Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ZULU

Christians were more brutal than Muslims 1000 years ago but Christians learnt how to modify their religion through history.

Muslims have not learnt it yet but they will!


65 posted on 09/06/2004 5:00:59 AM PDT by F14 Pilot (Democracy is a process not a product)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]


To: F14 Pilot

Do you know if the Bahai's also believe in the veil? Are women given equal rights in the faith? I know they're even stricter than Muslims when it comes to alcohol, gambling and other religious tenants.


83 posted on 09/06/2004 2:28:19 PM PDT by freedom44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

To: F14 Pilot
Christians were more brutal than Muslims 1000 years ago but Christians learnt how to modify their religion through history.

What cra* are you spouting? Did Christians do what Mahmud of Ghazni did?

Nothing symbolises more the absoluteness of Muslim belligerence towards Hindus than the Hindu Kush. Historically, the passes across the Hindu Kush have been of great military significance, providing access to the northern plains of India to foreign invaders, starting from Alexander the Great in 327 BC, to Taimurlane in 1398 AD, and from Mahmud of Ghazni, in 1001 AD, to Nadar Shah in 1739 AD.

As noted by Srinandan Vyas on the Hindu.org web site: 'In Persian, the word "Kush" is derived from the verb Kushtar -- to slaughter or carnage, because all Hindus living there were slaughtered. Encyclopaedia Americana says of Hindu Kush: The name means literally "Kills the Hindu," a reminder of the days when Hindu slaves from Indian subcontinent died in harsh Afghan mountains while being transported to Moslem courts of Central Asia. While Encyclopaedia Britannica mentions that the name Hindu Kush first appears in 1333 AD in the writings of Ibn Battutah, the medieval Berber traveller, who said the name meant "Hindu Killer," a meaning still given by Afghan mountain dwellers who are traditional enemies of Hindus.'

'Unlike the Jewish holocaust,' writes again Vyas, 'the exact toll of the Hindu genocide suggested by the name Hindu Kush is not available. However the number is easily likely to be in millions.' A few known historical figures can be used to justify this estimate. Encyclopaedia Britannica recalls that in December 1398 AD, Taimurlane ordered the execution of at least 50,000 captives before the battle for Delhi; likewise, the number of captives butchered by Taimurlane's army was about 100,000 .

Encyclopaedia Britannica again mentions that Mughal emperor Akbar 'ordered the massacre of about 30,000 captured Rajput Hindus on February 24, 1568 AD, after the battle for Chitod, a number confirmed by Abul Fazl, Akbar's court historian.' Afghan historian Khondamir records that during one of the many repeated invasions on the city of Herat in western Afghanistan, which used to be part of the Hindu Shahiya kingdoms '1,500,000 residents perished.'

111 posted on 09/11/2004 7:34:17 AM PDT by Cronos (W2K4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson