Disfunctional Muslim Male

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:04 pm

I'd like to get some input from you as I see a glaring fault with the morality of Muslim males and more importantly the short-coming of the Islamic faith. I know TB has made a number of posts about Islam but this is a more real life example. The following are a couple of examples:

"A female war photographer from the New York Times revealed tonight how she was repeatedly sexually assaulted during her nightmare hostage ordeal in Libya."

"Last month, South African journalist Lara Logan, Chief Foreign Correspondent for CBS, was also sexually abused while covering scenes of celebration in Cairo's Tahrir Square."

I'll also throw in a female helicopter pilot who, after being shot down and took captive by Saddams troops in desert Storm One, was repeated groped and assaulted even tho she had a broken arm.

Now my own humble opinion. I don't know about the rest of you but I have yet to hear about christian men assaulting Muslim women at any sort of protest or if they were captured on a battle field. To me this shows a certain lack of respect for women in general and none for non Muslim women. This all has to be a direct result of the Koran/Quran and the teachings there in. I would think the examples I listed are the last reason we want any sort of Islamic ascendancy and/or Sharia law in the west. If there was just one lone example carried out by one sexually suppressed Muslim, I wouldn't be post. In all the examples, the sexual assaults involved multiple males with no considerations of the female beyond their own animal desires. So is a failure in upbringing or a failure of faith?

Now I'm not saying all Muslim males have this predilection to grope and screw non-Muslim women, but a pattern is developing where given a chance, it seems a number have the idea non-Muslim women are free to be used as a self gratification blow up doll. Since their culture has a direct tie to their religion, I'm telling my daughter not to allow herself to be alone with any Muslim male as they seem to have no moral compass where females are concerned. Better safe than sorry.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:30 pm

I'm fairly sure that's a result of bad upbringing and "bad culture", not necessarily the influence of Islam in general - if it were the influence of Islam in general, then you would hear of cases of this sort of behavior all over the world, whereas they seem to be confined to what was once called "the Arab World," defined as Arabic-speaking countries stretching from the Atlantic Ocean in the west to the Arabian Sea in the east, and from the Mediterranean Sea in the north to the Horn of Africa and the Indian Ocean in the southeast.

If you want to state that the influence of the Qu'ran encourages Muslim men to sexually abuse non-Muslim women, then I'm going to have to ask you to find some passages of the Qu'ran to support this claim.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:17 pm

Here is your answer Null:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

A tale of two Pakistanis: The Muslim woman on the left was welcomed
as an immigrant to America 10 years ago, but is complaining of
emotional trauma from having been bumped from an airline flight.
The Christian on the right still lives as a minority in Pakistan and
is just happy to be home after having been chained to a tree,
gang-raped, and ordered to embrace Islam by her kidnappers.

It's not an academic debate. If you wanna close your eyes and cover your ears and scream "la la la la la" it's up to you.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:05 pm

I'm not seeing any Qu'ran passages.

Tunnelcat · Post by **Tunnelcat** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:15 pm

I think you'll see this happen in prudish or sexually repressed cultures and religions. Think about it, when sex is repressed, males will bottle up their pent up desire until they become vessels of overflowing sexual rage. The result is the rape or murder of women. Human males can't control hormone production, yet religions and societal norms tell those same human males to keep it zipped until the proper time, marriage usually, for example. And heaven forbid other forms of sexual release beside intercourse. Patriarchal societies usually, but not always, treat their females very badly.

Christianity has it's own prudish ideals that comes with it's own set of problems. It's past, and sometimes present treatment of women in this country isn't stellar either. But Islam seems to bring with it the sordid label of carrying it to the extreme, even to the point of blaming, vilifying, denigrating and murdering women. I can't label all Islamic males with this "problem", but I'm postulating that many of them essentially hate and blame women because of their devotion to their religion and the resulting sexual restrictions placed on them by that religion. They then act out that pent up sexual rage when the opportunity presents itself and which their society often condones as a "solution". And they do this all for religion and societal mores. I will never understand this aspect of many religions either, control of the sexual lives of others.

Bill Maher, who I know many of you hate so bare it out, is well known to slam Muslim men over their treatment of women. Here's what happened recently on his show.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/video/item ... muslim-men

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 6:32 pm

null0010 wrote:I'm not seeing any Qu'ran passages.

don't know the accuracy of this but most of the following gives license to do what you want to infidels. Correct what is inaccurate:

* Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them(2:191)
* Make war on the infidels living in your neighboorhood (9:123)
* When opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you catch them (9:5)
* Kill the Jews and the Christians if they do not convert to Islam or refuse to pay Jizya tax (9:29)
* Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable (3:85)
* The Jews and the Christians are perverts; fight them (9:30)
* Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticise Islam. (5:33)
* The infidels are unclean; do not let them into a mosque (9:28)
* Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron rods, boiling water; melt their skin and bellies
(22:19)
* Do not hanker for peace with the infidels; behead them when you catch them (47:4)
* The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them (8:65)
* Muslims must not take the infidels as friends (3:28)
* Terrorise and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an (8:12)
* Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorise the infidels (8:60)

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 7:57 pm

I'll have to go get my copy of the Qu'ran to verify all that, but at a glance I don't see a verse condoning or encouraging rape of non-Muslims.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:19 pm

"Infidel" women are taken as spoils of war.

In Quran 4:24 we read:

Also (prohibited are) Women already married, except those whom your right hand hands posses. ……. In Quran “ your right hands posses” means captives in Jihad. Abdullah Yusuf Ali also mentioned this in his translation of the Quran footnote # 537. Islam allows Muslims to capture married women in war and marry with them while their husbands are alive and captured. History of Islam has a bloody chronicle of invading countries and seizing properties, women and children.

Your source:
Andrew Bostom edited a book titled “The Legacy Of Jihad” It’s recommended for further information.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 9:21 pm

Also, if you want to read about jihad:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Th ... sages.html

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:11 pm

ThunderBunny wrote:
In Quran 4:24 we read:

Also (prohibited are) Women already married, except those whom your right hand hands posses. ……. In Quran “ your right hands posses” means captives in Jihad. Abdullah Yusuf Ali also mentioned this in his translation of the Quran footnote # 537. Islam allows Muslims to capture married women in war and marry with them while their husbands are alive and captured. History of Islam has a bloody chronicle of invading countries and seizing properties, women and children.

Okay, that sounds more like wife stealing than rape, though.

flip · Post by **flip** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:19 am

Why do you think they steal them?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:26 am

null0010 wrote:I'll have to go get my copy of the Qu'ran to verify all that, but at a glance I don't see a verse condoning or encouraging rape of non-Muslims.

From the above passage:

" Terrorise and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an (8:12)"

Do you think rape is not a form of terrorism? Or do you think it is a form of male/female bonding?

SilverFJ · Post by **SilverFJ** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:30 am

Wow, null, you could drag that ★■◆● out for days, couldn't you? You really think sex with a woman you forced to marry you isn't rape? lol!

Even is Islam was a peaceful religon in the Koran like you claim (which is is not) Islam would be just like Communism. They would both work on paper and that's it.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 11:41 am

SilverFJ wrote:Wow, null, you could drag that ★■◆● out for days, couldn't you? You really think sex with a woman you forced to marry you isn't rape?

These incidents that have been referenced in this thread do not seem to have anything to to with marriage.

flip · Post by **flip** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:56 pm

It's simple Null. If God says you should terrorize your enemies, cut their heads off, and steal their wives, if he doesn't want them raped also he better explicitly say "BUT DO NOT RAPE THEM". So in this case it's not what the Koran says but what it does not say.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:59 pm

flip wrote:It's simple Null. If God says you should terrorize your enemies, cut their heads off, and steal their wives, if he doesn't want them raped also he better explicitly say "BUT DO NOT RAPE THEM". So in this case it's not what the Koran says but what it does not say.

So you're saying that without saying "do not rape anyone," the Qu'ran implicitly condones and encourages rape?

flip · Post by **flip** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:04 pm

Yes. Islamic doctrine is fundamentally flawed in that manner. It teaches one to be fierce and to develop hate for your enemies. A hateful person is not known for self-control.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:06 pm

To take this a step further, are you saying that whatever any religion or philosophy or law does not expressly forbid, it therefore condones, permits, and/or encourages?

flip · Post by **flip** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:09 pm

No sense in making this more complicated than it is Null. If God tells someone to hate someone else, then be assured they will. It's simple as that.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:11 pm

flip wrote:No sense in making this more complicated than it is Null. If God tells someone to hate someone else, then be assured they will. It's simple as that.

Do I really need to bring up all the hatred in the Christian Bible to dissuade you from this line of reasoning?

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:19 pm

Please do.

because I will point out this passage, words spoken by Christ.

Matthew 5:43-48 wrote:Love for Enemies

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:23 pm

Typical of the "well, look how bad this other guy is!" reasoning.

The KKK is a horrible religiously-based movement based on hate, but what proportion of violence relative to islamic militantcy has been done in the world by the KKK OVER its ENTIRE existence?

Great Null- you can point out hateful crap in the bible. How does that minimize the death, rape and destruction caused in the name of islam?

flip · Post by **flip** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:30 pm

It would depend on how you approached it. Would you be talking about Christianity or Judaism? Islam, Christianity and Judaism all share the same root. But even then why does it matter. The same line of reasoning would apply equally to all 3.

In Judaism, God tells the Jews that he will use them to re-establish his rule on the Earth. He tells them to kill the inhabitants of the land that he gives to them, always with specific guidelines. The whole problem is the fallen mind of man. Saul loses his kingship for doing exactly what God says but not within the guidelines set. I also think for the jews sake, considering they were nomads looking for a home, they were also hated. If they were to survive as a people, it would have been kill or be killed. To eradicate your enemy was a necessity of reality. Point here is that they did just that. God said kill, they did and most every time got punished for their over zealousness in doing it.

On the other hand. Christian principals are perfect. A common theme throughout the Bible. To bring forth perfection from something that is imperfect. All the atrocities falsely committed in the name of Christianity were because of a deviation from it's principals.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:34 pm

In fact, I could be a muslim right now (I merely have to repeat the shahada 3 times in front of a witness), grab a knife and go to town on your family. I actually have Lebonese blood.

Maybe I have a legitamate gripe against a white guy like you Null because you're a citizen of a country that has been oppressing me. Can I rape your sister, girlfriend and burn down your infidel house now?

Hey. At least I'm not a Christian. Those guys are REALLY terrible. They might sing carols on your doorstep during Christmas or something.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 7:48 pm

ThunderBunny wrote:Maybe I have a legitamate gripe against a white guy like you Null because you're a citizen of a country that has been oppressing me.

First, I am not white, and second, my people have been oppressed far worse than any Arab. Don't try to pull racial oppression cards against me. But that is neither here nor there.

If you're going to use phrases like these:

ThunderBunny wrote:The KKK is a horrible religiously-based movement based on hate, but what proportion of violence relative to islamic militantcy has been done in the world by the KKK OVER its ENTIRE existence?

It would be more appropriate to compare violence done by Islam OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE to violence done by Christianity OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE. And I think we both know who the "winner" is in that little contest.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:39 pm

It would be more appropriate to compare violence done by Islam OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE to violence done by Christianity OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE. And I think we both know who the "winner" is in that little contest.

Yep. Islam, by a LONG shot.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:15 pm

ThunderBunny wrote:
It would be more appropriate to compare violence done by Islam OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE to violence done by Christianity OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE. And I think we both know who the "winner" is in that little contest.
Yep. Islam, by a LONG shot.

I've already demonstrated conclusively in another thread that the death toll from Christianity is much higher than the death toll from Islam in the past 200 years, so I suppose I'll have to gather historical data stretching back to the birth of Christ.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:19 pm

Here are a few of the 123 verses in the Quran about killing and fighting.'

"O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you, and let them find in you a harshness; and know that Allah is with the godfearing" (Sura 9:123).

"Fight against those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger, have forbidden -- such men as practise not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book -- until they pay tribute out of hand and have been humbled" (Sura 9:29).

"The punishment of those who wage war against God and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter;" (Sura 5:33).

NOTE: The Qur'an encourages Muslims to fight, even when they would rather seek peace with those who do not wish to adopt Islam.

"Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." (Sura AL-BAQARA 2:16)

Most Muslims would say that these verses are misunderstood, but misunderstood or not, the history of Islam shows that many Muslim leaders have used those verses to spread terror. Islam, according to the Qur'an, can be spread by force.

Apologists for Islam often quote the following verse, and most Westerners, unfamiliar with the Koran and imagining that it must obey the same theological logic as the Christian Bible, assume that Islamic scripture mandates religious toleration toward non-Muslims. That assumption is inaccurate.

""Let there be no compulsion in religion; truth stands out clearly from error" (Sura 2.256).

Sounds peaceul enough, right? That is until you learn that the Qur'an includes many abrogated verses, called mansukh, and abrogating verses, nasikh; the latter cancel the former, rendering them invalid, though they nevertheless remain in the Koran and are deceptively quoted, for Western consumption, as though they still represented genuine Islamic beliefs. For example:

O you who believe! When you meet those who disbelieve marching for war, then turn not your backs to them. And whoever shall turn his back to them on that day - unless he turn aside for the sake of fighting or withdraws to a company - then he, indeed, becomes deserving of Allah's wrath, and his abode is hell; and an evil destination shall it be. So you did not slay them, but it was Allah Who slew them and you did not smite when you smote (the enemy) but it was Allah Who smote, and that He might confer upon the believers a good gift from Himself; (8:12-17)

"Slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush" (Sura 9.5).

"O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people. (Sura 5.51).

the Bible does not teach such things.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:21 pm

null0010 wrote:
ThunderBunny wrote:
It would be more appropriate to compare violence done by Islam OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE to violence done by Christianity OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE. And I think we both know who the "winner" is in that little contest.
Yep. Islam, by a LONG shot.
I've already demonstrated conclusively in another thread that the death toll from Christianity is much higher than the death toll from Islam in the past 200 years, so I suppose I'll have to gather historical data stretching back to the birth of Christ.

I hope your not referring the the Crusades when you quote your figures.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:36 pm

Null wrote:It would be more appropriate to compare violence done by Islam OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE to violence done by Christianity OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE. And I think we both know who the "winner" is in that little contest.

That's kind of a bull★■◆● contest. And then--and I know this won't make a dent with people like you, Null--you have the fact that Islam was started in violence, and Christianity started in peace, and was later usurped contrary to the authority of scripture and actually perpetrated violence against Biblical Christianity. That's pretty well known (by anyone who actually knows anything about Christianity).

By the way I will echo the statements of others here, when a man holds a man as his prisoner and forces that man's wife to marry him, it's clearly against her will and that is tantamount to rape by any reasonable measure. The only difference is that she is now in his harem against her will--while her husband is still alive--and will be raped over and over again. Just because the bastard calls it marriage doesn't make it so. Admit it.

I tend to disagree with the main thrust of this topic, from one perspective. Soldiers, as a rule, are no angels, and outside of discipline from higher authority all kinds of atrocities have been committed in wars. I don't know what Muslim men are like, having only very briefly met a few of them in my life, but in my opinion it is disingenuous to lay these occurrences at the feet of Islamic culture as a whole in this way, with only militant kidnappers as examples.

Null, what kind of violence do you expect to find from Christianity even up to the death of Jesus Christ? I think an important question that needs to be asked if you're going to seriously engage in an argument for Christianity VS Islam on the subject of violence, is just what qualifies someone as Christian or Muslim? If it's just anyone that claims the label, then I wouldn'tt even bother. How can anyone argue for or against such a broad spectrum? The real argument becomes 'which religion can take anyone who claims it and cause them to live a peaceful lifestyle. Kinda stupid, isn't it? Unless you're prepared to start a new topic and answer that question, you might as well shut it down (that argument) right now.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:26 pm

I've already demonstrated conclusively in another thread that the death toll from Christianity is much higher than the death toll from Islam in the past 200 years, so I suppose I'll have to gather historical data stretching back to the birth of Christ.

As evidenced above, you don't seem to read websites. http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ will give you a complete picture.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:23 am

That website has an agenda to pursue, factual and sourced accounts of wartime deaths do not.

CUDA: The Crusades did not happen 200 or less years ago.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:28 am

I like how people always forget why there were “The Crusades”.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:30 am

Everyone knows the Crusades were all about oil.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:11 am

null0010 wrote:It would be more appropriate to compare violence done by Islam OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE to violence done by Christianity OVER ITS ENTIRE EXISTENCE. And I think we both know who the "winner" is in that little contest.

null0010 wrote: CUDA: The Crusades did not happen 200 or less years ago.

Are we now changing the parameters of this discussion? because FYI Islam is over 200 years old. and it predates the 1st crusade by 400 years.

edit: not to mention it's not so much the Violence done by it's followers as it is what is taught in each book. because as we all know human beings will twist anything for their own gains.

Christ did not teach Violence. period

Foil · Post by **Foil** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:36 am

null0010 wrote: CUDA: The Crusades did not happen 200 or less years ago.

CUDA wrote:Are we now changing the parameters of this discussion?

No, Null was referring to his own post, where he said he compared the last 200 years. The crusades simply fall outside that time frame.

That said, the heart of the debate on the previous page is whether the scriptures Cuda referenced are being used against non-Muslim women. From what I gather, the primary factor seems to be the cultural framework where it's interpreted (i.e. the Islamic religious leadership in the West generally sees those scriptures very differently than elsewhere).

IMHO, arguing whether radical violence by Muslims is due to cultural factors or some inherent quality of the religion is like debating whether the glass is half full or half empty. It's both, and the relative weight of each factor depends largely on where/when you're looking.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:00 am

Foil wrote:
null0010 wrote: CUDA: The Crusades did not happen 200 or less years ago.
CUDA wrote:Are we now changing the parameters of this discussion?
No, Null was referring to his own post, where he said he compared the last 200 years. The crusades simply fall outside that time frame.

you are correct I skimmed at that point of his post. but he did still change the parameters. his first post said "Over it's entire existence" his next post narrowed it to the last 200 years. there are accounts of over 150 million killed by Muslim's over the last 200 years

Foil wrote:That said, the heart of the debate on the previous page is whether the scriptures Cuda referenced are being used against non-Muslim women. From what I gather, the primary factor seems to be the cultural framework where it's interpreted (i.e. the Islamic religious leadership in the West generally sees those scriptures very differently than elsewhere).

IMHO, arguing whether radical violence by Muslims is due to cultural factors or some inherent quality of the religion is like debating whether the glass is half full or half empty. It's both, and the relative weight of each factor depends largely on where/when you're looking.

and again. it's not what the people do. it's what is taught. the Qur'an teaches kill the infidels. MORE THAN ONCE.
Christ teaches Love and pray for your enemies. and to turn the other cheek.
You cannot even say that these are two sides of the same penny they are more Apples and Oranges. diametrically opposed points of teaching. "could" certain teaching's be miss interpreted? SURE with both faith's if you take a line at a time.

But if you look at the overall message, which one teaches which message?

and to back track on Nulls post

Null wrote:Okay, that sounds more like wife stealing than rape, though.

steal
[steel] Show IPA ,verb, stole, sto·len, steal·ing, noun
–verb (used with object)
1.
to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly or by force: A pickpocket stole his watch.

[rape
1 [reyp] Show IPA noun, verb, raped, rap·ing.
–noun
4.
an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside.
5.
Archaic . the act of seizing and carrying off by force.

it seems to me like the two are pretty comparable in their description.

so you are going to take his wife without permission or right. WHY? just to have her cook, clean and do your laundry for you?
I'm sure all those Car thief's just plan on parking the car they just stole in their driveways so they can look at it. I don't think so Tim. they will use and abuse it and then maybe sell it for someone else to do the same.

null0010 · Post by **null0010** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:56 am

CUDA wrote:there are accounts of over 150 million killed by Muslim's over the last 200 years

I'd like to see a source for that claim.

Nightshade · Post by **Nightshade** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:35 pm

The much talked about crusades:

630 Two years before Muhammad's death of a fever, he launches the Tabuk Crusades, in which he led 30,000 jihadists against the Byzantine Christians. He had heard a report that a huge army had amassed to attack Arabia, but the report turned out to be a false rumor. The Byzantine army never materialized. He turned around and went home, but not before extracting 'agreements' from northern tribes. They could enjoy the 'privilege' of living under Islamic 'protection' (read: not be attacked by Islam), if they paid a tax (jizya).

This tax sets the stage for Muhammad's and the later Caliphs' policies. If the attacked city or region did not want to convert to Islam, then they paid a jizya tax. If they converted, then they paid a zakat tax. Either way, money flowed back to the Islamic treasury in Arabia or to the local Muslim governor.

632—634 Under the Caliphate of Abu Bakr the Muslim Crusaders reconquer and sometimes conquer for the first time the polytheists of Arabia. These Arab polytheists had to convert to Islam or die. They did not have the choice of remaining in their faith and paying a tax. Islam does not allow for religious freedom.

633 The Muslim Crusaders, led by Khalid al—Walid, a superior but bloodthirsty military commander, whom Muhammad nicknamed the Sword of Allah for his ferocity in battle (Tabari, 8:158 / 1616—17), conquer the city of Ullays along the Euphrates River (in today's Iraq). Khalid captures and beheads so many that a nearby canal, into which the blood flowed, was called Blood Canal (Tabari 11:24 / 2034—35).

634 At the Battle of Yarmuk in Syria the Muslim Crusaders defeat the Byzantines. Today Osama bin Laden draws inspiration from the defeat, and especially from an anecdote about Khalid al—Walid. An unnamed Muslim remarks: 'The Romans are so numerous and the Muslims so few.' To this Khalid retorts: 'How few are the Romans, and how many the Muslims! Armies become numerous only with victory and few only with defeat, not by the number of men. By God, I would love it . . . if the enemy were twice as many' (Tabari, 11:94 / 2095). Osama bin Ladin quotes Khalid and says that his fighters love death more than we in the West love life. This philosophy of death probably comes from a verse like Sura 2:96. Muhammad assesses the Jews: '[Prophet], you are sure to find them [the Jews] clinging to life more eagerly than any other people, even polytheists' (MAS Abdel Haleem, The Qur'an, Oxford UP, 2004; first insertion in brackets is Haleem's; the second mine).

634—644 The Caliphate of Umar ibn al—Khattab, who is regarded as particularly brutal.

635 Muslim Crusaders besiege and conquer of Damascus

636 Muslim Crusaders defeat Byzantines decisively at Battle of Yarmuk.

637 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq at the Battle of al—Qadisiyyah (some date it in 635 or 636)

638 Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.

638—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.

639—642 Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.

641 Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.

643—707 Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.

644 Caliph Umar is assassinated by a Persian prisoner of war; Uthman ibn Affan is elected third Caliph, who is regarded by many Muslims as gentler than Umar.

644—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.

656 Caliph Uthman is assassinated by disgruntled Muslim soldiers; Ali ibn Abi Talib, son—in—law and cousin to Muhammad, who married the prophet's daughter Fatima through his first wife Khadija, is set up as Caliph.

656 Battle of the Camel, in which Aisha, Muhammad's wife, leads a rebellion against Ali for not avenging Uthman's assassination. Ali's partisans win.

657 Battle of Siffin between Ali and Muslim governor of Jerusalem, arbitration goes against Ali

661 Murder of Ali by an extremist; Ali's supporters acclaim his son Hasan as next Caliph, but he comes to an agreement with Muawiyyah I and retires to Medina.

661—680 the Caliphate of Muawiyyah I. He founds Umayyid dynasty and moves capital from Medina to Damascus

673—678 Arabs besiege Constantinople, capital of Byzantine Empire

680 Massacre of Hussein (Muhammad's grandson), his family, and his supporters in Karbala, Iraq.

691 Dome of the Rock is completed in Jerusalem, only six decades after Muhammad's death.

705 Abd al—Malik restores Umayyad rule.

710—713 Muslim Crusaders conquer the lower Indus Valley.

711—713 Muslim Crusaders conquer Spain and impose the kingdom of Andalus. This article recounts how Muslims today still grieve over their expulsion 700 years later. They seem to believe that the land belonged to them in the first place.

719 Cordova, Spain, becomes seat of Arab governor

732 The Muslim Crusaders stopped at the Battle of Poitiers; that is, Franks (France) halt Arab advance

749 The Abbasids conquer Kufah and overthrow Umayyids

756 Foundation of Umayyid amirate in Cordova, Spain, setting up an independent kingdom from Abbasids

762 Foundation of Baghdad

785 Foundation of the Great Mosque of Cordova

789 Rise of Idrisid amirs (Muslim Crusaders) in Morocco; foundation of Fez; Christoforos, a Muslim who converted to Christianity, is executed.

800 Autonomous Aghlabid dynasty (Muslim Crusaders) in Tunisia

807 Caliph Harun al—Rashid orders the destruction of non—Muslim prayer houses and of the church of Mary Magdalene in Jerusalem

809 Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sardinia, Italy

813 Christians in Palestine are attacked; many flee the country

831 Muslim Crusaders capture Palermo, Italy; raids in Southern Italy

850 Caliph al—Matawakkil orders the destruction of non—Muslim houses of prayer

855 Revolt of the Christians of Hims (Syria)

837—901 Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sicily, raid Corsica, Italy, France

869—883 Revolt of black slaves in Iraq

909 Rise of the Fatimid Caliphate in Tunisia; these Muslim Crusaders occupy Sicily, Sardinia

928—969 Byzantine military revival, they retake old territories, such as Cyprus (964) and Tarsus (969)

937 The Ikhshid, a particularly harsh Muslim ruler, writes to Emperor Romanus, boasting of his control over the holy places

937 The Church of the Resurrection (known as Church of Holy Sepulcher in Latin West) is burned down by Muslims; more churches in Jerusalem are attacked

960 Conversion of Qarakhanid Turks to Islam

966 Anti—Christian riots in Jerusalem

969 Fatimids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Egypt and found Cairo

c. 970 Seljuks enter conquered Islamic territories from the East

973 Israel and southern Syria are again conquered by the Fatimids

1003 First persecutions by al—Hakim; the Church of St. Mark in Fustat, Egypt, is destroyed

1009 Destruction of the Church of the Resurrection by al—Hakim (see 937)

1012 Beginning of al—Hakim's oppressive decrees against Jews and Christians

1015 Earthquake in Palestine; the dome of the Dome of the Rock collapses

1031 Collapse of Umayyid Caliphate and establishment of 15 minor independent dynasties throughout Muslim Andalus

1048 Reconstruction of the Church of the Resurrection completed

1050 Creation of Almoravid (Muslim Crusaders) movement in Mauretania; Almoravids (aka Murabitun) are coalition of western Saharan Berbers; followers of Islam, focusing on the Quran, the hadith, and Maliki law.

1055 Seljuk Prince Tughrul enters Baghdad, consolidation of the Seljuk Sultanate

1055 Confiscation of property of Church of the Resurrection

1071 Battle of Manzikert, Seljuk Turks (Muslim Crusaders) defeat Byzantines and occupy much of Anatolia

1071 Turks (Muslim Crusaders) invade Palestine

1073 Conquest of Jerusalem by Turks (Muslim Crusaders)

1075 Seljuks (Muslim Crusaders) capture Nicea (Iznik) and make it their capital in Anatolia

1076 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) conquer western Ghana

1085 Toledo is taken back by Christian armies

1086 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) send help to Andalus, Battle of Zallaca

1090—1091 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) occupy all of Andalus except Saragossa and Balearic Islands

1094 Byzantine emperor Alexius Comnenus I asks western Christendom for help against Seljuk invasions of his territory; Seljuks are Muslim Turkish family of eastern origins; see 970

1095 Pope Urban II preaches first Crusade; they capture Jerusalem in 1099

So it is only after all of the Islamic aggressive invasions that Western Christendom launches its first Crusades.

They seem to be initiated by the religion of peace I think. It also shows how muhammad, pubuh (plague be upon him), was merely a bloodthirsty warlord that decided to make himself a "prophet" to extort money, pillage and plunder under a "religious" pretense.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/11/ ... rusad.html

References

Gil, Moshe. A History of Palestine: 634—1099. Cambridge UP, 1983, 1997.

Nicolle, David. The Armies of Islam. Men—at—Arms. Osprey, 1982.

———. Saladin and the Saracens. Men—at Arms. Osprey, 1986.

———. Armies of the Muslim Conquests. Men—at—Arms. Osprey, 1993.

———. The Moors, the Islamic West. Men—at—Arms. Osprey, 2001.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:30 pm

OK I've seen on a half dozen site where it quotes the 150 million in the last 200 years, but the sources that they referenced I could not lay my faith in. so I will not link them.
but these sources I can, bear in mind that these were found with a minimal of effort, but some of these fall out of the 200 year time frame

MUSLIMS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATHS OF MORE THAN 270 MILLION NON-MUSLIMS WORLDWIDE

120 MILLION AFRICANS
Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.

60 MILLION CHRISTIANS
The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson,World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:

80 MILLION HINDUS
Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”

10 MILLION BUDDHISTS
Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam); everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.]

270,000,000: THAT’S WAY MORE THAN STALIN, HITLER, MAO, POL POT, IDI AMIN, AND THE REST OF THE 20TH CENTURY’S GENOCIDAL SOCIALISTS!
Astute BloggersPolitical Islam H/T Maria

So even if you TOTALLY dismiss the slave trades estimated 120 million killed that leave 150 Million murdered by Muslims. and this is just once quick look.

and again I point to the teachings NOT the people. the Qur'an teaches violence against non-Muslims. Christ teaches to love your enemy.

Edit: currently 90-95% of the worlds conflicts involve Muslims on at least one of the sides.