Columbus and Islam
Monday
In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue. We all know the New World was discovered because Christopher Columbus was looking for a trade route to the East.
But why was he looking for a trade route? Because during its second great jihad, Islam had invaded Central Asia and defeated Constantinople in 1453, cutting off the overland route for Europeans. Islamic armies continued their jihad northward, and conquered much of what is now Eastern Europe, until they were finally stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683 (on September 11th).
Learn more about historical jihads here: Jihad Through History.
Learn more about the principles of jihad as they are still applied today.
Another way jihad helped create America: Thomas Jefferson's Quran.
17 comments:
But why was he looking for a trade route? Because during its second great jihad, Islam had invaded Central Asia and defeated Constantinople in 1453, cutting off the overland route for Europeans.
Last week, I stunned my American Government class with that same information.
Most textbooks conveniently omit the information.
I just linked to your post.
Always On Watch,
I wonder why they leave that out, I wonder if it has anything to do with hurting someone's feelings.
Citizen Warrior,
Actually here's another interesting fact. According to Greg Nyquist in "Ayn Rand Contra human Nature," one of the biggest factors leading to the poverty and strife of the dark ages was the Muslim Conquests of the seventh, eighth and ninth centuries AD, cutting off trade to western Europe. He quotes as his source of information, a book called Medieval_Cities.
Here is part of an Amazon.com customer review Nyquist wrote, describing what he read in the book. Talking about "Medieval Cities" he wrote,
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a groundbreaking work in the study of the so-called "Dark Ages." Pirenne, one of the great scholars and historians of the 20th century, discovered that the economic destitution of Western Europe during the 8th, 9th, and 10th centuries was a consequence, not of the barbarian invasions, as is commonly supposed, but of the Islamic presence in the Mediterranean. The astonishing advance of Islam into Northern Africa, Spain, and Syria during the 7th and 8th centuries meant that Western Europe lost control of the Mediterranean. It became, as Pirenne puts it, a "Moslem lake," and because of this, Western Europe found itself in what amounted to a state of virtual blockade. All the trading routes to the East were cut off and Gaul and other Western European countries were thrown back on their own resources. Bereft of the economic lifeblood of trade, cities shrunk into insignifance. Marseilles, once a thriving seaport, became a ghost town. The Middle Class ceased to exist. Complete autarky reigned in the West. The economic devestation was so bad that Charlemagne's government could not collect any taxes. All of Charlemagne's revenues came from his own estates.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you think of that?
I think that's fascinating, Damien. There is so much history I still want to learn!
Citizen Warrior,
Thanks, I thought it was fascinating too. I was wondering if it might useful in some way. People can learn from history.
I read you post about Islam's Rise. It was very well written and thought provoking. But I thought of something that perhaps you didn't. What if one of the factors leading to the rise of Islam, Islamic States, Islamic terrorism and Jihad, in the latter half of the twentieth century is the non Islamic World's dependency on oil?
Think about it. If we lived in a parallel universe were everything was identical to ours, up until, say the 1950's when someone developed cheep non fossil fuel alternative, and it replaced oil, would we be in the same situation we are in now?
Today, the biggest source of income for Saudi Arabia, and Iran is oil. Iran uses it to fund their weapons program and Saudi Arabia uses it to fund their culture Jihad in non Muslim countries. Also for most of the middle east, their biggest source of income is oil. What would happen if cut the off the life blood of Islamic regimes like Iran and Saudi Arabia? What if we were able to develop a cheep practical alternative to oil? Some time in the future that is bound to happen anyway, the only problem is how do we go about making that happen soon?
While eliminating our need for oil completely might not stop them from waging their Jihad, it might make it more difficult for them to do so, since they would have fewer resources. Jihadist would have less funds for terrorist activities, and to a degree, even their cultural and demographic Jihads might be retarded by lack of funds.
A lack of money would really slow down their advance, for sure, Damien. Without oil money, they would probably would have been left behind as the rest of the world advanced economically. And very likely, it would have taken longer to rise up as a serious threat to the rest of the world. Good point.
Citizen Warrior,
problem is, what's the best way for us to deprive the Jihadist of cash? Its probably going to be awhile before there is a cheep, viable alternative to oil out there. Its also very hard to imagine how we could create an effective blockade around every Islamic terrorist state. So what is the best way to dry up their income?
Damien, there are several ways, and even more ways need to be found:
1. Divest those countries that support terror. This hampers their ability to thrive.
2. Participate in the Terror Free Oil Initiative to help cut off money to them.
3. We can promote the two above projects to everyone we know. We can get on the radio and promote them, get interviewed, get on television, write about them.
4. We can encourage the development and implementation of every other alternative source of energy.
In the meantime, concessions to Islam must stop, and we must be urgently spreading the word to our fellow non-Muslims about Islam's relentless encroachment.
Citizen Warrior,
Those are some excellent ideas.
The negative effect Muslims have had on history is not made explicit in history lessons.
When I studied history in school, I was taught that a series of unrelated events brought about the Dark Ages.
Not true.
It was largely Islamic conquest that interrupted the growth of civilization.
If I would have understood that, I could have understood the story of history, and then I would have been interested.
Instead, it took until I was in my forties for me to begin to understand history.
Political correctness destroys knowledge by insisting that important facts be left out.
Citizen Warrior,
Here's another article I found on Islam in history.
The Impact of Islam on Medieval Europe
It won't let me say all that I want to say in one comment so, I will have to separate this into multiple comments.
I think it is well written and informative. I also think that John J. O'Neil provides a wealth of historical information. But I kind of get the feeling when I read it, that its author fails to adequately backup one or two of his assertions.
In "The Impact of Islam on Medieval Europe," O’Neill states that,
--------------------------------------
Early Christianity, of course, was profoundly, even fanatically, pacifist. The idea of going to war and fighting for Christ was contrary to everything the carpenter of Nazareth had taught.
--------------------------------------
This is true, and some early Christians may have even condemned forcing unbelievers to adopt the faith, but I remember hearing from multiple sources about some of the first Christian Roman Emperors, banning pagan worship, and that was even before Islam.
According to a Wikipedia article on Theodosius
--------------------------------------
For the first part of his rule, Theodosius seems to have ignored the semi-official standing of the Christian bishops; in fact he had voiced his support for the preservation of temples or pagan statues as useful public buildings. In his early reign, Theodosius was fairly tolerant of the pagans, for he needed the support of the influential pagan ruling class. However he would in time stamp out the last vestiges of paganism with great severity.[14] His first attempt to inhibit paganism was in 381 when he reiterated Constantine's ban on sacrifice. In 384 he prohibited haruspicy on pain of death, and unlike earlier anti-pagan prohibitions, he made non-enforcement of the law, by Magistrates, into a crime itself.
In 388 he sent a prefect to Syria, Egypt, and Asia Minor with the aim of breaking up pagan associations and the destruction of their temples. The Serapeum at Alexandria was destroyed during this campaign.[15] In a series of decrees called the "Theodosian decrees" he progressively declared that those Pagan feasts that had not yet been rendered Christian ones were now to be workdays (in 389). In 391, he reiterated the ban of blood sacrifice and decreed "no one is to go to the sanctuaries, walk through the temples, or raise his eyes to statues created by the labor of man"[16]. The temples that were thus closed could be declared "abandoned", as Bishop Theophilus of Alexandria immediately noted in applying for permission to demolish a site and cover it with a Christian church, an act that must have received general sanction, for mithraea forming crypts of churches, and temples forming the foundations of 5th century churches appear throughout the former Roman Empire. Theodosius participated in actions by Christians against major Pagan sites: the destruction of the gigantic Serapeum of Alexandria by soldiers and local Christian citizens in 392, according to the Christian sources authorized by Theodosius (extirpium malum), needs to be seen against a complicated background of less spectacular violence in the city: (That a large library was resident in the Serapeum, however, which was destroyed along with the temple, is a modern tale, generated by a single sentence in Gibbon; no ancient evidence supports it, and even pagan sources show it to be false: Ammianus, for instance, indicates that the Serapeum library was no longer in existence in 392, and Eunapius of Sardis's angry account of the demolition seems to make it clear that no library was destroyed.) [17] Eusebius mentions street-fighting in Alexandria between Christians and non-Christians as early as 249, and non-Christians had participated in the struggles for and against Athanasius in 341 and 356. "In 363 they killed Bishop George for repeated acts of pointed outrage, insult, and pillage of the most sacred treasures of the city."[18]
------------------------------------
Source
So Christianity did have a record of state sponsored religious intolerance even before Mohammad. Since But perhaps the main point of the article is true and Islamic conquests made it worse.
Back to "The Impact of Islam on Medieval Europe"
O'Neil also writes,
------------------------------------------------------
We know that, from its inception, Islam regarded apostasy and heresy as capital offences. The most notorious, though by no means the only, example of this is found in the fate of Mansur Al-Hallaj (858–922), the Persian mystic, whose death mimicked that of Christ, though first Al-Hallaj was dismembered. And the killing of political and religious opponents, or those who deviated in any way from orthodox Islam, occurred at the very start and was continuous throughout Muslim history.
Medieval Christianity, beginning in the twelfth century, adopted the same attitude, which was unknown in the early Church. We must then enquire as to the source of such intolerance.
------------------------------------------------------
That first paragraph is 100% true, unless you count those few years when Mohammad preached his message but did not yet have the means to conquer and force others to live under Islam. But even so, unlike Christianity, Islam was intolerant, even while its founder was alive, and in fact its founder was violent hate filled man.
However, given what I know, I don't think we can say that what he wrote in the second paragraph is entirely true. One major difference between Jesus and Mohammad through, is that we have good reason to think that Jesus himself, wouldn't approve of such intolerance. Unlike Mohammad, Jesus was a pacifist after all, and he was pretty apolitical. However Christianity did become the state religion of Rome under Theodosius, who did persecute unbelievers. According to the Wikipedia article on him that I sited earlier, he lived from January 11, 347 to January 17, 395. According to another Wikipedia article on Islam, Muhammad lived from around 570 to 632 AD.
That said, I think that most of what O'Neils says maybe true, and he does a good job of backing up most of what he says. I Would most certainly like to read his "Holy Warriors: Islam and the Demise of Classical Civilization"
An important question: is the Quran the Word of God or is it a fabrication of a man. Thus, is the Quran the truth or a fiction and a hoax? The jihadists use many verses from the Quran as the Main source of justification for their violence, mayhem and murders. There, the question is clearly given on pages 145 through 157 in THE ISLAMIC INVASION by Robert Morey in which he wrote a section on the Quran with its self-contradictions. Just two of the many he cited are the following “The Quran differs on whether a day is a thousand years or fifty thousand years in God’s sight’ and “Who was first to believe? Abraham or Moses [Sura 6:14 versus 7:143]? The above is inconsistent and illogical. Further, Morey wrote about “The fact that Judaism and Christianity broke up into different sects was used in the Quran to prove that they are not of God [Suras 30:20-32. 42:13, 14]. Yet Islam has broken up into many warring sects and therefore cannot be true if the Quran is right.” Moreover, Morey in his book shows many more contradictions and absurdities in the Quran, there are and how Muhammad incorporated extra Biblical and Jewish folklore along with pre-Islamic Arabian myth and parts of Zoroastrian and Hindu stories into the Quran. Furthermore, the Muslims claim that “the Quran is the direct, literal word of God unmodified in any way by the Prophet who uttered them at the bidding of God.” Nevertheless, in the book UNVEILING ISLAM by Ergun Mehmet and Eethi Caner has shown that the Quran was modified in the following account on pages 45. “Muhammad felt the need to improve on the words of Allah, since he changed Allah’s wisdom for his own on several occasions. A hadith tells of the nonchalant emendations of Muhammad:’ On a number of occasions he [a scribe] had, with the Prophet’s consent changed the closing words of verses. For example, when the prophet had said ‘God is mighty and wise ‘ Adbollah b. Abi Sarh suggested writing down ‘Knowing and wise’ and the Prophet answered that there was no objection. Having observed a succession of changes of this type, Adbollah renounced Islam on the grounds that revelations, if from God could not be changed at the prompting of a scribe such as himself. After his apostasy he went to Mecca and joined the Qorayshites.’ Other writers reveal that later Muhammad and his people did go war with the Qorayshites and he personally killed Abdollah. Obviously Abdollah knew too much and Muhammad wanted Abdollah’s knowledge to die with him.” In conclusion, the Quran is not only a fiction, it’s also a hoax.
man. us, is the Quran the truth or a fiction and a hoax? The jihadists use many verses from the Quran as the Main source of justification for their violence, mayhem and murders. There, the question is clearly given on pages 145 through 157 in THE ISLAMIC INVASION by Robert Morey in which he wrote a section on the Quran with its self-contradictions. Just two of the many he cited are the following “The Quran differs on whether a day is a thousand years or fifty thousand years in God’s sight’ and “Who was first to believe? Abraham or Moses [Sura 6:14 versus 7:143]? The above is inconsistent and illogical. Further, Morey wrote about “The fact that Judaism and Christianity broke up into different sects was used in the Quran to prove that they are not of God [Suras 30:20-32. 42:13, 14]. Yet Islam has broken up into many warring sects and therefore cannot be true if the Quran is right.” Moreover, Morey in his book shows many more contradictions and absurdities in the Quran, there are and how Muhammad incorporated extra Biblical and Jewish folklore along with pre-Islamic Arabian myth and parts of Zoroastrian and Hindu stories into the Quran. Furthermore, the Muslims claim that “the Quran is the direct, literal word of God unmodified in any way by the Prophet who uttered them at the bidding of God.” Nevertheless, in the book UNVEILING ISLAM by Ergun Mehmet and Eethi Caner has shown that the Quran was modified in the following account on pages 45. “Muhammad felt the need to improve on the words of Allah, since he changed Allah’s wisdom for his own on several occasions. A hadith tells of the nonchalant emendations of Muhammad:’ On a number of occasions he [a scribe] had, with the Prophet’s consent changed the closing words of verses. For example, when the prophet had said ‘God is mighty and wise ‘ Adbollah b. Abi Sarh suggested writing down ‘Knowing and wise’ and the Prophet answered that there was no objection. Having observed a succession of changes of this type, Adbollah renounced Islam on the grounds that revelations, if from God could not be changed at the prompting of a scribe such as himself. After his apostasy he went to Mecca and joined the Qorayshites.’ Other writers reveal that later Muhammad and his people did go war with the Qorayshites and he personally killed Abdollah. Obviously Abdollah knew too much and Muhammad wanted Abdollah’s knowledge to die with him.” In conclusion, the Quran is not only a fiction, it’s also a hoax.
The Greek philosopher Plato is one of the contributors to Western Civilization. He may shed some light into the subject of those people who are shackled in the chains and darkness of Islamic thought. In Plato’s REPUBLIC he gave an allegory of a cave where “the condition of men living in a sort of cavernous chamber…Here they have been from childhood, chained by leg and also by the neck, so that they cannot move and see only what is in front of them.” This can fit into what the Imams do in the mosques and how they brainwash the young people in the madrassa’s by always programming Islamic doctrine into their victims and not exposing them to other worldviews. Furthermore, even in Islamic tradition when Muslims have their newborn child the father whispers words of the Quran into the infants ear so that that Quran verses are the first thing the newborn person hears. This programming process takes place all their lives. These are some of the chains that keep them bound in a mosque [cave]. The chains do not let them reach out for dialectic reasoning and let them examine the evidence both for as well as against, or even question whether Muhammad was a true prophet of God or not, and if the Quran is a hoax or not. As the chains and darkness of the cave blinds and holds the prisoners back from reality, so Islamic propaganda holds back the cognition to reason with the question if Islam is true or not. They are forbidden from even thinking to question Islam. Furthermore, if a Muslim by some miracle wakes up to the truth about Islam, it would be like the man in Plato’s cave allegory who was released from his chains and taken outside to the real world. At first direct light would be painful and disorienting, it would take some time for him to understand what the truth is all about, he even might cling to the shadows and still for a time believe some of the illusions to be real. But he would finally come to know “what he had formerly seen was meaningless illusion.” And that was “what passed for wisdom in his former dewelling-place.”And that the other cave prisoners also needed to see the light [the truth] for he “was sorry for them.” and he would re-enter the cave just to rescue them. Nevertheless, the cave prisoners wouldn’t understand and “if they could lay hand on the man who was trying to set them free.” And if they could “they would kill him.” Likewise, when someone escapes from the shackles of Islam, those still in the darkness of this religion would not understand and if possible kill him for leaving Islam, and even more so if he were to try to enlighten them about the truth about Islam. For these people in Islam are chained to an empty imitation of truth and godliness
Post a Comment