Aliens

[theliq]

They did look it up. Kangaroo brain

Later some did but after Ghengis Khans death...for you to read......and try to comprehend.....you will note the expanding map,showing that the Mongols not passing through the Levant (although they had the odd sortie) or Indiaen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_Empire

Never said they made it to the Levant.

Funny how any group of people that likes to invade, rape, loot and kill naturally gets attracted to Islam.

• Berke - grandson of Genghis Khan and leader of the Golden Horde who was the first Mongol ruler to establish Islam in a Mongol state.
• 
  
• Ghazan - seventh ruler of the Ilkhanate.[11]
• Muhammad Khodabandeh - formerly a Christian, he was the eighth Ilkhanid dynasty ruler in Iran from 1304 to 1316.[12]
• Mubarak Shah - head of the ulus of the Chagatai Khanate (1252–1260, March-September 1266).[13]
• Nawrūz (Mongol emir) - a convert to Islam;[14] he played an important role in the politics of the Mongol Ilkhanate.
• Negudar - Mongol general and noyan[15]
• Nogai Khan - Mongol general and great-grandson of Genghis Khan.[16]
• Tarmashirin - Khan of the Chagatai Khanate following Duwa Timur.
• Tekuder - Mongol leader of the Ilkhan empire who was formerly a Nestorian Christian.[17]
• Tuda Mengu - Mongol leader of the Golden Horde[18]
• Tughlugh Timur - the Khan of Moghulistan.[19]
• Öljei Temür Khan, also known as Buyanshir Khan after he converted to Islam while he stayed at the court of Timur in Samarkand.

Like I said, Hitler loved Islam even more than the savage Mongols...


The Fuhrer is deeply religious, though completely anti-Christian. He views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so. It is a branch of the Jewish race. This can be seen in the similarity of their religious rites. Both (Judaism and Christianity) have no point of contact to the animal element, and thus, in the end they will be destroyed. The Fuhrer is a convinced vegetarian on principle.

— Goebbels Diaries, 29 December 1939

During a meeting with a delegation of distinguished Arab figures, Hitler learned of how Islam motivated the Umayyad Caliphate during the Islamic invasion of Gaul and was now convinced that "the world would be Mohammedan today" if the Arab regime had successfully taken France during the Battle of Tours,[228] while also suggesting to Speer that "ultimately not Arabs, but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire."

In speeches, Hitler made apparently warm references towards Muslim culture such as: "The peoples of Islam will always be closer to us than, for example, France".

According to Speer, Hitler stated in private, "The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?" Speer also stated that when he was discussing with Hitler events which might have occurred had Islam absorbed Europe:

Hitler said that the conquering Arabs, because of their racial inferiority, would in the long run have been unable to contend with the harsher climate and conditions of the country. They could not have kept down the more vigorous natives, so that ultimately not Arabs but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire."

— Albert Speer

Similarly, Hitler was transcribed as saying:


'Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers [...] then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world.

Hitler was quite MAD Roudy and he despised everyone,including Arabs.....what he did to Jews was to try(and thankfully fail)eliminate them,he detested the Russians/Slavs(where he slaughtered over 11 million) I think really whatever this Being thought should be consigned to the Dustbin of history where such thought(and actual practice) belong.

Hitler loved NO ONE including himself........he ended up being one of the most pathetic individuals in history........mind you most Germans loved him...God Knows How but they did.steve,keep up your good work on this interesting thread Roudy

I am glad that you understand why Islam is a cancer to modern humanity and freedom.

Rabid Islam Roudy but not all.......be more definitive because they are not ALL THE SAME.steve

 

[Roudy]

They did look it up. Kangaroo brain

Later some did but after Ghengis Khans death...for you to read......and try to comprehend.....you will note the expanding map,showing that the Mongols not passing through the Levant (although they had the odd sortie) or Indiaen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_Empire

Never said they made it to the Levant.

Funny how any group of people that likes to invade, rape, loot and kill naturally gets attracted to Islam.

• Berke - grandson of Genghis Khan and leader of the Golden Horde who was the first Mongol ruler to establish Islam in a Mongol state.
• 
  
• Ghazan - seventh ruler of the Ilkhanate.[11]
• Muhammad Khodabandeh - formerly a Christian, he was the eighth Ilkhanid dynasty ruler in Iran from 1304 to 1316.[12]
• Mubarak Shah - head of the ulus of the Chagatai Khanate (1252–1260, March-September 1266).[13]
• Nawrūz (Mongol emir) - a convert to Islam;[14] he played an important role in the politics of the Mongol Ilkhanate.
• Negudar - Mongol general and noyan[15]
• Nogai Khan - Mongol general and great-grandson of Genghis Khan.[16]
• Tarmashirin - Khan of the Chagatai Khanate following Duwa Timur.
• Tekuder - Mongol leader of the Ilkhan empire who was formerly a Nestorian Christian.[17]
• Tuda Mengu - Mongol leader of the Golden Horde[18]
• Tughlugh Timur - the Khan of Moghulistan.[19]
• Öljei Temür Khan, also known as Buyanshir Khan after he converted to Islam while he stayed at the court of Timur in Samarkand.

Thanks Roudy for this info......as I said well after the death of Ghengis Khan and the zenith of the Mongol Empire,steve,infact during the rise of Genghis's Empire many peoples were untouched by the Mongols,mind you if you resisted then War was a fact.........people don't naturally get attacted to Islam,there would be social-economic reasons during this period for the remnants of the Empire to do so.I do know that the Assassins got into Ghenghis Khans inner most sanctum and did not succeed in killing him(where we now get the word Assassination)....for their trouble the Great Khan put out a edict to wipe the Assassins off the face of the earth....and did to a point.....some escaped to northern Syria and re-established themselves there,where their mastery of Assination of mainy religious leaders continued........today the titular leader of the Assassins is believe it or not the AGA KHAN,one of the worlds wealthiest men,(property,horse racing etc,.)...but again thanks for your information above....steve

The Mongols were very brutal and barbaric, yet efficient killers. Which is why they got attracted to Islam, the religion who's founder was a brutal merciless warrior. And that's exactly why Hitler liked Islam more than all other religions. He thought Christianity was for pussies, and a derivative of Judaism. Hitler envisioned a Nazi Islamic Germany that conquers the world, just like Mohammad did. However he thought that Arabs were too inferior of a race to carry out Mohammad's legacy.

Look it up.

Roudy during the Genghis period Islam was so far from the mind of the Mongols they had a completely different belief and set of morality........later generations did convert,but at their zenith the Mongols had complete freedom of ideas and religion.........They invented the inverted Bow and their prowess at riding the horse that enabled them to shoot an arrow ten times faster than the original bow,riding forward or riding away gave them greater superiority against their foe.

The Christian press over the centuries have given them bad press.(of course they would)..but the Mongols invented much indeed.......and Islam had nothing to do with them,just the logistics of expanding such a vast Empire has much to be admired.......their postal system of speed and accuracy was never bettered until the invention of the aeroplane..................tbc...steve

Never said they weren't smart or efficient at killing. War and killing has brought about many great inventions from which mankind has benefited. The Internet is one modern example. Another is the MRI. Bottom line is Islam attracted the Mongols for the same reason it attracted the Nazis.

 

[Roudy]

Later some did but after Ghengis Khans death...for you to read......and try to comprehend.....you will note the expanding map,showing that the Mongols not passing through the Levant (although they had the odd sortie) or Indiaen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_Empire

Never said they made it to the Levant.

Funny how any group of people that likes to invade, rape, loot and kill naturally gets attracted to Islam.

• Berke - grandson of Genghis Khan and leader of the Golden Horde who was the first Mongol ruler to establish Islam in a Mongol state.
• 
  
• Ghazan - seventh ruler of the Ilkhanate.[11]
• Muhammad Khodabandeh - formerly a Christian, he was the eighth Ilkhanid dynasty ruler in Iran from 1304 to 1316.[12]
• Mubarak Shah - head of the ulus of the Chagatai Khanate (1252–1260, March-September 1266).[13]
• Nawrūz (Mongol emir) - a convert to Islam;[14] he played an important role in the politics of the Mongol Ilkhanate.
• Negudar - Mongol general and noyan[15]
• Nogai Khan - Mongol general and great-grandson of Genghis Khan.[16]
• Tarmashirin - Khan of the Chagatai Khanate following Duwa Timur.
• Tekuder - Mongol leader of the Ilkhan empire who was formerly a Nestorian Christian.[17]
• Tuda Mengu - Mongol leader of the Golden Horde[18]
• Tughlugh Timur - the Khan of Moghulistan.[19]
• Öljei Temür Khan, also known as Buyanshir Khan after he converted to Islam while he stayed at the court of Timur in Samarkand.

Like I said, Hitler loved Islam even more than the savage Mongols...


The Fuhrer is deeply religious, though completely anti-Christian. He views Christianity as a symptom of decay. Rightly so. It is a branch of the Jewish race. This can be seen in the similarity of their religious rites. Both (Judaism and Christianity) have no point of contact to the animal element, and thus, in the end they will be destroyed. The Fuhrer is a convinced vegetarian on principle.

— Goebbels Diaries, 29 December 1939

During a meeting with a delegation of distinguished Arab figures, Hitler learned of how Islam motivated the Umayyad Caliphate during the Islamic invasion of Gaul and was now convinced that "the world would be Mohammedan today" if the Arab regime had successfully taken France during the Battle of Tours,[228] while also suggesting to Speer that "ultimately not Arabs, but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire."

In speeches, Hitler made apparently warm references towards Muslim culture such as: "The peoples of Islam will always be closer to us than, for example, France".

According to Speer, Hitler stated in private, "The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?" Speer also stated that when he was discussing with Hitler events which might have occurred had Islam absorbed Europe:

Hitler said that the conquering Arabs, because of their racial inferiority, would in the long run have been unable to contend with the harsher climate and conditions of the country. They could not have kept down the more vigorous natives, so that ultimately not Arabs but Islamized Germans could have stood at the head of this Mohammedan Empire."

— Albert Speer

Similarly, Hitler was transcribed as saying:


'Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers [...] then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world.

Hitler was quite MAD Roudy and he despised everyone,including Arabs.....what he did to Jews was to try(and thankfully fail)eliminate them,he detested the Russians/Slavs(where he slaughtered over 11 million) I think really whatever this Being thought should be consigned to the Dustbin of history where such thought(and actual practice) belong.

Hitler loved NO ONE including himself........he ended up being one of the most pathetic individuals in history........mind you most Germans loved him...God Knows How but they did.steve,keep up your good work on this interesting thread Roudy

I am glad that you understand why Islam is a cancer to modern humanity and freedom.

Rabid Islam Roudy but not all.......be more definitive because they are not ALL THE SAME.steve

Yes, DESPITE Islam, they are not all violent and intolerant. History, ethnicity, traditions, and culture have a lot to do with human behavior as well.

 

[Challenger]

Another one too lazy or to stupid to read and find out for themselves.

Here, read this The Great Arab Conquests How The Spread Of Islam Changed The World We Live In Amazon.co.uk Hugh Kennedy 9780753823897 Books

Islam spread by violence, the Caliphates were obtained through Jihad, you ignorant fool...

No. The initial Arab "conquests" were the result of a "unified" group of "opportunists" filling the power vacuum left by the result of a 26 year long war between the two "superpowers" of the age the Romano-Byzantines and the Sassanian Persians, that left both empires devastated. The Arabs fought no more than one or two decisive battles against the Byzantines, destroying their field armies and the cities and towns of Egypt and the Levant (Palestine and Syria) surrendered to them. There was no mass slaughter of civillians, no forced conversion, no expulsions, except of those Byzantine nobles who refused to convert; they were allowed to leave the area unharmed. No churches were destroyed or desecrated and the natives were allowed to administer themselves as they had before. The only differences were that they had to pay taxes to their conquerers. The tax could be avoided altogether if they converted to Islam and the Muslims even tried to stop mass conversions as they reduced their tax base. It took centuries for the region to convert to Islam, that's historical fact, not Islamophobic propaganda.

There's another book availble on the subject by the historian Tom Holland, In The Shadow Of The Sword - Tom Holland that postulates the idea that the overwhelming bulk of Arabs in the 7th century that took part in the conquests were not even Muslims. Islam becoming a "state" religion much later. This book caused a bit of a controversy in 2012 when a TV programme about it was shown on UK's Channel 4. TV historian Tom Holland triggers storm after calling Islam a made-up religion Daily Mail Online

What are you blaberring now? From the time Mohammad appeared on the scene, Islam spread through invasions and conquests. In India alone Islamic savages massacred over 90 million Hindus until they conquered it. And every nation Islam conquered, they forced the Arab religion, culture, and language down the people's throats at the point of the sword. Those who "converted willingly" knew what the consequences would be if they didn't.

Again, try reading some objective history, not Islamophobic propaganda. The only large scale massacres in India prior to the 1948 Partition, were perpertated by Timur-i-Lenk who was a Turko-Mongol warlord in the 14th century who used Islam more as a political tool to legitimise his rule, whereas his own religious beliefs remain a mystery. He's held responsible for depopulated vast areas of Asia and the Levant.

Islam spread as much through missionaries as did any other religion. The only people who claim 90million hindus were massacred by Muslims are those like Andrew Bostrom, who is not even a historian but an agenda driven Islamophobe, along with others like Daniel Pipes. Such accounts also tend to omit the Hindu massacres of Muslims.

If anyone is interested, here's a simplified but more objective account:
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Hold on the Mongol Empire was virtually over by 1280 and the Mongols were never Muslims,and their territory never extended into the Levant or India for that matter......are you sure that you don't mean the Mughals who invaded India 1540 well after the collapse of the Mongols and Ghengis Khan and his sons ??????? they were Turkic/Persian peoples with some Mongol but should not be confused with the Mongols under the Great Khan...who were never Muslim steve

If you've never heard of Timur-i-Lenk, he's better known as Tamerlane and his forces were a blend of Turkic and Mongol soldiers, here's a brief account of his campaigns in India and the levant:
Timur - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
He was a seriously unpleasant individual who may or may not have been a Muslim. When the Mongol empire split, the Ilkhanids eventually conveted to Islam Ilkhanate - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia but other parts retained their Shamanistic practices.

 

[Challenger]

Islam spread by violence, the Caliphates were obtained through Jihad, you ignorant fool...

No. The initial Arab "conquests" were the result of a "unified" group of "opportunists" filling the power vacuum left by the result of a 26 year long war between the two "superpowers" of the age the Romano-Byzantines and the Sassanian Persians, that left both empires devastated. The Arabs fought no more than one or two decisive battles against the Byzantines, destroying their field armies and the cities and towns of Egypt and the Levant (Palestine and Syria) surrendered to them. There was no mass slaughter of civillians, no forced conversion, no expulsions, except of those Byzantine nobles who refused to convert; they were allowed to leave the area unharmed. No churches were destroyed or desecrated and the natives were allowed to administer themselves as they had before. The only differences were that they had to pay taxes to their conquerers. The tax could be avoided altogether if they converted to Islam and the Muslims even tried to stop mass conversions as they reduced their tax base. It took centuries for the region to convert to Islam, that's historical fact, not Islamophobic propaganda.

There's another book availble on the subject by the historian Tom Holland, In The Shadow Of The Sword - Tom Holland that postulates the idea that the overwhelming bulk of Arabs in the 7th century that took part in the conquests were not even Muslims. Islam becoming a "state" religion much later. This book caused a bit of a controversy in 2012 when a TV programme about it was shown on UK's Channel 4. TV historian Tom Holland triggers storm after calling Islam a made-up religion Daily Mail Online

What are you blaberring now? From the time Mohammad appeared on the scene, Islam spread through invasions and conquests. In India alone Islamic savages massacred over 90 million Hindus until they conquered it. And every nation Islam conquered, they forced the Arab religion, culture, and language down the people's throats at the point of the sword. Those who "converted willingly" knew what the consequences would be if they didn't.

Again, try reading some objective history, not Islamophobic propaganda. The only large scale massacres in India prior to the 1948 Partition, were perpertated by Timur-i-Lenk who was a Turko-Mongol warlord in the 14th century who used Islam more as a political tool to legitimise his rule, whereas his own religious beliefs remain a mystery. He's held responsible for depopulated vast areas of Asia and the Levant.

Islam spread as much through missionaries as did any other religion. The only people who claim 90million hindus were massacred by Muslims are those like Andrew Bostrom, who is not even a historian but an agenda driven Islamophobe, along with others like Daniel Pipes. Such accounts also tend to omit the Hindu massacres of Muslims.

If anyone is interested, here's a simplified but more objective account:
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Hold on the Mongol Empire was virtually over by 1260 and the Mongols were never Muslims,and their territory never extended into the Levant or India for that matter......are you sure that you don't mean the Mogauls sic who invaded India after the collapse of the Mongols and Ghengis Khan and his sons ???????steve

Actually the Mongols actually did invade the Middle East. They sacked Bagdad but were stopped by the Muslim Mameluks in the Galilee.

Islam spread by violence, the Caliphates were obtained through Jihad, you ignorant fool...

No. The initial Arab "conquests" were the result of a "unified" group of "opportunists" filling the power vacuum left by the result of a 26 year long war between the two "superpowers" of the age the Romano-Byzantines and the Sassanian Persians, that left both empires devastated. The Arabs fought no more than one or two decisive battles against the Byzantines, destroying their field armies and the cities and towns of Egypt and the Levant (Palestine and Syria) surrendered to them. There was no mass slaughter of civillians, no forced conversion, no expulsions, except of those Byzantine nobles who refused to convert; they were allowed to leave the area unharmed. No churches were destroyed or desecrated and the natives were allowed to administer themselves as they had before. The only differences were that they had to pay taxes to their conquerers. The tax could be avoided altogether if they converted to Islam and the Muslims even tried to stop mass conversions as they reduced their tax base. It took centuries for the region to convert to Islam, that's historical fact, not Islamophobic propaganda.

There's another book availble on the subject by the historian Tom Holland, In The Shadow Of The Sword - Tom Holland that postulates the idea that the overwhelming bulk of Arabs in the 7th century that took part in the conquests were not even Muslims. Islam becoming a "state" religion much later. This book caused a bit of a controversy in 2012 when a TV programme about it was shown on UK's Channel 4. TV historian Tom Holland triggers storm after calling Islam a made-up religion Daily Mail Online

What are you blaberring now? From the time Mohammad appeared on the scene, Islam spread through invasions and conquests. In India alone Islamic savages massacred over 90 million Hindus until they conquered it. And every nation Islam conquered, they forced the Arab religion, culture, and language down the people's throats at the point of the sword. Those who "converted willingly" knew what the consequences would be if they didn't.

Again, try reading some objective history, not Islamophobic propaganda. The only large scale massacres in India prior to the 1948 Partition, were perpertated by Timur-i-Lenk who was a Turko-Mongol warlord in the 14th century who used Islam more as a political tool to legitimise his rule, whereas his own religious beliefs remain a mystery. He's held responsible for depopulated vast areas of Asia and the Levant.

Islam spread as much through missionaries as did any other religion. The only people who claim 90million hindus were massacred by Muslims are those like Andrew Bostrom, who is not even a historian but an agenda driven Islamophobe, along with others like Daniel Pipes. Such accounts also tend to omit the Hindu massacres of Muslims.

If anyone is interested, here's a simplified but more objective account:
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Hold on the Mongol Empire was virtually over by 1260 and the Mongols were never Muslims,and their territory never extended into the Levant or India for that matter......are you sure that you don't mean the Mogauls sic who invaded India after the collapse of the Mongols and Ghengis Khan and his sons ???????steve

Actually the Mongols actually did invade the Middle East. They sacked Bagdad but were stopped by the Muslim Mameluks in the Galilee.

Yup, at the battle of Ain Jalut in 1260CE.

 

[Challenger]

^^^^^^

Which is why the Mongols, like Hitler, had an admiration for Islam and eventually converted to it. It happens with any tribe that likes to invade, loot, behead, rape, and kill other people.

Wrong, most of them converted to Buddhism. The Ilkhanids converted to Islam under Iranian and Turkish influence and basicaly settled down to live relatively peacfully once Timur died.

 

[Challenger]

GUILTINESS.....AS ALWAYS...YOUR MANIC-MADNESS SHINING THROUGH YET AGAIN DISGUSTING TERROR MERCHANT OF NORTH LONDON

600 miles out old chap, keep trying. A clue I can see the North sea and the North Yorks moors from my house.

So it is you that is terror merchant of Oz as you will go to any extremes to defend islamonazi terrorism

Whass’ up Sherlock…..


Quite the Englishman, aren’t we ole’ bean? (and your bloke, steve he did say "whilst." )....


I can just see you…


whilst twirling your mustache, and snickering.


"600 miles out old chap, keep trying…."


"I can see the North sea…"


"...and the North Yorks moors...
from my house"



I have some favorite movies with a lot of English-speaking people in them:


Have you seen::


Rebecca (’40)

The Invisible Man (’33)

American Werewolf in London (’81)

Time Bandits (’81)

Dial ‘M’ For Murder (’54)

European Vacation (80’s)

A Hard Days Night (’64)

Help (’65)


Classics. Maybe ‘youse’ over there by the moors would like American Werewolf in London !


cheerio, lad….

We had enough with Dracula don't cha' know, and his coffin can still be seen in the ruins of Whitby Abbey

Proof, if any were needed that Phoney lives in his own little fantasy world.

So now you are an expert on Whitby and Dracula

I have laid in Dracula`s grave at Whitby Abbey and had the 3 white resident ducks follow me around after feeding them. The ducks even followed me into a ...

...I suppose we'll never know where they followed you, probably for the best. This may come as a shock to you but Dracula is a character in a book by Bram Stoker...he's not real. Stoker got the name from the patronym of Vlad Tepes a Wallachian nut job who enjoyed impaling people.

 

[Challenger]

Any and all attacks against the Zionist Israeli security forces and their supporters and collaborators, just as in WW2 when the various European resistance movements against the Nazis carried out similar attacks. Had the French, Dutch or Polish Resistance fired rockets into Germany, they would have been praised for their ingenuity, it's all a matter of perpective.

And now the laws and rules are different, so you are trying to blame the Jews for the attacks. IT IS NOW ILLEGAL TO TARGET CIVILIANS and this is what hamas is doing, so the world should give them a taste of their own medicine and drop whizz-bangs on them

Hamas' weapons are incapable of "targeting" civilians; only the Zionist's weapons have that capability.

So Iranian grad missiles are not capable of targeting civilians, IED's are not capable of targeting civilians, anti tank missiles are not capable of targeting civilians, depleted uranium rounds fired from a semi automatic are not apable of targeting civilians. Do you the rest of the weapons used by hamas that can target civilians, until we are down to qassams that have been designated a prohibited weapon

The key word here is "targeting", get it?

I do but it seems that you don't as hamas uses many weapons that are targeted at Israeli children, and the ones that cant are designated under International Law as prohibited weapons.
But why let such a little thing as this steer you away from your Jew Hatred and Nazi Anti Semitism

 

[theliq]

Islam spread by violence, the Caliphates were obtained through Jihad, you ignorant fool...

No. The initial Arab "conquests" were the result of a "unified" group of "opportunists" filling the power vacuum left by the result of a 26 year long war between the two "superpowers" of the age the Romano-Byzantines and the Sassanian Persians, that left both empires devastated. The Arabs fought no more than one or two decisive battles against the Byzantines, destroying their field armies and the cities and towns of Egypt and the Levant (Palestine and Syria) surrendered to them. There was no mass slaughter of civillians, no forced conversion, no expulsions, except of those Byzantine nobles who refused to convert; they were allowed to leave the area unharmed. No churches were destroyed or desecrated and the natives were allowed to administer themselves as they had before. The only differences were that they had to pay taxes to their conquerers. The tax could be avoided altogether if they converted to Islam and the Muslims even tried to stop mass conversions as they reduced their tax base. It took centuries for the region to convert to Islam, that's historical fact, not Islamophobic propaganda.

There's another book availble on the subject by the historian Tom Holland, In The Shadow Of The Sword - Tom Holland that postulates the idea that the overwhelming bulk of Arabs in the 7th century that took part in the conquests were not even Muslims. Islam becoming a "state" religion much later. This book caused a bit of a controversy in 2012 when a TV programme about it was shown on UK's Channel 4. TV historian Tom Holland triggers storm after calling Islam a made-up religion Daily Mail Online

What are you blaberring now? From the time Mohammad appeared on the scene, Islam spread through invasions and conquests. In India alone Islamic savages massacred over 90 million Hindus until they conquered it. And every nation Islam conquered, they forced the Arab religion, culture, and language down the people's throats at the point of the sword. Those who "converted willingly" knew what the consequences would be if they didn't.

Again, try reading some objective history, not Islamophobic propaganda. The only large scale massacres in India prior to the 1948 Partition, were perpertated by Timur-i-Lenk who was a Turko-Mongol warlord in the 14th century who used Islam more as a political tool to legitimise his rule, whereas his own religious beliefs remain a mystery. He's held responsible for depopulated vast areas of Asia and the Levant.

Islam spread as much through missionaries as did any other religion. The only people who claim 90million hindus were massacred by Muslims are those like Andrew Bostrom, who is not even a historian but an agenda driven Islamophobe, along with others like Daniel Pipes. Such accounts also tend to omit the Hindu massacres of Muslims.

If anyone is interested, here's a simplified but more objective account:
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Hold on the Mongol Empire was virtually over by 1280 and the Mongols were never Muslims,and their territory never extended into the Levant or India for that matter......are you sure that you don't mean the Mughals who invaded India 1540 well after the collapse of the Mongols and Ghengis Khan and his sons ??????? they were Turkic/Persian peoples with some Mongol but should not be confused with the Mongols under the Great Khan...who were never Muslim steve

If you've never heard of Timur-i-Lenk, he's better known as Tamerlane and his forces were a blend of Turkic and Mongol soldiers, here's a brief account of his campaigns in India and the levant:
Timur - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
He was a seriously unpleasant individual who may or may not have been a Muslim. When the Mongol empire split, the Ilkhanids eventually conveted to Islam Ilkhanate - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia but other parts retained their Shamanistic practices.

Thanks I have as Temur the Lame......anglo=Tamerlane........he thought he was Genghis Khan but never was......did his decendents later create the Mughal Empire in India I wonder ??????...Thanks for the info Challenger...steve

 

[theliq]

600 miles out old chap, keep trying. A clue I can see the North sea and the North Yorks moors from my house.

So it is you that is terror merchant of Oz as you will go to any extremes to defend islamonazi terrorism

Whass’ up Sherlock…..


Quite the Englishman, aren’t we ole’ bean? (and your bloke, steve he did say "whilst." )....


I can just see you…


whilst twirling your mustache, and snickering.


"600 miles out old chap, keep trying…."


"I can see the North sea…"


"...and the North Yorks moors...
from my house"



I have some favorite movies with a lot of English-speaking people in them:


Have you seen::


Rebecca (’40)

The Invisible Man (’33)

American Werewolf in London (’81)

Time Bandits (’81)

Dial ‘M’ For Murder (’54)

European Vacation (80’s)

A Hard Days Night (’64)

Help (’65)


Classics. Maybe ‘youse’ over there by the moors would like American Werewolf in London !


cheerio, lad….

We had enough with Dracula don't cha' know, and his coffin can still be seen in the ruins of Whitby Abbey

Proof, if any were needed that Phoney lives in his own little fantasy world.

So now you are an expert on Whitby and Dracula

I have laid in Dracula`s grave at Whitby Abbey and had the 3 white resident ducks follow me around after feeding them. The ducks even followed me into a ...

...I suppose we'll never know where they followed you, probably for the best. This may come as a shock to you but Dracula is a character in a book by Bram Stoker...he's not real. Stoker got the name from the patronym of Vlad Tepes a Wallachian nut job who enjoyed impaling people.

He is either completely THICK or he is TAKING THE PISS,Challenger............I'll go for THICK..LOL..steve

 

[Challenger]

No. The initial Arab "conquests" were the result of a "unified" group of "opportunists" filling the power vacuum left by the result of a 26 year long war between the two "superpowers" of the age the Romano-Byzantines and the Sassanian Persians, that left both empires devastated. The Arabs fought no more than one or two decisive battles against the Byzantines, destroying their field armies and the cities and towns of Egypt and the Levant (Palestine and Syria) surrendered to them. There was no mass slaughter of civillians, no forced conversion, no expulsions, except of those Byzantine nobles who refused to convert; they were allowed to leave the area unharmed. No churches were destroyed or desecrated and the natives were allowed to administer themselves as they had before. The only differences were that they had to pay taxes to their conquerers. The tax could be avoided altogether if they converted to Islam and the Muslims even tried to stop mass conversions as they reduced their tax base. It took centuries for the region to convert to Islam, that's historical fact, not Islamophobic propaganda.

There's another book availble on the subject by the historian Tom Holland, In The Shadow Of The Sword - Tom Holland that postulates the idea that the overwhelming bulk of Arabs in the 7th century that took part in the conquests were not even Muslims. Islam becoming a "state" religion much later. This book caused a bit of a controversy in 2012 when a TV programme about it was shown on UK's Channel 4. TV historian Tom Holland triggers storm after calling Islam a made-up religion Daily Mail Online

What are you blaberring now? From the time Mohammad appeared on the scene, Islam spread through invasions and conquests. In India alone Islamic savages massacred over 90 million Hindus until they conquered it. And every nation Islam conquered, they forced the Arab religion, culture, and language down the people's throats at the point of the sword. Those who "converted willingly" knew what the consequences would be if they didn't.

Again, try reading some objective history, not Islamophobic propaganda. The only large scale massacres in India prior to the 1948 Partition, were perpertated by Timur-i-Lenk who was a Turko-Mongol warlord in the 14th century who used Islam more as a political tool to legitimise his rule, whereas his own religious beliefs remain a mystery. He's held responsible for depopulated vast areas of Asia and the Levant.

Islam spread as much through missionaries as did any other religion. The only people who claim 90million hindus were massacred by Muslims are those like Andrew Bostrom, who is not even a historian but an agenda driven Islamophobe, along with others like Daniel Pipes. Such accounts also tend to omit the Hindu massacres of Muslims.

If anyone is interested, here's a simplified but more objective account:
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Hold on the Mongol Empire was virtually over by 1280 and the Mongols were never Muslims,and their territory never extended into the Levant or India for that matter......are you sure that you don't mean the Mughals who invaded India 1540 well after the collapse of the Mongols and Ghengis Khan and his sons ??????? they were Turkic/Persian peoples with some Mongol but should not be confused with the Mongols under the Great Khan...who were never Muslim steve

If you've never heard of Timur-i-Lenk, he's better known as Tamerlane and his forces were a blend of Turkic and Mongol soldiers, here's a brief account of his campaigns in India and the levant:
Timur - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
He was a seriously unpleasant individual who may or may not have been a Muslim. When the Mongol empire split, the Ilkhanids eventually conveted to Islam Ilkhanate - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia but other parts retained their Shamanistic practices.

Thanks I have as Temur the Lame......anglo=Tamerlane........he thought he was Genghis Khan but never was......did his decendents later create the Mughal Empire in India I wonder ??????...Thanks for the info Challenger...steve

Yup, Babur who claimed descent from Timur created the Mughal Dynasty, but northern India was already ruled by Muslim dynasties before then.

 

[Challenger]

Whass’ up Sherlock…..


Quite the Englishman, aren’t we ole’ bean? (and your bloke, steve he did say "whilst." )....


I can just see you…


whilst twirling your mustache, and snickering.


"600 miles out old chap, keep trying…."


"I can see the North sea…"


"...and the North Yorks moors...
from my house"



I have some favorite movies with a lot of English-speaking people in them:


Have you seen::


Rebecca (’40)

The Invisible Man (’33)

American Werewolf in London (’81)

Time Bandits (’81)

Dial ‘M’ For Murder (’54)

European Vacation (80’s)

A Hard Days Night (’64)

Help (’65)


Classics. Maybe ‘youse’ over there by the moors would like American Werewolf in London !


cheerio, lad….

We had enough with Dracula don't cha' know, and his coffin can still be seen in the ruins of Whitby Abbey

Proof, if any were needed that Phoney lives in his own little fantasy world.

So now you are an expert on Whitby and Dracula

I have laid in Dracula`s grave at Whitby Abbey and had the 3 white resident ducks follow me around after feeding them. The ducks even followed me into a ...

...I suppose we'll never know where they followed you, probably for the best. This may come as a shock to you but Dracula is a character in a book by Bram Stoker...he's not real. Stoker got the name from the patronym of Vlad Tepes a Wallachian nut job who enjoyed impaling people.

He is either completely THICK or he is TAKING THE PISS,Challenger............I'll go for THICK..LOL..steve

Nah, he's trying to take the piss, just like all internet trolls.

 

[Roudy]

Islam spread by violence, the Caliphates were obtained through Jihad, you ignorant fool...

No. The initial Arab "conquests" were the result of a "unified" group of "opportunists" filling the power vacuum left by the result of a 26 year long war between the two "superpowers" of the age the Romano-Byzantines and the Sassanian Persians, that left both empires devastated. The Arabs fought no more than one or two decisive battles against the Byzantines, destroying their field armies and the cities and towns of Egypt and the Levant (Palestine and Syria) surrendered to them. There was no mass slaughter of civillians, no forced conversion, no expulsions, except of those Byzantine nobles who refused to convert; they were allowed to leave the area unharmed. No churches were destroyed or desecrated and the natives were allowed to administer themselves as they had before. The only differences were that they had to pay taxes to their conquerers. The tax could be avoided altogether if they converted to Islam and the Muslims even tried to stop mass conversions as they reduced their tax base. It took centuries for the region to convert to Islam, that's historical fact, not Islamophobic propaganda.

There's another book availble on the subject by the historian Tom Holland, In The Shadow Of The Sword - Tom Holland that postulates the idea that the overwhelming bulk of Arabs in the 7th century that took part in the conquests were not even Muslims. Islam becoming a "state" religion much later. This book caused a bit of a controversy in 2012 when a TV programme about it was shown on UK's Channel 4. TV historian Tom Holland triggers storm after calling Islam a made-up religion Daily Mail Online

What are you blaberring now? From the time Mohammad appeared on the scene, Islam spread through invasions and conquests. In India alone Islamic savages massacred over 90 million Hindus until they conquered it. And every nation Islam conquered, they forced the Arab religion, culture, and language down the people's throats at the point of the sword. Those who "converted willingly" knew what the consequences would be if they didn't.

Again, try reading some objective history, not Islamophobic propaganda. The only large scale massacres in India prior to the 1948 Partition, were perpertated by Timur-i-Lenk who was a Turko-Mongol warlord in the 14th century who used Islam more as a political tool to legitimise his rule, whereas his own religious beliefs remain a mystery. He's held responsible for depopulated vast areas of Asia and the Levant.

Islam spread as much through missionaries as did any other religion. The only people who claim 90million hindus were massacred by Muslims are those like Andrew Bostrom, who is not even a historian but an agenda driven Islamophobe, along with others like Daniel Pipes. Such accounts also tend to omit the Hindu massacres of Muslims.

If anyone is interested, here's a simplified but more objective account:
Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Hold on the Mongol Empire was virtually over by 1280 and the Mongols were never Muslims,and their territory never extended into the Levant or India for that matter......are you sure that you don't mean the Mughals who invaded India 1540 well after the collapse of the Mongols and Ghengis Khan and his sons ??????? they were Turkic/Persian peoples with some Mongol but should not be confused with the Mongols under the Great Khan...who were never Muslim steve

If you've never heard of Timur-i-Lenk, he's better known as Tamerlane and his forces were a blend of Turkic and Mongol soldiers, here's a brief account of his campaigns in India and the levant:
Timur - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
He was a seriously unpleasant individual who may or may not have been a Muslim. When the Mongol empire split, the Ilkhanids eventually conveted to Islam Ilkhanate - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia but other parts retained their Shamanistic practices.

Unpleasant? Ha ha ha. Yes he WAS a GOOD Muslim, just judging by the body count he left behind. He used Islam as justification for his campaigns of mass murder.

Born into the Barlas confederation in Transoxiana during the 1320s or 1330s, Timur gained control of the Western Chagatai Khanate by 1370. From that base, he led military campaigns across Western, South and Central Asia and emerged as the most powerful ruler in the Muslim worldafter defeating the Mamluks of Egypt and Syria, the emerging Ottoman Empire and the declining Delhi Sultanate. From these conquests he founded the Timurid Empire, although it fragmented shortly after his death.

Timur is considered the last of the great nomadic conquerors of the Eurasian Steppe, and his empire set the stage for the rise of the more structured and lasting Gunpowder Empires in the 1500s and 1600s.[3][4]:1

Timur envisioned the restoration of the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan. "In his formal correspondence Temur continued throughout his life as the restorer of Chinggisid rights. He even justified his Iranian, Mamluk and Ottoman campaigns as a re-imposition of legitimate Mongol control over lands taken by usurpers[.]" As a means of legitimating his conquests, Timur relied on Islamic symbols and language, referring to himself as the "Sword of Islam" and patronizing educational and religious institutions. He converted nearly all the Borjigin leaders to Islam during his lifetime. "Temur, a non-Chinggisid, tried to build a double legitimacy based on his role as both guardian and restorer of the Mongol Empire."[6] Timur also decisively defeated the Christian Knights Hospitaller at Smyrna, styling himself a ghazi.:91 By the end of his reign, Timur had gained complete control over all the remnants of the Chagatai Khanate, Ilkhanate, and Golden Horde and even attempted to restore the Yuan dynasty.[citation needed]

Timur's armies were inclusively multi-ethnic and were feared throughout Asia, Africa, and Europe, sizable parts of which were laid waste by his campaigns. Scholars estimate that his military campaigns caused the deaths of 17 million people, amounting to about 5% of the world population.

After the death of Abu Sa'id, ruler of the Ilkhanid Dynasty, in 1335, there was a power vacuum in Persia. In 1383, Timur started the military conquest of Persia. He captured Herat, Khorasan and all eastern Persia by 1385; he captured almost all of Persia by 1387. Of note during the Persian campaign was the capture of Isfahan. After the city revolted against Timur's taxes by killing the tax collectors and some of Timur's soldiers, Timur ordered the massacre of the city's citizens; the death toll is reckoned at between 100,000 and 200,000. An eye-witness counted more than 28 towers constructed of about 1,500 heads each. This has been described as a "systematic use of terror against towns...an integral element of Tamerlane's strategic element" which he viewed as preventing bloodshed by discouraging resistance.


****YUP, sounds pretty much like standard Islamic behavior throughout history.

 

[montelatici]

Genghis Khan is said to have killed over 40 million people. And he wasn't a Muslim. Maybe Timur was behaving more like his Mongol ancestors. But, both numbers are likely gross exaggerations. In any case, 90% of Timur's victims, whatever number, were Muslims.

By the way, I went into the editing/discussion area (I am a Wiki editor) of the wiki article you are citing, and it turns out that there is a great deal of controversy as to the veracity of many of the claims contained in the article.

This is stated at the beginning of the article:

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
This article may be unbalanced towards certain viewpoints. (November 2012)
This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. (November 2012)


If I were a propagandist like you are I could do the same thing without providing any links, using bold and large text, for example:


According to the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament), when God called forth his people out of slavery in Egypt and back to the land of their forefathers, he directed them to kill all the Canaanite clans who were living in the land (Deut. 7.1-2; 20.16-18). The destruction was to be complete: every man, woman, and child was to be killed.

and then end it by stating:

****YUP, sounds pretty much like standard Jew behavior throughout history.

Please note. The above is not my contention at all. Just an example of the bullying little punk's propagandizing behavior.

 

[Penelope]

By the way, I went into the editing/discussion area (I am a Wiki editor) of the wiki article you are citing, and it turns out that there is a great deal of controversy as to the veracity of many of the claims contained in the article.

That is great. So many of those article are bias and some even without citation. I can always tell when I read one with Jewish bias and all the footnotes are from Jewish sources.

 

[Penelope]

^^^^^^

Which is why the Mongols, like Hitler, had an admiration for Islam and eventually converted to it. It happens with any tribe that likes to invade, loot, behead, rape, and kill other people.

Usually when countries have the same enemy , a country trying to harm them, they become allies, such as the Ottomans and Germans, why Britain and the USA sided with Russia is another story.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

If the Jews are so alien to the region of Palestine, why is the land sprinkled all over with Jewish artifacts? From the Tomb of Abraham in Hebron (where the Arabs conducted a massacre), to the Tomb of Joseph (which the Arabs destroyed), to the Tomb of Rachel (which had to have an ugly fortress built around it to save it). There's Masada (with its ritual bath) and the Ein Gedi caves (where David hid from Saul). The Arabs are trying to destroy any Temple artifacts by dumping them, just as they destroyed the ancient Shalom synagogue in Jericho.

Oh (looks disappointed) totally not about what I thought.

 

[Phoenall]

Genghis Khan is said to have killed over 40 million people. And he wasn't a Muslim. Maybe Timur was behaving more like his Mongol ancestors. But, both numbers are likely gross exaggerations. In any case, 90% of Timur's victims, whatever number, were Muslims.

By the way, I went into the editing/discussion area (I am a Wiki editor) of the wiki article you are citing, and it turns out that there is a great deal of controversy as to the veracity of many of the claims contained in the article.

This is stated at the beginning of the article:

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
This article may be unbalanced towards certain viewpoints. (November 2012)
This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. (November 2012)


If I were a propagandist like you are I could do the same thing without providing any links, using bold and large text, for example:


According to the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament), when God called forth his people out of slavery in Egypt and back to the land of their forefathers, he directed them to kill all the Canaanite clans who were living in the land (Deut. 7.1-2; 20.16-18). The destruction was to be complete: every man, woman, and child was to be killed.

and then end it by stating:

****YUP, sounds pretty much like standard Jew behavior throughout history.

Please note. The above is not my contention at all. Just an example of the bullying little punk's propagandizing behavior.

Now how about finding a report of the Israeli government saying the same thing today, you know like the reports coming from arab muslim quarters that demand the genocide of all the Jews.

 

[Roudy]

Genghis Khan is said to have killed over 40 million people. And he wasn't a Muslim. Maybe Timur was behaving more like his Mongol ancestors. But, both numbers are likely gross exaggerations. In any case, 90% of Timur's victims, whatever number, were Muslims.

By the way, I went into the editing/discussion area (I am a Wiki editor) of the wiki article you are citing, and it turns out that there is a great deal of controversy as to the veracity of many of the claims contained in the article.

This is stated at the beginning of the article:

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
This article may be unbalanced towards certain viewpoints. (November 2012)
This article needs attention from an expert on the subject. (November 2012)


If I were a propagandist like you are I could do the same thing without providing any links, using bold and large text, for example:


According to the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament), when God called forth his people out of slavery in Egypt and back to the land of their forefathers, he directed them to kill all the Canaanite clans who were living in the land (Deut. 7.1-2; 20.16-18). The destruction was to be complete: every man, woman, and child was to be killed.

and then end it by stating:

****YUP, sounds pretty much like standard Jew behavior throughout history.

Please note. The above is not my contention at all. Just an example of the bullying little punk's propagandizing behavior.

But you can't show us any other violence committed by Jews other than this passage over 4,000 years a good, now can you?

Besides you keep telling us that the bible isn't "historically accurate".

Yet, the massacres and beheadings committed by the Mongol Muslim are historical facts. Oh but let's not "exaggerate" Islamic atrocities. Noooooo.

Sorry you Jew hating piece of shit, you're shit outta luck on this one.

 

[Roudy]

Apparently Monte has nothing better to do but "edit" wiki articles in order to inject his false propaganda, lies, and Jew hate into them, and Fatima Penepoop with the Palestinian Muslim boyfriend is still an asylum escapee who is possibly starting to fall in love with Monte because he's such an avid Jew hating wiki editor. Ha ha ha.