Were The Crusades Justified? - Page 18 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Were The Crusades Justified?

1. Yes, The Crusades Were Justified.
17
35%
2. No, The Crusades Were Not Justified.
16
33%
3. Neither, Both Sides Were Equally Justified or Not-Justified.
9
18%
4. Other.
7
14%
#15128124
The crusades were mostly motivated by economic factors. The aim of conquering the "holy land" was just a pretext to unify the armies of Christendom against an external enemy. Considering the loss of Constantinople and the decimation of Christians in the ME, the crusades were a failure. The problem as always was that Europe wasn't united and that Europeans fought each other. Learning from these mistakes today, it's easy to see that we have to strengthen the European Union against imperial powers threatening Europe.
#15139881
Both sides fought admirably.

The Christian leaders of the time ought to have recognised the truth of Islam, instead of fighting against it for the sake of holding on to their religious authority and poltical powers.

If they wanted to use the conlict to facilitate the unification of Europe, they should have instead used the doctrine of papal infallability to bring about a mass conversion of the European peoples to the Islamic religion. Under Islam Europe would have had real and lasting unification as a civilisation. But in the face of Islam, which appears to be destined to take over Europe, just as Mohammed predicted, the leaders of the Christian Church only cared about preserving their own worldly power which they felt to be threatened by the Islamic religion.

Therefore they incited conflict with the Muslim world, creating enmity between Christian and Islamic civilisation that has lasted to the present time.

Much heroism came out of the Crusades, but Europe would have been in a better state in the long-run if, instead of crusading against the Muslims, the leaders of the Christian world facilitaed the inevitable conversion of the European peoples to the Islamic religion.

Now Christianity is a dying religion, and the only real Christians are Muslims. For the people today who most closely follow in the path of Jesus are the Muslims. For they more closely follow his teachings and way of life than do the Christians (excepting a scattered individuals, and the Amish and Mennonites, no one else appears to be following Jesus' teachings, 'cept the Muslims).
Last edited by Peter Pan on 27 Nov 2020 20:18, edited 1 time in total.
#15139882
Peter Pan wrote:Both sides fought admirably.

The Christian leaders of the time ought to have recognised the truth of Islam, instead of fighting against it for the sake of holding on to their religious authority and poltical powers.

If they wanted to use the conlict to facilitate the unification of Europe, they should have instead used the doctrine of papal infallability to bring about a mass conversion of the European peoples to the Islamic religion. Under Islam Europe would have had real and lasting unification as a civilisation. But in the face of Islam, which appears to be destined to take over Europe, just as Mohammed predicted, the leaders of the Christian Church only cared about preserving their own worldly power which they felt to be threatened by the Islamic religion.

Therefore they incited conflict with the Muslim world, creating enmity between Christian and Islamic civilisation that has lasted to the present time.

Much heroism came out of the Crusades, but Europe would have been in a better state in the long-run if, instead of crusading against the Muslims, the leaders of the Christian world facilitaed the inevitable conversion of the European peoples to the Islamic religion.

Now Christianity is a dying religion. And today the people most closely following in the path of Jesus are the Muslims. The closest thing to Christians are the Muslims. Their way of life more closely conforms to the way of life of Jesus Christ than to that of any Christian I have known.


@Peter Pan ,

You must not know too many actual Christians. Esepecially if you do not know the distinctions between Islam and Christianity.

I agree that in the West Christianity has been dead, in my belief since 1054 AD with the Schism. But Christianity lives on in the East, and will persist.
#15139899
Peter Pan wrote:The Christian leaders of the time ought to have recognised the truth of Islam, instead of fighting against it for the sake of holding on to their religious authority and poltical powers.


You mean Europeans should have bent over to be conquered by armies from the ME after having resisted conquest for centuries?

More so than Christianity, Islam has been a means of conquest from the very beginning.

If Europe had been conquered by Islam, European countries would be impoverished shit holes ruled by corrupt and despotic rulers like most Muslim countries today. Just look around, it doesn't take rocket science to get this simple truth. Fleeing despotic rulers and economic desperation, millions of Europeans would be seeking asylum in Syria and Afghanistan.

Under Islam Europe would have had real and lasting unification as a civilisation.


:lol: :lol: :lol:

You mean like the Muslim world?

Now Christianity is a dying religion, and the only real Christians are Muslims.


Now the Muslim world is retarded backwater that can't even feed its own people while the Christian West is controlling the world.

You are a real joker.

annatar1914 wrote:I agree that in the West Christianity has been dead, in my belief since 1054 AD with the Schism. But Christianity lives on in the East, and will persist.


History doesn't actually stand still. The Muslim world has stagnated for over 500 years while Christian Europe has made tremendous progress. Humanism, the Enlightenment, Socialism, universal human rights, democracy, sciences, the arts, ... they all grew out of Christian Europe, while the Muslim world has retreated into a destructive fundamentalism. Today, Muslims face the choice of suffering repression and economic depravation at home or migrating to Europe. What's so great about that? Once we have made the transition to renewable energy, the Arabs can go back to doing with the camels whatever it is they do with the camels.
#15139903
annatar1914 wrote:You must not know too many actual Christians.


What I said implies that I know a lot of Christians and Muslims. I am well versed in the Koran and the Bible, and have a better understanding of the religions than most people, since I am not only aware of the historical and doctrinal distinctions between the two religions; unlike the Christians, I am familiar enough with both the Koran and the Bible to know which of these differences are based (however tenuously) on passages that appear in the said scriptures, for many of the doctrines that are believed to separate the two religions are based on artificial dogmas invented by religious ideologues, who have corrupted their own religion, and have told monstrous lies about the Koran.

The doctrines to which Christians commonly appeal, in order to justify their hatred of Islam, are nothing more than false dogmas superimposed upon the Christian religion by religious authorities motivated entirely by worldly considerations, and desirous of maintaining the division between the Christian world and the Islamic.

The same authorities responsible for inventing and perpetuating such dogmas are not exactly wellsprings of truth and wisdom. For they also committed great injustices against Christians "heretics" for the crime of rejecting dogmas that have no basis in the Christian religion. So they lied about and distorted their own religion. They also told preposterous lies about the Koran and Mohammed, and invented fake translations of the Koran to make the Koran appear as a most idiotic piece of prolix absurdity containing all manner of evil.

But Christianity lives on in the East, and will persist.

You are right about that. Which is why I predict that the future of European civilisation is Islamo-Christian: Orthoddox Christianity for Eastern Europe, and Islam for the West. Once the Muslims have reached a certain critical mass in Western Europe, mass conversion of the native population to Islam is an historical inevitability. Only Islam will be there to fill the spiritual void in the hearts of these people when they have reached their lowest point. There is no way that they are going to revert back to Christianity.

The future of Western civilisation is Islamo-Christian. And we should welcome such a future.
#15139912
Peter Pan wrote:
You are right about that. Which is why I predict that the future of European civilisation is Islamo-Christian: Orthoddox Christianity for Eastern Europe, and Islam for the West. Once the Muslims have reached a certain critical mass in Western Europe, mass conversion of the native population to Islam is an historical inevitability. Only Islam will be there to fill the spiritual void in the hearts of these people when they have reached their lowest point. There is no way that they are going to revert back to Christianity.

The future of Western civilisation is Islamo-Christian. And we should welcome such a future.


In general, what you have said is an absolute crock of bullshit concerning the relation and differences between Islam and Christianity. But, quite in keeping with a certain Islamic narrative that is totally mendacious. There are similarities of course, being that Islam is a syncretic Monotheism that has elements of (and historically grew out of) heretical Christian sects along with Zoroasterianism, Judaism, and Arabic Paganism.

But, I have only a little doubt that Islam will take over the Western world, at least for a time.
#15139916
Random American wrote:I'm sure some of them were. I don't necessarily agree with the modern narrative that they were vicious Christians slaughtering peaceful Muslims. Both sides were brutal and the Muslims were conquering Christian lands.



The islamist were on the march to conquer Europe. If not for the Crusades we would be speaking Arabic. I am not saying there is anything wrong with that language. However, Western values are more enlightened than Islamic law. This is not a slam on Muslims as many are quite Western. BTW, many other non-Westerns are very kind too.
#15139917
annatar1914 wrote:In general, what you have said is an absolute crock of bullshit concerning the relation and differences between Islam and Christianity. But, quite in keeping with a certain Islamic narrative that is totally mendacious. There are similarities of course, being that Islam is a syncretic Monotheism that has elements of (and historically grew out of) heretical Christian sects along with Zoroasterianism, Judaism, and Arabic Paganism.

But, I have only a little doubt that Islam will take over the Western world, at least for a time.


A civil war would likely prevent that. Or perhaps another Queen Isabella ethnic cleansing.

There is a paradox in this issue. Feminists generally refuse to put down Muslims because they see them as part of the oppressed intersection. They tend to forget that women in the West have the best life and women in Islam remain oppressed.
#15139918
@Julian658

A civil war would likely prevent that. Or perhaps another Queen Isabella ethnic cleansing.


native populations in Europe have little time, and are lacking certain things which the Muslims possess.

There is a paradox in this issue. Feminists generally refuse to put down Muslims because they see them as part of the oppressed intersection. They tend to forget that women in the West have the best life and women in Islam remain oppressed.


I'm not a Feminist, so I see the ''paradox'' as just a psychological urge to destroy the common enemy of both Muslims and Feminists.
#15139922
Atlantis wrote:You mean Europeans should have bent over to be conquered by armies from the ME after having resisted conquest for centuries?

They should have embraced Islam as a religion, i.e. follow the teachings of Jesus. They would still fight off any Muslim invading armies. The real conflict was not religion against religoin, but of tribe agains tribe (i.e. tribal competition writ large). It was one civilisation against another civilisation, not one religion against another. Appeal was made to the prevalent religion at the time, which happened to be Christianity and Islam, not because the conflcit had any basis in differences of religious opinions (the differences between Islam and Christianity being negligible as far as core beliefs are concerned), but only to motivate the masses to fight against the enemy.

The conflict between Muslims and the West is rooted in 'tribe'. Only an ignoramus would think that it was all based on the beliefs of Christians or Muslims. Indeed the rivalry between the 'Semitic' and the 'Aryan' (for lack of any better terms), or between European and Near-Eastern civilisations, predates Islam and Christianity by several thousands of years. It has been going on since the beginning of recorded history in some form or another (e.g. the Punic Wars, Greco-Persian Wars), and continues to the present day (e.g. the so-called War on Terror"). Probably the only way that this conflict will be resolved is via the Islamisation of Europe and the Europanisation of Islam.

More so than Christianity, Islam has been a means of conquest from the very beginning.

That is an insult to Christianity. What you are really claiming is that Christianity is historically weak and impotent as compared with Islam. On that score I believe you are mistaken. The Christians have conquered vast stretches of the earth, wiping out entire peoples and civilisations in some cases. Islam doesn't even come close. But Christianity has become very weak. As civilisation it is dead. As a belief it exists only in the hearts of a few scattered individuals. The only thing that can revitalise Europeans and restore Western civilisation is the complete Islamification of Western Europe via mass conversation, which is likely to occur as soon as the Muslims reach a certain critical mass in Western Europe. For the Europeans that remain secular will continue to have a very low birth rate, while the Europeans that converted to Islam will have higher reproductive rates owing to lifestyle factors peculiar to Islam, factors which tend to favour very high reproductive rates. The men will be able to take multiple wives if they are so minded since Islam allows a man to have up to four wives (Muslims are also allowed to choose from both Muslim and Christian women). At the same time, the secular population will convert to islam in proportion as the native European Muslim population grows and expands. Once Islam is sufficiently nativied in this manner, the general population will convert en masse to the new religion, since there is no other alternative.

If Europe had been conquered by Islam, European countries would be impoverished shit holes ruled by corrupt and despotic rulers


All of that is caused by tribe and culture (not to mention conflicts instigiated by Western countries). It is absurd to suggest that it is caused by people believing that God is one, that Mohammed was his messenger, that Jesus is the soul of God (ruh allah) and the incarnation of the word of God, that he was born of a virgin, that Mary is to be venerated, etc. Such core Islamic beliefs do not bringa about impoverishment. That is a preposteorus claim on your part. And in many respects Islamic countries are superior to modern Western countries. Better manners, morals, ethnic cohesion, a stronger sense of community, lower rates of suicide, a strong sense of brotherhood unheard of in Western countries, etc.

Just look around, it doesn't take rocket science to get this simple truth. Fleeing despotic rulers and economic desperation, millions of Europeans would be seeking asylum in Syria and Afghanistan.

I used to think that until I actually visited Muslim countries and had knew lots of Muslims. You have been fed lies and misinformation about the Islamic world. You are blinded by anger and hatred.

You mean like the Muslim world?


Now the Muslim world is retarded backwater that can't even feed its own people while the Christian West is controlling the world.


Where is this Christian West you speak of?


Humanism, the Enlightenment, Socialism, universal human rights, democracy, sciences


All garbage. I noticed you left out the Renaissance, which represented something infinitely superior to everything you listed, and was rooted in in pre-christian pagan culture.

the arts


You can thank both the Pagans and the Christians for that.

But why are you defending Christianity? I never attacked the Christian religion. I just think that the only people practising Christianity today are Muslims. By that I mean: the people most closely following the teachings of Jesus, and who adhere to a way of life that most closely resembles the Christian way, are the Muslims.
Last edited by Peter Pan on 27 Nov 2020 23:34, edited 1 time in total.
#15139925
annatar1914 wrote:@Julian658



native populations in Europe have little time, and are lacking certain things which the Muslims possess.



The difference in fertility rates is large. This may sound racist, but it would not be an issue if the Muslim migrants adopted the native culture as their own.

I'm not a Feminist, so I see the ''paradox'' as just a psychological urge to destroy the common enemy of both Muslims and Feminists.

I agree. The idea is to destroy the west. They are consumed with guilt.
#15139934
Julian658 wrote:The difference in fertility rates is large. This may sound racist, but it would not be an issue if the Muslim migrants adopted the native culture as their own.


Convert to Islam, and the native European fertility rate will skyrocket. Problem solved.

There is still time to save Europe. The cure is readily available to you. The cure is Islam.

An ethnically Western European Islamic culture would crush.

I agree. The idea is to destroy the west. They are consumed with guilt.

If they tried to use Islam to destroy the West, they inadvertantly sent the cure. Once the native Europeans are converted to Islam, the problems you speak of will all vanish overnight.

Only Islam will save Western Europe. (And by Islam I don't mean the mere presence of Muslims from abroad. I mean conversion to the Islamic religion. Islam is good. Muslims can be good, bad, or indifferent.)

But perhaps you are so blinded by anger and hatred towards Islam that you will allow your civilisation to perish rather than allow the conversion of the population to a belief system that is identical to the core teachings of Jesus.

A Europeanised Islam, by the way, would be as culturally distinct from Arabic Islam, as European Christians are distinct from Ethiopian Christians.

It would be Europeanised in exactly the same way that Christianity was Europeanised (not to mention paganised).

It is the only thing that would revitalise and restore European civilistation. It would mark the beginning of a new Golden Age, comparable to the classical Greco-Roman civilsation, the European Renaissance, etc. The fusion of the greatest civilisation with the greatest religion can only lead to an era of heightened cultural vitality lasting for many generations.

Europeans would be foolish not to take advantage of the opportunity. The alternative of course is to be taken over, to grow weaker and weaker, and continue to dwindle in numbers as everyone else increases and expands.

Nothing can save you but Islam.

You have but two options - two possible outcomes : (1) be invaded and taken over, ever decreasing in numbers while newcomers grow and expand, the Muslims eventually taking the most desirable women as wives (European women will flock to the Muslim "invaders' - if European men don't convert to Islam beforehand) ; (2) or, let the native European population convert to the Islamic religion so that they can be saved.

Of course, one can conceive of other scenerioes but they are all dubious and unlikely. The two outcomes listed above are certitudes.
#15139952
Peter Pan wrote:Convert to Islam, and the native European fertility rate will skyrocket. Problem solved.

There is still time to save Europe. The cure is readily available to you. The cure is Islam.

An ethnically Western European Islamic culture would crush.


If they tried to use Islam to destroy the West, they inadvertantly sent the cure. Once the native Europeans are converted to Islam, the problems you speak of will all vanish overnight.

Only Islam will save Western Europe. (And by Islam I don't mean the mere presence of Muslims from abroad. I mean conversion to the Islamic religion. Islam is good. Muslims can be good, bad, or indifferent.)

But perhaps you are so blinded by anger and hatred towards Islam that you will allow your civilisation to perish rather than allow the conversion of the population to a belief system that is identical to the core teachings of Jesus.

A Europeanised Islam, by the way, would be as culturally distinct from Arabic Islam, as European Christians are distinct from Ethiopian Christians.

It would be Europeanised in exactly the same way that Christianity was Europeanised (not to mention paganised).

It is the only thing that would revitalise and restore European civilistation. It would mark the beginning of a new Golden Age, comparable to the classical Greco-Roman civilsation, the European Renaissance, etc. The fusion of the greatest civilisation with the greatest religion can only lead to an era of heightened cultural vitality lasting for many generations.

Europeans would be foolish not to take advantage of the opportunity. The alternative of course is to be taken over, to grow weaker and weaker, and continue to dwindle in numbers as everyone else increases and expands.

Nothing can save you but Islam.

You have but two options - two possible outcomes : (1) be invaded and taken over, ever decreasing in numbers while newcomers grow and expand, the Muslims eventually taking the most desirable women as wives (European women will flock to the Muslim "invaders' - if European men don't convert to Islam beforehand) ; (2) or, let the native European population convert to the Islamic religion so that they can be saved.

Of course, one can conceive of other scenerioes but they are all dubious and unlikely. The two outcomes listed above are certitudes.


The Arab world was advanced until it adopted Islam. As of now THEY REMAIN STUCK IN THE MIDDLE AGES. They are much worse than Catholicism in the 12th century or Judaism as described in the Old Testament.

Europeans have become secular and are leaving Christianity behind because it is archaic. To assume they will embrace a much more backwards archaic religion is illogical. The Islamists were in the South of Spain for 8 centuries and despite convenient conversions by Christian to pay less taxes Spain remained Christian and then Queen Isabella kicked them out. This plan was tried once before and it did not work
#15139984
Peter Pan wrote:The conflict between Muslims and the West is rooted in 'tribe'.


Tribal politics are the source of conflicts, so much we can agree; however, the messianic religions are just one way of continuing the conflict at a higher and bigger level, ie. the Christian against the Muslim tribes.

The conflicts are not necessarily rooted in religion, but religion is used as a vehicle to pursue conflicts on a large scale. Religion is the narrative that provides the pretext, as I have already exhaustively explained above. From Gilgamesh slaying Humbaba (because, as the guardian of the forest, the latter didn't worship the gods of the city of Ur, where Gilgamesh was king) to the invasion of Iraq allegedly because Saddam didn't worship the Western gods of democracy and the free market, 5,000 years have passed but nothing has changed. At Gilgamesh's time, people fought because of timber, today people fight because of oil, they are still using their religion (or values) as pretext.

It wouldn't do to say I want to kill you because I want to steal your money and fuck your wife. No, that doesn't sound good. That's where religion comes in. I have to kill you because you don't respect our values (Christian, Muslim, Western, etc.).

Thus, even if religion isn't the origin of conflict, religion is a powerful driver for conflict especially if it is politicized as in political Islam. It's not honest to say that religion has nothing to do with conflict when you advocate Islam, which is more about politics than about spirituality. Your aim is political, not spiritual. You don't understand the first thing about religion or you wouldn't politicize religion.

What you are really claiming is that Christianity is historically weak and impotent as compared with Islam.


I don't know what ideological corner you come from, but you are here taking a page out of Hitler's book. Hitler regretted that Germans hadn't been converted to Islam because he thought that they would have been better fighters. You singing from the same hymn sheet makes mockery of your claim that religion has nothing to do with war.

The Christians have conquered vast stretches of the earth, wiping out entire peoples and civilisations in some cases. Islam doesn't even come close.


Islam was a religion of war right from the time of its founder, while Christianity only started to be associated with politics 500 years after its creation. That Christian Europe was more effective at expansion has nothing to do with cruelty. Since the Renaissance, Europe has just been more innovative than the Muslim world. The Muslim conquest was every bit as cruel as anything we can imagine. The ISIS head-choppers prove that Muslims haven't changed either.

But why are you defending Christianity? I never attacked the Christian religion. I just think that the only people practising Christianity today are Muslims. By that I mean: the people most closely following the teachings of Jesus, and who adhere to a way of life that most closely resembles the Christian way, are the Muslims.


Religion is not static. Religion has to evolve to stay alive, otherwise it becomes an empty shell. Christianity lives on in Western traditions. Humanism, the Enlightenment, Socialism, human rights, the sciences, the arts, the rule of law, social and political liberation ... all of this is rooted in Christian Europe, while the Muslim world has been dead and stagnating for over 500 years. Muslims slept through all of these developments in a nightmare of oppression.

We once had an ISIS supporter on Pofo. His conspiracy theories were laughable. Are you advocating radical Islam?
#15139985
Julian658 wrote:The Arab world was advanced until it adopted Islam. As of now THEY REMAIN STUCK IN THE MIDDLE AGES. They are much worse than Catholicism in the 12th century or Judaism as described in the Old Testament.


Not true. Arab culture blossomed from the 8th to the 15th century largely because Islam provided a homogeneous cultural and commercial space from Spain in the West to Canton in the East. The Arab traders calling on Malaga or other trading posts along the way could trade as if they were at home because the Imams and Muslim rulers would guarantee that the local trading partners adhered to the same laws. Ie. their investments were safe.

When the Arab traders lost their monopoly to the European navigatores, who cut out the Arab middle-men in the East Asia trade, Arab/Muslim culture started to decline and European culture started to blossom with the European Renaissance. European colonialism made the crusades superfluous since the Mediterranean was no longer the center of commercial activity. The Italian city states had expanded their trading empires in the Mediterranean on the back of the crusades.

Arab culture also declined because of the Ottoman conquest. The Ottomans were nomads from central Asia who were good at conquest but bad at promoting the sciences, just like the Mongols who conquered China. As a foreign warrior class, they were busy with consolidating their power over the conquered people.
#15139995
Atlantis wrote:Not true. Arab culture blossomed from the 8th to the 15th century largely because Islam provided a homogeneous cultural and commercial space from Spain in the West to Canton in the East. The Arab traders calling on Malaga or other trading posts along the way could trade as if they were at home because the Imams and Muslim rulers would guarantee that the local trading partners adhered to the same laws. Ie. their investments were safe.

When the Arab traders lost their monopoly to the European navigatores, who cut out the Arab middle-men in the East Asia trade, Arab/Muslim culture started to decline and European culture started to blossom with the European Renaissance. European colonialism made the crusades superfluous since the Mediterranean was no longer the center of commercial activity. The Italian city states had expanded their trading empires in the Mediterranean on the back of the crusades.

Arab culture also declined because of the Ottoman conquest. The Ottomans were nomads from central Asia who were good at conquest but bad at promoting the sciences, just like the Mongols who conquered China. As a foreign warrior class, they were busy with consolidating their power over the conquered people.


At the onset Islam was a different religion. For example when the Islamist entered the Iberian Peninsula they saw the Spanish Jews as allies and the Jews were taxed at a lower rate than the Christians. The Spanish Jews helped the invasion as they were second class citizens in Christian Spain. The invasion of Spain happened in the middle of multiple Goth tribal wars as Spain was not a nation but a collection of kingdoms. The Moors made it all the way up to France. Many Christians went into the mountains and eventually drove the Muslims to the south where they remained for seven centuries. Seven centuries is a long time and they left a lot of beautiful architecture. The Catholic Queen (a title given by the Pope) Isabella threw the Islamists out in the 15th century and today Spain is less Muslim than France, Germany, or the UK.

Córdova was a great city when Paris was not what it is today. The Moors (mostly Berbers) were a talented people from North Africa. The question is why so many Muslim nations remain stuck in the middle ages. By the way this is not an Islam thing. Just look at the Amish.
#15143711
The horror of ISIS has lead to a secularisation in the Middle-East like Dubai or Saudi-Arabia, although they are Salafi the strictest form of Sunna.

The Syrian war is our 30-Years war.

Jihadism is a mix of all islamic streamings. The Base is Salafism, but also Theobandi and Shia. Suicidebombers are from Shia Hezbollah (which have their ideology from medivial Islmailites)
#15143712
SaddamHuseinovic wrote:The horror of ISIS has lead to a secularisation in the Middle-East like Dubai or Saudi-Arabia, although they are Salafi the strictest form of Sunna.

The Syrian war is our 30-Years war.

Jihadism is a mix of all islamic streamings. The Base is Salafism, but also Theobandi and Shia. Suicidebombers are from Shia Hezbollah (which have their ideology from medivial Islmailites)


Because in the Muslim world it can only logically go one of two ways; Atheism or the strictest and most devout claimants to original Islamic belief; those like ISIS or the Twelver Sect of Shia ruling Iran.
  • 1
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
How to deal with Trump?

But history does tell us failure to respond makes[…]

Election 2020

Really great points and a great post. I still do[…]

https://youtu.be/BZeLvk0pEAA Sima Qian's masterpi[…]

You ain't gonna fight George Soros and his massive[…]