wafd parties were Freemasons, and many members of the Egyptian parliament were Masons as well, where they mingled with the military commanders and aristocrats of the ruling British occupation" (http://www.redmoonrising.com/Ikhwan/MB.htm). Not only was Masonry not new in the Arab world at the beginning of the XXth century, but there are grounds for thinking that Freemasonry may originate in the Semitic world and that, in fact, Masonry as it emerged in the West in the sixteenth century may merely be an imported product, created a long time before by revolutionary subversive groups. The sect of Roshaniyya ('illuminated ones'), born in Afghanistan in the fifteenth century, is one of them, and the notorious sect of the Assassins, better known as the Ismailis, which had its hour of glory at the end of the eleventh century and which may have had some influence on the Templars "in moulding, or at least in suggesting, some of its esoteric dogmas and ceremonies"
(http://www.antiqillum.com/pdf/qadosh097.pdf) is another ; it is believed that the former was and is still a branch of the latter, and interestingly enough, the members of this sect claim to gain power from the spirits of their dead members.
Both "are supposed to have derived their doctrines from the sect of the Sofis in Persia" (ibid.), whose system of initiation, like the Masonic one, is divided into degrees. Now, it is most interesting to note that, according to von Hammer, Sufism, before even being a philosophical and mystical sect, was a political one, and its main aim was to overthrow the Abbassids in favour of the Fatimids. Junaid (tenth century), head of the Safavid sect, is suspected of having sought to turn sufism into a political power ; he combined warlike policies with Shi'a piety. And so the Fatimids came to power. A few years after having created the city of Cairo, the Fatimids, who we know were sensitive to 'esoteric doctrines', established the Great House of Wisdom, where scholars translated the main philosophical and scientific works of antiquity, especially those of Greece and Egypt, into Arabic, while trying to show that Islam could make faith and reason coincide and experimenting in rationalism ; the Fatimid caliph was called the Grand Master and, according to the Muslim historian Ameer Ali, "the account of the different degrees of initiation adopted in the [House of Wisdom] forms an invaluable record. In fact, the [House of Wisdom] at Cairo became the model of all the [Freemasonic] Lodges created in Christendom." Many scholars associated with the Great House of Wisdom were Sufis. It is precisely these that the Fatimid caliphs chose to propagate Islam, or rather its esoteric doctrines, throughout the world, especially throughout the West, where, as prophesied by Muhammad, the time would come when "the sun (of Islam) would rise". Any outer form, whether artistic, scientific or religious, could be used to achieve this goal. This is how the European courts of the late twelfth century, beginning with that of Eleanor d'Aquitaine and Marie de Champagne, already weakened as a result of the domestication of the warriors by the Church institution of chivalry, succumbed to the enervating melodies and lukewarm poetry of the fidèles d'amour, whose forms originated, as perfectly seen by de Rougemont, in the Middle East, and whose vision of woman, idealised, risen above man, is completely opposed to the traditional customs and conceptions of the West. In this connection it should be noted that, besides including women in their ranks, Sufi leaders have championed 'women's rights' within their own sects.

Sufism, like any Islamic esoteric sect, contains a greater or lesser quantity of pre-Islamic elements in its doctrine and in its practices, though it is often assumed that these constitute only peripheral residues. Specialists in sufism certainly make this assumption, as do most modern sufis. But, what if, on the contrary, they were the core of the teaching and the elements belonging to Islamic exoterism were only a 'cover', having the dual purpose of, first, protecting sufism from the attack of exoteric Islam, and second, to hide its real nature from the non-Muslim milieux which it has successfully infiltrated by playing on an apparent syncretism, a vague pantheism, and the concept of a unity of all religions? We may instance here the teaching of Al-Bistami, who was quoted as having advocated a return to a pre-Islamic cult through sufism. This cult, which various groups, operating together or alone, but, whether they are aware of it or not, synergetically, while from time to time in conflict with each other, have been trying to spread, by the means either of exotericism (the Abrahamic religions) or of esotericism in the spiritual field, is the Chthonic-Telluric worship of the Great Mothers of nature, which derives ultimately from a "substratum of ethnic, religious and even mystical elements in which a strong Semitic-Pelasgian component is unquestionable." This substratum gives birth to a social organisation in which women exercise political functions and politics is subordinated to economics ; juridically, it is based on the doctrine of so-called 'natural right', which posits equality between all human beings, and between men and women, as stated in the notorious "Déclaration des droits de l'homme", whose evil Edmund Burke once warned against with an appropriate scorn ; in the "Universal Declaration of the United Nations", the "European Convention of Human Rights", etc., all of whose evils Michel Villey warned against with a similar scorn ; politically, it finds expression either in democracy, whether parliamentary or not, or in its borderline form : tyranny.
goldennbrown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2011, 03:13 PM   #20
drakul
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,854
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
It is by the names of certain demons, and by the use of incantations, that the Christians appear to be possessed of miraculous power. And it was by means of sorcery that Jesus was able to accomplish the wonders which he performed; and foreseeing that others would attain the same knowledge, and do the same things, making a boast of doing them by help of the power of God, he excludes such from his kingdom. If they are justly excluded, while he himself is guilty of the same practices, he is a wicked man; but if he is not guilty of wickedness in doing such things, neither are they who do the same as he.

That is so laughable, if you know anything about ancient near east religions. Pagans were so wrapped up in BLOOD SACRIFICE on such a massive scale, it is beyond our comprehension. Sorcery, voodoo, hoodoo, black magic, spells, everything you can possibly imagine. You think cutting the throat of an animal and then dragging out its slimy writhing bloody intestines in order to read the future is emblematic of an advanced civilization/culture/religion? This is what they ALL did - Romans, Greeks, Jews, Druids, etc.

NO it is symbolic of a very deep DEGENERACY. The Christians called it `propitiation of DEMONS' and they BANNED blood sacrifice as one of their very first acts in 325AD when Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the empire.
drakul is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:05 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.