[coolestuk]

Almost the whole world that is islamic became muslim through military occupation, the mass slaughter of the males who fought or would not convert, the looting of property and the selling off into slavery of their women and children. This was all based on emulating the behaviour of Mohammed (known as sunnah in islamic practice); Mohammed took 20% of the spoils from his army of warriors. (Some describe him as the profit of 20% because of this). This can be verified in The Life of Mohammed, the first biography of Mohammed (and written by a muslim 100 years after the death of Mohammed). The author, Ibn Ishaq, was a christian who was taken as a slave to Medina, and converted to islam for a better life (one of the inducements used in the spread of islam).

The real lesson is that christianity endured 300 years of this aggression, before Pope Urban made christianity do an about turn, and began the (very minimal) Crusades against islam. They were a failure, and islamic violence against European christendom continued until the Siege of Vienna (when Jan Sobieski defeated the muslim army on September 11, 1683).

Watch just 1 minute of this video to see what happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v...

The muslim attack against Europe continued beyond this. The white slave trade continued for hundreds of years (it was stopped by a joint British/US naval bombardment of Algeria in 1815). In 1951 the UN report on slavery calculated that 5% of the population of Saudi Arabia and Yemen were still slaves.

Buddhism did not respond in the same way as christianity to islamic aggression. Many experts on the history of buddhism say that buddhism died about 1000 years ago (e.g. Conze). And they explicitly attribute this death of buddhism to the onslaught of the islamic invasion & destruction in India.

The real lesson is that some religions are actually militant political movements wrapped up in religion. Islam is one such religion. Islamic militancy was going on for hundreds of years before christianity responded in kind.

[milfot]

"Almost the whole world that is islamic became muslim through military occupation."

This is just plain bullshit! The introduction of islam to much of the world was through trade, just the same as the christians. And if you take slavery, trade and military occupations to be evidence that "The real lesson is that some religions are actually militant political movements wrapped up in religion." then I am afraid you will have to say the same of christianity.

Once again, the point is that extremists / militants use religion (or any other reason) to justify occupation, oppression and murder. To fight militant-ism you have to do just two things. 1.resist. 2.not become one.

ps: were you serious about that video you linked? seems like dumb paranoid aryan propaganda to me..

[coolestuk]

"The introduction of islam to much of the world was through trade, just the same as the christians. "

Would you care to provide evidence for that assertion about trade rather than jihad? There is evidence that for areas like Indonesia & Malaysia, trade was the route. For almost everywhere else, it was by war. Next you'll be telling me that the hundreds of years in which islam used violence to dominate Spain was a Golden Age of tolerance and multi-culturalism.

Ibn Ishaq's book "The Life of Mohammed" was known by muslims for hundreds of years as "The Book of Battles". Muslims must emulate Mohammed. In the 13 years he was in Mecca, he attained 150 followers. In Medina he embraced war, assassination, slave-taking and robbery. By the time he died, all of Arabia was muslim.

Essentially, Islam was spread by the sword.

Attacking that video as "dumb paranoid aryan propaganda" is an ad hominem fallacy. Deal with the facts.

[chumma]

> In the 13 years he was in Mecca, he attained 150 followers. In Medina he embraced war, assassination, slave-taking and robbery. By the time he died, all of Arabia was muslim.

So would you please care to provide evidence to this assertion? How someone with a mere 150 followers could control a whole nation ?

[westicle]

Voldemort managed.

(http://hpmor.com/chapter/34)

[chumma]

Yea maybe history and fiction are much correlated by the way they are created and explained.

[jlgreco]

I think it is fair to say that both Islam and Christianity were spread with more or less the same mix of techniques. The two religions have a great deal in common.

However that should not be interpreted as praise of Islam. In fact, I think that comparison is extraordinary damming.

[tlear]

Not really, big coup for Christianity was conversion of the Roman empire and that was most definitely peaceful. Contrast that with how Middle east, and North Africa became Muslim

[Volpe]

erm.. but the 'spread' of the roman empire, was not peaceful. So you are really arguing the semantics of the order in which things were done.

Large group takes over world, then spreads religion. vs Large group spreads religion, and takes over world.

Yeah, REAL moral high ground there.

[jlgreco]

That is pretty much when the religious violence started...

[ucee054]

No the conversion of the Emperor was peaceful.

As for the pagan citizens of the Empire who didn't convert after that, the Parabalani made short work of them...

[simonh]

"Almost the whole world that is islamic became muslim through military occupation, the mass slaughter of the males who fought or would not convert, the looting of property and the selling off into slavery of their women and children."

s/is islamic became muslim/was colonial became christian/

"Islamic militancy was going on for hundreds of years before christianity responded in kind."

Try a search for the word "crusade" on wikipedia. You might find it enlightening.

[cousin_it]

What specifically should I find enlightening?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

== Middle Eastern situation ==

In 636 CE, Muslim forces led by the Arab Rashidun Caliphs defeated the Eastern Roman/Byzantines at the Battle of Yarmouk, conquering Palestine...

== Western European situation ==

The western European idea of the Crusades came in response to the deterioration of the Byzantine Empire caused by a new wave of Turkish Muslim attacks...

[simonh]

How did the Romans/Byzantines get into Palestine in the first place? "They started it" as a historical excuse is a pretty poor rationalisation. The point is right now, in the current generation and given the current situation what is the best way to proceed.

[_delirium]

How does this differ from the violent history of Christianization? From Theodosius I declaring Christianity mandatory and destroying the pagan temples, to Icelanders being held hostage to put pressure on them to convert (which they eventually voted to do, under that pressure), to colonial militias spreading Christianity in Africa and Asia, the religion basically spread by the sword. And it was maintained for hundreds of years thereafter through state violence: in most of Europe, if you attempted to convert to another religion, or declare yourself an atheist, you'd be executed as an apostate or a heretic. Even the Jews were expelled from many parts of Europe, where they had been tolerated by the Muslim empires (and prospered in Ottoman Istanbul and Salonica).

[ucee054]

Next you'll be telling me that the hundreds of years in which islam used violence to dominate Spain was a Golden Age of tolerance and multi-culturalism.

I'll take moslem Spain over Torquemada any day.

It is complete stupidity to assert Islamic violence over European Christendom, when Europe became Christian because of the violence of the Roman Empire.

So what if Europe had been conquered by Genghis Khan and subsequently turned moslem? The Albigensians were exterminated by Catholics. Do you find that somehow better than if they had been exterminated by Sunnis? Do you think the Albigensians enjoyed being slaughtered by Catholics more?

At their basis, Islam, Christianity and Judaism are exactly the same horrid Old Testament garbage. If anything, Islam is less offensive because some of the worst bits of the Old Testament have been cut out, the same way Java is less offensive than C++.