Islamophiles / Regressive Left - Liberal non-Muslims who are desperate to protect the Religion of Peace
- Thread starter Cosmos
- Start date
-
⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
Paralethal
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
It could well have been drawn by someone like @Marjan Šiklić. There is a movement among losers like him to convert to Islam to support patriarchal values.
Q
QI 541
Guest
kiwifarms.net
What happened to Vegas?
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
By "today's incident" he meant Las Vegas.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2016
he should move to Sweden if he wants the second experience then.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2015
better yet, move to Malmö and get a grenade in his face.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
It's odd that people immediately jump to countries like Sweden with lower murder rates than the US rather than places in civil war. Somalia and Afghanistan would be better choices. They're not too keen on people with LGBT flairs on their Twitter accounts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14_October_2017_Mogadishu_bombings
Over 3 times the death toll of Las Vegas and Sutherland Springs combined.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2016
Here's a Jan Hus history series on the Ottoman Turks...
Part 1... The Folly of Youth/Don't Trust an Italian
I happen to really enjoy the history of the Ottoman Empire. It's fascinating and the stories of palace intrigue are really quite stunning. However, even though I'm fascinated by their history, It's important to note that they were capable of stunning acts of brutality.
Lets begin in 1444...
The Ottoman Empire and Hungarians have just signed a 10 year truce after a long and bitter war. After this, the Sultan, Murad II, decides to abdicate, leaving his 12 year old son Mehemet (Yes, that Mehemet) as the new Sultan. Rumors of Ottoman weakness cause renewed fervor and an interest in a new "Crusade"
The main "bulwark of Christendom" in 1444 was Władysław III: King of Poland, Grand Duke of Lithuania AND the King of both Hungary and Croatia. At the age of 18, this young king had the weight of the world on his shoulders. He was, to put it bluntly, way in over his head and as such, he was influenced by many of the older men around him. One of these men was an Italian Cardinal by the name of Julian Caesarini. Caesarini was famous for preaching for a (failed) crusade against the Hussites, and he filled the young king's head with tales of Crusades and glory. The Cardinal was emphatic that the king would be in no real danger since a joint Papal/Venetian fleet were to keep the main brunt of the Ottoman army locked in Anatolia, allowing the young man to forge a name for himself. As such, he breaks the truce with the Ottomans. And he goes off, confident that he'll be successful against a boy sultan.
However, Murad II later returns to help his son out.
Since Wladyslaw was such a young king with no real power of his own, he was very eager to prove himself against the Ottoman menace. A 20,000 man army made up of Poles, Lithuanians, Hungarians, Teutons and later supported by Bulgarian rebels and Wallachians assemble at Varna. It's important to note that the young Polish king was not actually the primary commander. That honor went to John (Or Jan) Hunyadi, a grizzled Hungarian Voivode (Hungarian kiwis can correct me but I believe the equivalent noble rank in the West is Duke) and a war veteran. *Note I can probably work up a post about Hunyadi's skill as a tactician later. Conspicuously absent from this army are units from France and England... They're still embroiled in the Hundred Years War. But no matter, the papal and Venetian fleets are sure to keep the Ottoman army locked away...
Imagine then the shock of the Europeans to find themselves facing the entire 60000 Ottoman army, with Murad II at its helm. Remember those Venetians? Yeah they were pretty eager to see the Hungarians brought to heel, so they actually provided transport for the Ottoman army. i.e. the exact opposite of what the Cardinal had said would happen.
So facing desperate odds, Hunyadi actually has some success in breaking the Ottoman Siphai (Heavy Calvary) lines. The young Wladyslaw sees this, and not realizing that his army and his life are in grave danger decides to directly attack the van of the Ottoman Sultan. The Sultan was protected by his guards, The Janissary Corps and they absolutely shred the inexperienced king and his Guard Cavalry.
The reprisals of the Sultan's Janissaries were brutal. They dismember the young king and mount his head atop a pole and also steal his armor and shield for trophies...
To be continued in part II... The Janissary Corps and the conquest of Constantinople.
Part 1... The Folly of Youth/Don't Trust an Italian
I happen to really enjoy the history of the Ottoman Empire. It's fascinating and the stories of palace intrigue are really quite stunning. However, even though I'm fascinated by their history, It's important to note that they were capable of stunning acts of brutality.
Lets begin in 1444...
The Ottoman Empire and Hungarians have just signed a 10 year truce after a long and bitter war. After this, the Sultan, Murad II, decides to abdicate, leaving his 12 year old son Mehemet (Yes, that Mehemet) as the new Sultan. Rumors of Ottoman weakness cause renewed fervor and an interest in a new "Crusade"
The main "bulwark of Christendom" in 1444 was Władysław III: King of Poland, Grand Duke of Lithuania AND the King of both Hungary and Croatia. At the age of 18, this young king had the weight of the world on his shoulders. He was, to put it bluntly, way in over his head and as such, he was influenced by many of the older men around him. One of these men was an Italian Cardinal by the name of Julian Caesarini. Caesarini was famous for preaching for a (failed) crusade against the Hussites, and he filled the young king's head with tales of Crusades and glory. The Cardinal was emphatic that the king would be in no real danger since a joint Papal/Venetian fleet were to keep the main brunt of the Ottoman army locked in Anatolia, allowing the young man to forge a name for himself. As such, he breaks the truce with the Ottomans. And he goes off, confident that he'll be successful against a boy sultan.
However, Murad II later returns to help his son out.
Since Wladyslaw was such a young king with no real power of his own, he was very eager to prove himself against the Ottoman menace. A 20,000 man army made up of Poles, Lithuanians, Hungarians, Teutons and later supported by Bulgarian rebels and Wallachians assemble at Varna. It's important to note that the young Polish king was not actually the primary commander. That honor went to John (Or Jan) Hunyadi, a grizzled Hungarian Voivode (Hungarian kiwis can correct me but I believe the equivalent noble rank in the West is Duke) and a war veteran. *Note I can probably work up a post about Hunyadi's skill as a tactician later. Conspicuously absent from this army are units from France and England... They're still embroiled in the Hundred Years War. But no matter, the papal and Venetian fleets are sure to keep the Ottoman army locked away...
Imagine then the shock of the Europeans to find themselves facing the entire 60000 Ottoman army, with Murad II at its helm. Remember those Venetians? Yeah they were pretty eager to see the Hungarians brought to heel, so they actually provided transport for the Ottoman army. i.e. the exact opposite of what the Cardinal had said would happen.
So facing desperate odds, Hunyadi actually has some success in breaking the Ottoman Siphai (Heavy Calvary) lines. The young Wladyslaw sees this, and not realizing that his army and his life are in grave danger decides to directly attack the van of the Ottoman Sultan. The Sultan was protected by his guards, The Janissary Corps and they absolutely shred the inexperienced king and his Guard Cavalry.
The reprisals of the Sultan's Janissaries were brutal. They dismember the young king and mount his head atop a pole and also steal his armor and shield for trophies...
To be continued in part II... The Janissary Corps and the conquest of Constantinople.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2016
Part II The Janissary Corps.
Any emperor knows that the best emperors need a household guard to protect against assassins, and to strike fear in the hearts of your enemies. In many cases, it's best to use foreigners as your guard unit to better prevent them from gaining a significant amount of influence. The Romans had the Praetorian, the Byzantines had the Norse Varangian and the Ottomans had the Janissaries.
It was customary for Ottomans to take the strongest sons from their Christian territories. In the beginning ALL Christian provinces were subject to this system. However, the Ottomans quickly switched to using children from their Balkan territories. These boys would then be converted to Islam (or at least taught about it) and then trained how to be effective bodyguards and soldiers for the Padishah. From the age of five, they would be forced to learn Turkish and adopt Turkish culture. They were forbidden from marrying and growing beards. Janissaries were also forbidden from learning any skills or professions that didnt make them better soldiers. They were subject to harsh discipline by palace eunuchs for infractions, and this environment created an exceptionally well trained and well disciplined group of soldiers. As such, the empire began to rely on them heavily for their military. The Padishah also directly engaged with his Corps, visiting the Janissary barracks to personally pay his Corps. In essence, the Janissaries were one of the first examples of a standing army.
Within the empire, the Ottomans had different social distinctions. Obviously they had freemen and slaves, but they also had a third group. Directly translated, this group was called "Door Servants" or "Slaves of the Porte." The Janissaries belonged to this group. They were paid a salary for their services and the Corps relied on a very strict system of meritocracy. This meant that social class before becoming a Janissary didn't matter. A skilled peasant would do better than an unskilled noble. In turn, the power of the Janissary Corps began to grow exponentially and by the 17th century they were a ruling faction in the empire.
But by this point they had grown decadent and actively hindered any attempt at reform. By 1622, they'd already assassinated a sultan who tried to curb their influence and a Janissary revolt in Serbia saw the beheading of all of Serbia's prominent noble families. From this point on, any Ottoman Sultan who tried to curb the powers of his own household guard would then be assassinated or deposed. This continues until an event known as the "Auspicious Incident" where Mahmoud II issued a fatwa against the corps, causing them to revolt. This revolt later failed and ALL of the remaining members of the corps were beheaded. And that's just a brief history... some interesting facts.
The Bulgarian word for traitor is "Janissar"
Janissaries were allowed to return home after their tenure was over and many of these guys became governor generals. One of these men was a guy named Skanderbeg. A former Janissary who led Albania in a 25 year long rebellion against the Ottoman Empire.
To be continued in part 3. Let me know if you want it to be on the Ottoman legal system or their conquest of Constantinople
Any emperor knows that the best emperors need a household guard to protect against assassins, and to strike fear in the hearts of your enemies. In many cases, it's best to use foreigners as your guard unit to better prevent them from gaining a significant amount of influence. The Romans had the Praetorian, the Byzantines had the Norse Varangian and the Ottomans had the Janissaries.
It was customary for Ottomans to take the strongest sons from their Christian territories. In the beginning ALL Christian provinces were subject to this system. However, the Ottomans quickly switched to using children from their Balkan territories. These boys would then be converted to Islam (or at least taught about it) and then trained how to be effective bodyguards and soldiers for the Padishah. From the age of five, they would be forced to learn Turkish and adopt Turkish culture. They were forbidden from marrying and growing beards. Janissaries were also forbidden from learning any skills or professions that didnt make them better soldiers. They were subject to harsh discipline by palace eunuchs for infractions, and this environment created an exceptionally well trained and well disciplined group of soldiers. As such, the empire began to rely on them heavily for their military. The Padishah also directly engaged with his Corps, visiting the Janissary barracks to personally pay his Corps. In essence, the Janissaries were one of the first examples of a standing army.
Within the empire, the Ottomans had different social distinctions. Obviously they had freemen and slaves, but they also had a third group. Directly translated, this group was called "Door Servants" or "Slaves of the Porte." The Janissaries belonged to this group. They were paid a salary for their services and the Corps relied on a very strict system of meritocracy. This meant that social class before becoming a Janissary didn't matter. A skilled peasant would do better than an unskilled noble. In turn, the power of the Janissary Corps began to grow exponentially and by the 17th century they were a ruling faction in the empire.
But by this point they had grown decadent and actively hindered any attempt at reform. By 1622, they'd already assassinated a sultan who tried to curb their influence and a Janissary revolt in Serbia saw the beheading of all of Serbia's prominent noble families. From this point on, any Ottoman Sultan who tried to curb the powers of his own household guard would then be assassinated or deposed. This continues until an event known as the "Auspicious Incident" where Mahmoud II issued a fatwa against the corps, causing them to revolt. This revolt later failed and ALL of the remaining members of the corps were beheaded. And that's just a brief history... some interesting facts.
The Bulgarian word for traitor is "Janissar"
Janissaries were allowed to return home after their tenure was over and many of these guys became governor generals. One of these men was a guy named Skanderbeg. A former Janissary who led Albania in a 25 year long rebellion against the Ottoman Empire.
To be continued in part 3. Let me know if you want it to be on the Ottoman legal system or their conquest of Constantinople
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2017
You're giving me the choice between learning about bureaucracy or how the last remnants of the Roman empire got it's shit wrecked. I'll take the shit wrecking please.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2015
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2014
This is partly true; Jesus wasn't white. But everything else is wrong:
- "Muslim" is not a race the way "white" is a race. "Muslim" means you adhere to Islam, not that you're black/Arab/white/etc.
- Islam did not exist until nearly 600 years after Christ's death and resurrection. So no, Jesus couldn't have been born in a "primarily Muslim" country.
- Jesus himself was a Semitic Jew.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2016
Really funny when they pull the "Jesus wasn't white" angle when they're the biggest anti-Semites around.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2013
None of those lands would become islamic territory until muslims brutally conquered and slaughtered the non-muslim peoples already living there.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2014
These people honestly seem to believe that the Middle East was always Muslim. In reality, before 600-800 AD, the dominant religions were Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, and a bunch of polytheistic belief systems.
Actually, even just decades ago, the Middle East was way more religiously diverse than it is now. Jews and Christians made up a sizable chunk of the population, and there were a lot of diverse Muslim sects. Nowadays, only a small handful of Jews live outside of Israel and Christians are being actively purged from the Middle East. Muslims from minority sects aren't faring much better.
I hate the "the Middle East is 100% Muslim" mindset so much because it diminishes the persecution that religious minorities are experiencing in their own homelands.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
The early caliphates didn't exterminate the non-Muslim populations of the lands they conquered. Their empire would have disintegrated if they tried. Mostly they used financial incentives to persuade people to convert by levying jizya taxes on infidels.
In 1900, Egypt was still 1/5 Christian. Today, it's about 1/10, but that's mostly because the Muslim majority is less educated and has a higher fertility rate.
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2015
Kristi Winters and Steve Shives have just gone on a total sperg, about how Sargon is a literal Nazi worse than Hitler for saying Jews arent White.
SJs confuse me :/