It takes a nation to protect the nation
Jihad against French (732-740)
The saga of how the Franks decisively defeated the Jihadis just 300 miles from Paris and saved Europe from the flames of Islam.
After the Jihad had trampled Spain in 711 C.E., the Muslim chieftain Emir Musa’s dream was to invade further by marching across the Pyrenees ranges into France and meet the Muslims marauding from the east through Byzantium, so that Islam could surround the Mediterranean Sea which would then become a Muslim Lake.
But Musa also secretly harbored ambitions to be an Emir of Europe independent of the Caliph for which he embezzled a disproportionate part of the ill gotten wealth from the looting during the Spanish campaign. This raised the Caliph's suspicions about Musa. So Emir Musa was banished by the Caliph and he could not fulfill his aggressive dream. Consequently, the Muslim aggression against France was taken up by another Jihadi marauder named Abd-ur-Rahman.
_______________________________
The Franks
Today, we might not realize the significance of the victory of the Franks (Ferrenghis – as the Muslims called them) over the Arabs, a few miles south of Paris in 732. Had it not been for this victory, the whole of Europe might have been Muslim today, and the history of Europe and perhaps that of the entire world would have been far more bloodied and darker as is that of the Middle East today.
__________________
Jihad against France
The Muslims' insatiable appetite for land, together with a burning desire to put end of Christianity had received a fillip after the conquest of Syria, Egypt, North Africa, and Spain. They dreamt of overrunning the whole of Western and Northern Europe. Thus began the Muslim invasion of France under the leadership of Abd-ur Rahman, who had then been appointed the chieftain of the Muslim occupiers of Spain by the Caliph.
When the Muslims burst upon France, the country was ruled by the Franks. The Franks were a Gothic (Germanic) tribe who eventually became the French as we know the French people today. It was another related Gothic clan – the Ostrogoths, who had been ruling Spain when the Muslims attacked Spain. The tales of mindless Muslim cruelty, savage torture, subterfuge deception and bloodchilling ruthlessness that the Ostrogoths who fled Muslim occupied Spain told their Frankish clansmen, had contributed to further stiffen the Frankish resolve to defeat the Muslim invaders.
_______________________________
The ferocity with which Charles (Karl) Martel fought against the invading Arabs, and his personal weapon of a hammerlike axe that he used, earned him the title of "Karl the Hammer".
__________________
Abd-ur-Rahman was an Arab soldier and emir of Spain, at a time when Islam as a military force was the most aggressive, violent and cruel in the world. He had become the Governor of Spain in 721. And in 722, and with the normal Muslim avarice to conquer more lands and convert the subjugated population to Islam, he set his greedy eyes on France. With this avarice in mind, he led an army across the Pyrenees Mountains into the dominions of the Franks, in the year 722.
For more information on Abd-ur-Rahman refer to the Encarta 2001.
Abd-ur-Rahman crossed the Pyrenees at the head of an immense army and advanced as far as the Loire River, pillaging and burning as he went. David W. Koeller in his article The Battle of Tours, says, " (The) Moslem army, in a wild search for land and the end of Christianity, after the conquest of Syria, Egypt, and North Africa, began to invade Western Europe under the leadership of Abd-ur-Rahman." The Muslim army had between 600,000 to 400,000 soldiers, and "an over whelming number of horsemen." (Encyclopedia.com, Battle of Tours). In October 732 AD, exactly one hundred years after Muhammad’s death, in 622 an army led by Abd-ur-Rahman… made contact with the Frankish army… along the road between Poitiers and Tours, [a city which was reputed to contain vast riches.] (Discovering World History Essay).
Abd-ur Rahman led his infantry across the Western Pyrenees and toward the Loire River. A Muslim commander named Al-Semak led the first invasion across the Pyrenees in 721, establishing a base at Norbonne. He was followed by Abd-ur Rahman with fresh contingents, who moved up the Rhône as far as Lyons and Dijon destroying churches and monasteries, following Muhammad's creed of especially targeting non-Muslim places of worship, before moving on to Bordeaux.
_______________________________
Abd-ur Rahman the Muslim general who invaded France destroyed palaces, burned churches, and imagined he could pillage the basilica of St. Martin of Tours. It is then that he found himself face to face with the lord of Austrasia, Charles, a mighty warrior from his youth, and trained in all the occasions of arms.
__________________
Abd-ur Rahman had crossed the Pyrenees, with a larger army and traversed the defiles [in the mountains] and the plains, so that he could penetrate deeper into the lands of the Franks with his ravaging and slaying campaigns. He gave battle to Duke Eudes (of Aquitaine) beyond the Garonne and the Dordogne, and put him to flight---so utterly was he beaten, and a large number of his compatriots were slain and wounded.
After this Abd-ur Rahman set in pursuit of Eudes; he destroyed palaces, burned churches, and imagined he could pillage the basilica of St. Martin of Tours. It is then that he found himself face to face with the lord of Austrasia, Charles, a mighty warrior from his youth, and trained in all the occasions of arms.
Between Poitiers and Tours, there was a clash between Abd-er Rahman, and the army of Charles Martel. After some spectacular victories, The Saracens (as the Franks called the Muslims) were met just outside the city of Tours by Charles Martel, known as the Hammer, and the Frankish Army.
The Battle of Tours
October 10, 732 AD marks the conclusion of the Battle of Tours, arguably one of the most decisive battles in all of history. Martel gathered his forces directly in the path of the oncoming Moslem army and prepared to defend themselves by using a phalanx style of combat. The invading Moslems rushed forward, relying on the slashing tactics and overwhelming number of horsemen that had brought them victories in the past.
_______________________________
At Poitiers, the Franks outmatched the Muslims in all departments of the game – subterfuge, cruelty, ruthlessness, and so were victorious, giving the Muslims their first decisive defeat. Before the battle was joined, for almost seven days the two armies watched one another, waiting anxiously the moment for joining the struggle. Finally they met in combat when the Franks suddenly advanced on the Arabs after nightfall on the seventh day. And in the shock of the battle the men of the North seemed like North a sea that cannot be moved. Firmly they stood, one close to another, forming as it were a bulwark of ice; and with great blows of their swords they hewed down the Arabs. Drawn up in a band around their chief, the people of the Austrasians carried all before them. Their tireless hands drove their swords down to the breasts [of the foe].
__________________
The Franks were the only ones to learn that the terror of the Arab Muslims can be neutralized only by a greater counter-terror. This counter terror has to be a mega-terror or a super-terror to strike fear in the hearts of Muslims that they give up their aggressive mentality on the pain of death
However, the French Army, composed of foot soldiers armed only with swords, shields, axes, javelins, and daggers, was well trained. Despite the effectiveness of the Moslem army in previous battles, the terrain caused them a disadvantage. Their strength lay in their cavalry, armed with large swords and lances, which along with their baggage mules, limited their mobility. The French army displayed great ardency in withstanding the ferocious attack.
It was one of the rare times in the Middle Ages when infantry held its ground against a mounted attack. The exact length of the battle is undetermined; Arab sources claim that it was a two day battle whereas Christian sources hold that the fighting clamored on for seven days. In either case, the battle ended when the French captured and killed Abd-ur Rahman.
_______________________________
Being more Smartly Sneaky with the Sneaky Muslims, secured the Franks a victory at Poitiers.
For the Muslims, the scale of their slaughter at the hands of the Franks and the death of their leader caused a sharp setback and they had no choice but to retreat back across the Pyrenees. The defeat and slaughter of the Muslims was so complete and ruthless that the Arab-Muslims were never to return again to France till the 20th century as immigrants from North Africa.
Not only did this prove to be an extremely decisive battle for the Christians, but the Battle of Tours is considered the high water mark of the Moslem invasion of Western Europe.
The Arabs marching through France had acquired a lot of loot, and this too worked in the favor of the Franks, who were not weighed down with the task of guarding their treasure, nor did they posses baggage trains of any kind. This drives home an important fact. The Arabs were there to loot, rape and covert the French to Islam at the point of the sword. The Franks were defending their nation. This apart, in tactics and ruthlessness too the Franks could match the Arabs and led to the massacre of the invaders.
__________________
Franks outmatch the Muslims in all departments of the game – subterfuge, cruelty, ruthlessness, and so are victorious, giving the Muslims their first decisive defeat
At Tours before the battle was joined, for almost seven days the two armies watched one another, waiting anxiously the moment for joining the struggle. Finally they met in combat when the Franks suddenly advanced on the Arabs after nightfall on the seventh day. And in the shock of the battle the men of the North seemed like North a sea that cannot be moved. Firmly they stood, one close to another, forming as it were a bulwark of ice; and with great blows of their swords they hewed down the Arabs. Drawn up in a band around their chief, the people of the Austrasians carried all before them. Their tireless hands drove their swords down to the breasts [of the foe].
At last late in to the night, the combatants. The Franks with misgivings lowered their blades, and beholding the numberless tents of the Arabs, prepared themselves for another battle another day.
The Muslims had initially planned to go to Tours to destroy the Church of St. Martin, the city, and the whole surrounding countryside. They never expected any serious battle with the Frankish leader Charles Martel, since till then the resistance had been weak and fragmented.
But Charles was different from other leaders. He drew up his host, and fought as fiercely as the hungry wolf falls upon the stag. He wrought a great slaughter upon his enemies that he slew in that battle 300,000 men, which included the commander of the Saracens Abd-ur-rehman.
From then on was Charles called "Martel," for as a hammer of iron, of steel, and of every other metal, even so he dashed: and smote in the battle all his enemies. And what was the greatest marvel of all, he only lost in that battle of Tours only 1500 men.
The tents and harness [of the enemy] were taken; and whatever else they possessed became a prey to him and his followers. Eudes, Duke of Aquitaine, being now reconciled with Prince Charles Martel, later slew as many of the Saracens as he could find who had escaped from the battle.
The outcome of the Battle of Tours saved future Civilization from becoming extinct in 732
The Battle of Tours was a very significant battle in the spread of Islam and in the survival of Christianity. The Battle of Tours decided history much more than one might imagine. The more powerful Muslims and the spread of Islam were knocking on Europe’s door. The battle of Tours changed all that. And Europe was safe for the next 700 years till the Muslims breached the Eastern Gateway when they overran Constantinople in 1453.
_______________________________
The defeat at Poitiers was the first Muslim defeat at the hands of the Christians. This was to be followed by the Reconquista in Spain (910 – 1492) and the Crusades (1096-1297), in addition to the Christian victories at Palermo, Lepanto and Vienna. But the final Christian victory against the challenge of Islam, called terrorism in our times, is yet to be delivered and this should happen in the next decade or two by 2025.
__________________
The spread of Islam was stopped along the road between the towns of Tours and Poitiers, France, with just its head in Europe. (Payne, Robert. 142) Islam spread rapidly through the Middle East and North Africa, due to the help of the influence of Islamic disciples and armies. But they were stopped dead at Tours. Was it the tactics of the Muslims that lost the battle for the Muslims or was it the loss of their great leader, Abd-er-Rahman? Or was it the leadership of the great Frankish leader Charles Martel?
Charles Martel, "The Hammer" who was till then just a Frankish General, then became the undisputed ruler of all the Franks. He became the ruler after defeating Austria in a war. He also engaged in wars against Alamanni, Bavarians, and Saxons, which were small tribes in and around France. But his greatest achievement was against the Muslims from Spain, who invaded France in 732. It was in this battle at Tours, it is said, that gave Charles his name, Martel "The Hammer", because of the merciless way in which he smote the enemy.
The Arab commander did not know that a trap had been set for him…. [Abd-ur-Rahman was in hot pursuit of another Frankish commander, when he came upon Charles Mantels army at Poitiers.] Abd-ur-Rahman called for a halt. He wanted to discover the strength of the enemy, and he hoped the Franks, if not too numerous, would attack.
_______________________________
What frightened that “brave” Muslim general Ab-ur-Rehman most of all was the possibility of losing his army among the forests and the streams. (Payne, 142-143). For seven days Charles [Martel] remained on the edge of the forest, waiting for the attack. It was bitterly cold weather, with Arabs still dressed for their summer campaigns.
The wolf pelts (furs) of the Franks helped them in the icy cold in addition to their nightly ravages of the huge Arab host arrayed against them. The Arabs were unfamiliar with the topography of the land, while the Franks knew it like the back of their palm. At last tired of the nightly ravages of the Franks in the morning of the seventh day Abd-ur-Rahman decided to launch a full-scale attack.
Charles and his army held firm, forming a hollow square to take the main charge of the Arabs while dispatching raiders along infrequently used forest paths to attack the Arabs from the rear. The Arabs, once guerrilla warriors, had a reverted to classical mode of warfare, and were no match for the Franks, who numbered many more well equipped soldiers than the Arabs spies indicated. Also the Franks were fighting with the Loire river at their back, and could not retreat even if they wanted to.
__________________
What frightened that “brave” Muslim general Ab-ur-Rehman most of all was the possibility of losing his army among the forests and the streams. (Payne, 142-143). For seven days Charles [Martel] remained on the edge of the forest, waiting for the attack. It was bitterly cold weather, with Arabs still dressed for their summer campaigns. The wolf pelts (furs) of the Franks helped them in the icy cold in addition to their nightly ravages of the huge Arab host arrayed against them. The Arabs were unfamiliar with the topography of the land, while the Franks knew it like the back of their palm. At last tire of the nightly ravages of the Franks in the morning of the seventh day Abd-ur-Rahman decided to launch a full-scale attack.
Charles and his army held firm, forming a hollow square to take the main charge of the Arabs while dispatching raiders along infrequently used forest paths to attack the Arabs from the rear. The Arabs, once guerrilla warriors, had a reverted to classical mode of warfare, and were no match for the Franks, who numbered many more well equipped soldiers than the Arabs spies indicated. Also the Franks were fighting with the Loire river at their back, and could not have retreated even if they had wanted to.
Being more Smartly Sneaky with the Sneaky Muslims, secured the Franks a victory
The Arabs marching through France had acquired a lot of loot, and this too worked in the favor of the Franks, who were not weighed down with the task of guarding their treasure, nor did they posses baggage trains of any kind. Most of them were simple foot soldiers, but there were some companies of cavalry. (Payne, 142-143) As the battle progressed, the Franks began to waver…. Behind their coats of mail, and their pointed helmets, their horses clothed in chain mail, the Arabs were almost impregnable. They were on the verge of victory when the Franks fought their way toward the treasure carts. Instead of fighting in column, the Arabs flew in defense of the treasure, and panicked when they saw the carts being driven away by the enemies.
Here the Muslim defeat at the Battle of Uhud in Arabia during the early days of Islam had repeated itself.
_______________________________
His Majesty Charles Martel (Karl the Hammer)
The Battle of Poiters was one of the fiercest in human history, where neither side gave the other any quarter. The Muslims for the first time met their match in the Franks in terms of ferocity. Once the Frankish army got the upper hand in the battle, they did not allow a single Arab soldier to return from the battlefield, neither did they take any prisoners. All the Arabs were slaughtered at Poitiers. And for a few decades after that a heap of Arab-Muslim bones marked the field of this seminal battle as the franks had not bothered to give the vanquished Arabs a decent burial as they were infidels.
__________________
Balises : Franks, French, Jihad, Zfrance, Zimperialism, qfightback
Réponses à cette discussion
-
Lien permanent Réponse de Netcon le
-
__________________
Abd-ur-Rahman ordered his troops back in line, but it was too late. A lance killed him. Then, while the armies were still fighting confusedly, night fell. Both armies retried to lick their wounds.
(Payne, 142-143). All through the night spies of Charles heard the
clash of arms as lieutenants of Abd-ur-Rahman quarreled bitterly
over the election of a new leader.The Arabs were fighting a small-scale civil war over the treasure carts. Toward dawn the sounds of fighting had ceased, and when the sun came through the clouds on that cold October Sunday, Charles saw
that the enemy had vanished from the battlefield.His scouts informed him that the Arabs were hurrying south, away from the northern winter and save their looted treasure. But the Franks were not going to allow the Muslim to escape that easily and
they pursued them into the in the marshes of the Loire and cut down
the fleeing Arabs and also retrieved the loot that the Arabs were
trying to save by fleeing.So at one stroke the Franks not only defeated and slaughtered the invading Saracens, but also recovered the looted treasures. The reason that the battle turned out the way it did, a loss for the
Muslims and a win for the Franks, seems disgraceful for the Muslims,
and genius for the Franks.
_______________________________
The battle of Poitiers was so bloodied that it saw the deaths of three hundred thousand Arab troops in a couple of days. The Franks equaled the passion of the Arabs in terms of
cruelty and barbarity. But it was this that broke the back of the
Arab aggression and from Poitiers onwards the Frankish army had the
upper hand over the Muslims. So much so that the Battle of Poitiers
was later known as the battle of Tours, from the French verb “to
turn” back__________________
The Arabs were at a distinct disadvantage. The reason why is because the Franks had the advantages of more men, warmer clothes, and the home terrain. The Arabs were no match for the Franks. The
Franks had more men, but only a few cavalry and much more foot
soldiers than the Arabs.Although, the Arabs had an overwhelming number of horsemen and relied on them greatly. With their horseman the Arabs rushed forward relying on slashing tactics. (Koeller, "Battle of Tours") The Arabs
relying on the tactics began to weaken the more numerous Franks and
the momentum of this battle began to change.But by this time the Franks had reached the treasure carts, and were riding off with them. The Arabs, in a foolish move motivated by greed ran back to save the treasure carts, not thinking about the
battle. The greed of the Arabs and the thought of the Franks having
taken their treasure terrorized them.Abd-ur-Rahman who had boasted of taking the land of France in the name of Islam was killed in action leaving the panicking Muslims, without a leader. As Robert Payne said in his book The History of
Islam, the loss of the leader a power vacuum, consequently starting
a miniature civil war over the commanding role, weakening the Muslim
army(Payne, 143). This in turn led to the complete rout of the
Muslim army at Tours.The battle at Tours was the turning point battle of the epic war between the Muslims and the Christians. This battle won by Charles Martel and his Franks stopped the spread of Islam into Western
Europe. If Abd-ur-Rahman had won the battle at Tours and conquered
even farther into Europe then the world as it is know might be
different. "Will Durant speculates that the Muslims defeat at the
French city of Tours in 732 AD determined that European countries
remained Christian rather than becoming Islamic cultures." (Durant,
Will. 86) Instead of Christianity, Islam might have become the
dominant religion to in Europe._______________________________
The defeat at Poitiers was the first decisive defeat for the Muslims at the hands of the Christians. This was to be followed by the Reconquista in Spain (910 – 1492) and the
Crusades (1096-1297), in addition to the Christian victories at
Palermo, Lepanto and Vienna. But the final Christian victory is yet
to be delivered and this should happen in the next decade or two by
2025.__________________
The Battle of Tours has been hailed as one of the most crucial battles in history. (Discovering World History Essay) This battle was the turning point of the undeclared war against Western Europe,
which had become inevitable once [Gibraltar had been captured by the
Moors]. (Payne, 143) The Muslims had moved in and captured all of
Spain, from their position of strength in North Africa. After that
they went into France they met the Loire River the resolute Frankish
General Charles Martel, and their campaign ended at Tours in defeat.
This is where the expansion of Islam ended in Western Europe. Some
say Charles Martel saved Christianity and Europe from Islam.This battle is said to be decisive because this battle decided whether Islam would spread father, or stop. This is the farthest a Muslim army ever got in Europe. If the Muslims had not chased after
their precious treasure, and pursued the wavering Franks, then they
might have won the battle and Western Europe and the world would be
different today.If the Muslims had won the battle, and their campaign had gone farther into Western Europe, Islam would most certainly be the most predominate religion in Western Europe. That is only if the Muslims
had won the battle. That is why the Battle of Tours is one of the
most decisive battles in history, to decide which would prevail
Islam or Christianity. As one sees today Christianity prevailed,
thus far at least. It remains to be seen how Europe that is today on
the way to becoming an Eurabia, as evidenced by the riots over the
Danish Cartoons, can defeat the modern Islamic Jihad. The Battle of
Tours decided much.Which major religion would prosper in Western Europe, Christianity or Islam. Christianity won this battle, but it was not because of the Muslim tactics or the great leadership of either
side, it was greed that won the battle. If the Muslims had not
thought of their treasure and thought of the spread of Islam they
might have won the battle and changed the world as one knows it._______________________________
The Frankish domains when the Muslims invaded France.
The defeat of the Saracen invaders by the Franks at Tours (more properly Poitiers) in 732 A.D. was a turning point in history. It is quite likely the Muslims, if victorious,
would have penetrated, at once, far into the north, and they would
surely have seized North Gaul, and thence marched into disorganized
domain of the Germanic tribes and onwards into Viking territory of
Scandinavia. After victory at Tours, they could have readily have
crushed the weak Christian powers of Italy and converted Europe to
Islam. But the valor of the Frankish knights changed the course of
history on the battlefield of Tours.__________________
In the battle of Poitiers (or Tours) Martel not only decisively defeated Abd-ur-Rahman's advance with great slaughter of the Muslims, but after that heavy fighting continued in the south of
France, to the west in Langredoc under ibd-al-Malik, and up the
Rhone river again, then east to Piedmont in Italy. The Muslims,
helped by some apostate 'Christian' allies, regroup and began
attacking again. But due to the constant hammering they received
from Charles, they had to be on a steady retreat towards the south.
In 737 AD, Martel recaptured Avignon and continued to recapture
Muslim strongholds until he reached Marseilles (739 AD). Martel died
in 741 A.D., after succeeding in driving Islam from France, and was
succeeded by Pepin the Short who was followed by Charlemagne,
(Charles the Great).The long tradition of Frankish resistance to the Muslims
The encounter of the Franks with the Muslims in France, was to create a long tradition of Frankish bitterness against the Muslim. The Franks played a leading role in battling the Muslim and throwing
them out of Southern Italy (Palermo), leading the Reconquista in
Spain, and of course, in contributing countless knights first to
strengthen the Byzantines against Muslim depredations and later on
to the to the Crusades.The defeat of the Saracen invaders by the Franks at Tours (more properly Poitiers) in 732 A.D. was a turning point in history. It is quite likely the Muslims, if victorious, would have penetrated, at
once, far into the north, and they would surely have seized North
Gaul, and thence marched into disorganized domain of the Germanic
tribes and onwards into Viking territory of Scandinavia. After
victory at Tours, they could have readily have crushed the weak
Christian powers of Italy and converted Europe to Islam. But the
valor of the Frankish knights changed the course of history on the
battlefield of Tours.Lessons from the battle of Poitiers (Tours)
In this battle the Franks (Ferengis) taught a lesson to the Arab Muslims that they had till then taught others. The Frankish infantry almost entirely slaughtered the defeated and fleeing Muslim army.
The Franks took no prisoners, they slaughtered all the Muslims who
fell into their hands. The Muslims for the first time in their
truculent march had met a match that had outmatched them in cruelty.
The rotting corpses of the slaughtered Muslims littered the valley of Poitiers for days, and for years thereafter, travelers saw the heaps of bones that was all that remained to remind the people
of this decisive battle for many decades thereafter.The lesson from the battle of Poitiers is that the terror of the Arab Muslims can be neutralized only by a greater counter-terror. This counter terror has to be a mega-terror or a super-terror to
strike fear in the hearts of Muslims that they give up Islam on the
pain of death. In the same manner in which they inflicted this
bloodied creed on others and were in fact themselves the victim of
such an injustice some time or the other, since hardly anyone had
converted to Islam by their own free will.The Muslims do not deserve any compassion or dialogue if we are to defeat Islam
Another lesson that the victory at Poitiers teaches us is that among the general Frankish population there were no values like compassion and chivalry towards any adversary. Hence they did not
think of negotiating a peace with the defeated Arabs. They also
never allowed any of the defeated Arabs to retreat and live to fight
another day. They slaughtered all of them so that they could never
again threaten France. The culture of the Franks was based on
warfare, as was that of the Mongols under Hulagu, who also defeated
the Muslims in 1258 at Baghdad. The Franks expected no quarter from
the Muslims and gave none. They never pleaded for mercy from the
ghoulish Muslim invaders, and whenever they had the chance, they
gave no mercy to the defeated Muslims. The perception of an enemy as
a legitimate object of destruction, was present in each and every
Frankish soldier.The Franks were victorious as they did not have the dead-weight of a public opinion that cried “Stop the War”
It was not that the Franks had the dead-weight of a public opinion that cried “Stop the War” or “Down with Charles Martel” as the communists and their pro-Terrorist lackeys today shout “Down
with Bush”. The Frankish leadership and the lay population, both
represented an example of the public perception of the enemy being a
legitimate object of destruction. This is a perception which existed
among the Arabs in the 7th century and exists today in the 21st, and
is a compliment that we need to return to the Muslims, if we are to
ever defeat Islam.The only difference is that such a commonality of objectives of utterly destroying the enemy by using all means available, does not exist any longer in France, or anywhere else in the Western world
today, where we see communist and other pro-terrorist marchers
shouting anti-war slogans. Such was the ferocity of the Franks
against the Arabs, that the words Ferangee or Feringi, which the
Arabs used to refer to the Franks became an invective in Arab
terminology.The final victory against the challenge of Islam, called terrorism in our times, is yet to be delivered. What do we need to have within us to be victorious?
The Franks were never under any illusion that they could reach out to the Muslims , and have any kind of an honorable peace with them. For the Franks it was a do or die battle, in which they
succeeded. This is another lesson for the World leaders of today,
who keep talking of reaching out to the moderate Muslims and
isolating the Jihadis from the general Muslim population and say
that after all “Islam is a religion of peace, that has been hijacked
by the Jihadis”. No sir, Islam is religion of war.Islam is religion of war and can be defeated only through war when it is physically pulverized
Islam is religion of war from root to fruit based on war that they call the Jihad. For us to hallucinate that there is an entity called moderate Muslims is like saying that there is an entity like
being only partially pregnant! You are either pregnant or you are
not. There is no go between. So also you are either a Muslim or you
are not. And if you are a Muslim, you are a war monger who follows
the Instruction Manual of terrorism (Quran) that calls upon you to
convert all non-Muslims to Islam at the pain of death. And teaches
you to use all kinds of trickery and subterfuge in order to defeat
and subjugate the non-Muslims.The Franks were one of the first to recognize the only way to successfully defeating the Muslims. As did the Mongols after them. The only answer to Muslim terrorism of Jihad is a mega-terrorism an
super-terrorism, that will not just intimidate Islam, but take it to
its physical destruction once and forever. Amen.Islam, Fanatic Islam and Islamic Terrorism
Today many the world over are innocent of how Islam was founded, how it grew and what Islam implies for the future of Humankind. So there are endless debates that Islam is a religion of peace, that
all Muslims are not fanatical, and that we need to differentiate
between, Muslims and terrorists.The reading of the story of Islam so far should be enough to dispel the notion that Islam differs from Islamic fanaticism, or that Islam is a religion of peace and that the Terrorists have
hijacked a peaceful religion. No it is not. It is Islam which gave
birth to Terrorism, which started from the evil mind of its founder
Mohammed (yimach shmo ve-zichro - may his name and memory be
obliterated) and has filtered down to the last follower (Muslim)
today. Islam is Fanaticism, it is high time we woke up to this
chilling reality.How Islam prevents Muslims from leaving Islam – Murder any Muslim leaving Islam
Mohammed (yimach shmo…) was a shrewd man who knew that there was always a danger of Muslims deserting Islam and reverting to some other less blood-thirsty religion, so he made it an offense
punishable with death for anyone leaving Islam, having once accepted
it. According to the Shariah, a Murtad (Muslim Apostate) has to be
killed, and it is the duty of a Muslim to kill any other Muslim who
leaves Islam.The murderous Quran is the inviolable word of god
There can also never ever be any discussion on the murderous commands of the Quran, since it is the word of god, or so Mohammed (yimach shmo ve-zichro - may his name and memory be obliterated) told his
followers.Assemble five times a day to swear your loyalty to Islam
To be doubly sure that his flock remains together in to its murderous ken (prison), he decreed that it was compulsory for all Muslims to come together and pray five times during the day. So
there wasn’t any chance for his followers to leave Islam and
emancipate themselves.Getting into Islam was a one way street.
Islam was a dead end, where you could enter, (in fact you were forced to enter at the pain of death) , but could never leave, since you would be killed. In fact such was the indoctrination and mass
hysteria that Mohammed (yimach shmo…) started, that in a generation
or so, the new converts forgot that their forefathers were not
Muslims, and in fact in North Africa, they even forgot that they
were not Arabs. They forgot that their forefathers were made to
submit to Islam at the pain of death.This sealed the fate of all those who were forced to embrace Islam from ever becoming decent thinking humans ever again.
Only the total destruction of non-Muslim heritage and wholesale slaughter of non-Muslims has got the Muslims Victory
With every Muslim military victory, there was not just a change of ruler, but a wholesale slaughter of those who refused to convert or pay Jaziya. There was also a total destruction of the pre-Islamic
culture, educational institution, libraries, etc. The planned and
deliberately implemented slaughter of the non-Muslim priestly and
warrior class was done to enfeeble the conquered populace so much
that they would forget who they were their national and cultural
identity be subsumed under a newly imposed Arabized Muslim identity.
This kind of tyranny was never known to the human race, with any other conqueror, like Alexander, Julius Caesar, Hannibal, or even those who came after the Muslims like the British Colonialists, or
the Spanish Conquistadors. Yes the Spanish Conquistadors were
ruthless, but in spite of all they did to he native Americans, the
naïve Americans still have preserved their memory of they being a
people different from the Spanish Conquistadors, not so with the
Egyptians, North Africans, Berbers, et al.Ask any Egyptian who he is, he will say he is an Arab, were the Pharaohs Arabs? Were the builders of the Pyramids, Arab? Ask any Libyan, Sudanese, Algerian, Tunisian, Somalian, who he is he will
say he is an Arab. These are people, whom the conquering Muslim
Arab, so Arabized that they have forgotten who they are, their
national identities have completely been submerged into the Arab
Muslim Ummah.This has not happened with the native Americans or the Maoris or the Africans, in spite of the fact that apartheid was practiced in South Africa. The Arabs as conquerors totally brainwashed at the
point of the sword all the conquered people, Arabized and Islamized
them at the pain of death.Knowing all this is relevant today for those who seek to defeat Islam. To do so we have to first understand the depth of depravity in Islam. If the Muslims have to be saved from Islam, then it is not
sufficient to conquer the Muslim countries and try to being
democracy to them, we have to de-Islamize these people, if they are
to be emancipated into civilized beings.Islam has brutalized them and made them robotic followers and into robotic killers, narrow-minded individuals, despotic rulers, and cruel sadists by following the injunctions of the Instruction
Manual of Terrorism (the Quran). This is proven by the bloodied
Shiite-Sunni murders that have started in Iraq despite elections,
and elections by people who support a murderous creed throw up
murders as their legislators as in the case of Hamas and the rise of
the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.Islam is a perverted mentality, a mental sickness based on intimidation to convert all non-Muslims to Islam, and to murder if you refuse to convert. And if you manage to save your head, then you
have to live under their dehumanizing tyranny and live as
non-Muslims (Dhimmis or Zimmis).The Retrograde Negative Spirit of Islam pervades all across that Islamic civilization(sic). Although to call it “civilization” is a contradiction in terms
The very first verse uttered by that lecherous mass-murderer, the accursed Mohammed-ibn-abdallah was “La Ilah Il Allah, Mohammed ur Rasoolallah” which translated literally would read “No god but god,
Mohammed is prophet of god”. In Arabic “La” connotes “No”. So what
can one expect from a mentality whose very first of its five
principles is based on negativism?Negativism permeates all through Islam, its attitudes towards all non-Muslims, its use of dishonesty to portray itself as a victim, its murderous intent towards all those who refuse to convert to
Islam, its use of any level of cruelty to Islamize entire humankind.
We can save ourselves from this Malignant Madness of Islam, only if we see it through to its grave. The other option is landing in the grave ourselves along with liberty, progress and free-thinking,
freedom of speech and scientific advancement, all of which will be
become slaves to that Instruction Manual of Hate and Terror – the
Quran.Why is a threat of death the only way to defeat Islam?
Islam was spread with the use of death threats. The defeated non-Muslims were given the choice of Islam or Death. After having been forced to accept Islam through such terminal coercion, the
converted people had no way of renouncing Islam. If they did so,
they were targeted as Murtads (apostates) and were killed. It is
mandatory in Islam for Muslims to kill anyone who leaves the cult.
So the converts were forced to remain Muslims. And as this was their
fate, then the best bet for them was to imbibe the murderous
attitude themselves and impose it on others.Today although "Islam or Death" is not possible openly, unless you live in Muslim ruled countries of the Islamic crescent like Egypt, Sudan, Iran, Pakistan or in areas contiguous to Muslim
majority areas like Malaku in Indonesia, Southern Sudan, Kashmir,
North Nigeria.Muslim converts today are convicts or psychological wrecks like Jose Padilla and Richard Reid
But the Muslims have devised ingenious methods to reach those best suited for Islam, so they evangelize in Prisons, where they can appeal to the dregs of society, or those come from broken families,
those who have gone through divorces, or those who have had some
heart-breaking personal experience.It is on the emotions of such unfortunate wrecks and irredeemable convicts that these Muslim missionaries prey like vultures and hyenas to make them join the murderous ranks of Islam. Richard Reid,
the Shoe bomber, Jose Padilla are specimen of those who become
Muslim today.The cardinal fact is that across the fourteen centuries of Islam’s existence, it has been its death threat that made people Muslim and it was the same death threat that kept them Muslim. The
same death threats are used today to intimate Ayan Hirsi Ali, Salman
Rushdie and many others like them to keep them from speaking the
truth about Islam.He who was born by the sword shall die by the sword
Modifying the age-old adage “He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword.” We can say that “Islam which was born by the sword shall die by the sword” As it was a death threat that made people
into Muslims and kept them as Muslims, the only way these scum can
be shaken out of their adherence to the savagery called Islam is a
death threat. Not individual death threats as the Muslims hurl today
at Hirsi and Salman, but a death threat of extermination through a
nuclear holocaust of the entire Muslim population across the globe!
Only when the beastlike Muslims see the determination of a world to do them in, upto their last man and woman, can the Ummah of Islam be smashed.
When the Muslims see that there is no option other than death, if they persist in remaining Muslim, will the fort of Islam be breached and once the first trickle of Muslims who renounce Islam starts, the
trickle will turn into a flood and an avalanche that will wipe out
Islam.Yes there will certainly be many Muslims who will try to kill those who renounce Islam, but when these murderers are themselves hunted down with equal ferocity, will the lay Muslims believe that
it is safe for them to give up Islam. Then and only then, shall we
see Muslims coming over in droves to give up Islam. But this can
happen only we seriously hurl and start executing a death threat of
mass killing of all Muslims across the globe. There are no soft
options here.Do we have it in us to do that?
The answer decides whether civilization wins or Islam wins!
_____________________________
-
Welcome to 4 Freedoms!
(currently not admitting new members)
Page Monitor
Just fill in the box below on any 4F page to be notified when it changes.
Muslim Terrorism Count
Mission Overview
Most Western societies are based on Secular Democracy, which itself is based on the concept that the open marketplace of ideas leads to the optimum government. Whilst that model has been very successful, it has defects. The 4 Freedoms address 4 of the principal vulnerabilities, and gives corrections to them.
At the moment, one of the main actors exploiting these defects, is Islam, so this site pays particular attention to that threat.
Islam, operating at the micro and macro levels, is unstoppable by individuals, hence: "It takes a nation to protect the nation". There is not enough time to fight all its attacks, nor to read them nor even to record them. So the members of 4F try to curate a representative subset of these events.
We need to capture this information before it is removed. The site already contains sufficient information to cover most issues, but our members add further updates when possible.
We hope that free nations will wake up to stop the threat, and force the separation of (Islamic) Church and State. This will also allow moderate Muslims to escape from their totalitarian political system.
The 4 Freedoms
These 4 freedoms are designed to close 4 vulnerabilities in Secular Democracy, by making them SP or Self-Protecting (see Hobbes's first law of nature). But Democracy also requires - in addition to the standard divisions of Executive, Legislature & Judiciary - a fourth body, Protector of the Open Society (POS), to monitor all its vulnerabilities (see also Popper).
1. SP Freedom of Speech
Any speech is allowed - except that advocating the end of these freedoms
2. SP Freedom of Election
Any party is allowed - except one advocating the end of these freedoms
3. SP Freedom from Voter Importation
Immigration is allowed - except where that changes the political demography (this is electoral fraud)
4. SP Freedom from Debt
The Central Bank is allowed to create debt - except where that debt burden can pass across a generation (25 years).
An additional Freedom from Religion is deducible if the law is applied equally to everyone:
- Religious and cultural activities are exempt from legal oversight except where they intrude into the public sphere (Res Publica)"
© 2023 Created by Netcon.
Powered by
