Dear reader, the islamic enslavement of people throughout its history is of such monumental proportion that it's easy to understand that many hesitate even to think the very thought - that the only explanation to this and islam's history of violent emergence and expansion can only be understood if reading the Koran literally. But, after all, islam is a religion and isn't a religion the very guarantee for less evil? The answer is NO. Religion is the best excuse for evil. And of the Judaic traditions islam is now the worst simply because it's the last and most elaborated "Abrahamic" religious ideology purely for parasitism and rapetivism.
Islam made the enslavement of others (the "infidels" and women) its very basis and therefore continued when the rest of the world stopped. And even in medieval times the enslavement of others would have been far less without an ideology that expressly sanctioned and asked for it.
Islam, Turkey and OIC the real factors behind violence in Ukraine?
Let Klevius explain:
Is this the new scimitar flag of Crimistan?The islamic scimitar stands for pure evil in history (yet sometimes the real meaning of it has been conflated).
In line with Astrachan (and others)
To understand this you need to understand Finland's original flag which shows the islamic scimitar (symbolizing the "Tatar* or Turk yoke") in a completely opposite light (the Finnish lion trampling evil islam**).
* Meaning those Tatars who followed islam's original parasitic path of looting and enslaving.
** The scimitar on the Finnish coat of arms was without any doubt seen as a symbol for the islamic evil represented by the "Turk" who was back then understood as both Ottoman muslim Turks as well as Turkic speaking muslim Tatars out of the Golden horde. - No? Oh sorry, Klevius forgot you are so full of prejudices against anything that doesn't paint islam neat and nice. So, why not try the words Nazism and Nazis when considering those evil muslims who under islam pillaged, murdered, raped and enslaved more people during 1400 years than any other ideology whatsoever (and always remember that most German Nazis were not that evil at all - just like most muslims)! And as a bonus you may add that islam from its origin and still today sanctions slavery, racism and sexism. And if you don't trust Klevius, just take a thorough read of OIC's (all the world's muslims Umma) Sharia declaration against Human Rights in UN!
The original Finnish flag based on a 16th century coat of arms.
This (below) is Finland's contemporary coat of arms. A Finnish researcher tried in vain to "explain" (on a thousand pages) away the islamic symbolism of the scimitar.
This (below) is Karelia's old coat of arms.
Karelia bordered the medieval Novgorod republic which was ransacked by muslim Bolgars who hunted for slaves. The southern part became an important hub in the islamic slave finance as Vikings and Kazar Jews etc served the islaic caliphate in the south and later on the Ottoman Turks.
Fair skinned female sex slaves from northern Europe were the by far most valuable according to islamic price lists(see more about this here)
Most of what you read about Vikings on the web is wrong. The Viking age started already before 750 in the east (because of islamic demand for sex slaves). So forget about Britain 786. Also remember that if you see the words Norway or Norwegians mentioned re. Vikings then throw the link/book away. There was no Norway or Norwegians or a Norwegian language during the Viking age! Educate yourself on Origin of the Vikings.
In 882, Rurik's successor, Oleg of Novgorod, conquered Kiev and founded the state of Kievan Rus.
After the Kievan Russian state began to disintegrate in 1132, slaves became much more numerous as inhabitants of neighboring East Slavic principalities (much of the territory between Poland-Lithuania and the Volga River) became fair game for enslavement.
Jewish merchants took East Slavic slaves from Novgorod to western destinations. Other East Slavic slaves were continuously "harvested" by the Turkic peoples (Tatars) inhabiting the southern and eastern frontiers of Rus' and subsequently sold to buyers mainly in the Arab countries.
The Mongol invasions into Rus' from 1236-1240 accelerated the disintegration of Kievan Rus' that had commenced in 1132.
Continuous Tatar slave raids replaced those of the pre-1240 Turkic peoples who had roamed the Ukranian steppe. In these centuries the word "slave" was borrowed from the ethnonym "Slav."
During the ensuing period of the "Tatar yoke" (1237-1480), the export of slaves through Novgorod continued and the Novgorodian slave market at the intersection of Slave and High Streets was the most active business locale in the entire Republic of Novgorod, which encompassed much of Russia north of the Volga to the White Sea.
The Crimean Tatars had converted to islam in the 1300s and in 1475 the Crimean Khanate became a protectorate of the Ottoman Empire while itself still clinging to power over the Duchy of Muscovy. In 1480, the Muscovites threw off the "Tatar Yoke" and began the unification of Russia under Slavic rulers. By 1503, those rulers would declare Russia the Third Roman Empire, and take the title of Tsar.
The Crimean Tatars made use of their strategic position between the Ottomans and the Russians and supplied slaves for the Ottoman Janissary corps from the neighboring peoples to an enormous extent yet to be fully mapped.
Greedy rulers either married a muslim and naively agreed* to convert or just found islam the perfect sword for evil but profitable slave finance
* Islam is an evil dead end. A totalitarian harpoon that has only one direction unless it's stopped. This is one of the many reasons why islam is completely out of sync with Human Rights - a fact that not only Klevius but also OIC has realized!
Little is known about the timeline of the islamization of Inner Asia and the Turkic peoples who lay beyond the bounds of the caliphate. Around 7th century and 8th century, there were some states of Turkic peoples like Turkic Khazar Khaganate and Turkic Turgesh Khaganete who fought against the caliphate in order to stop Arabization and islamization in Asia. From the 9th century onwards, the Turks (at least individually, if not yet through adoption by their states) began to convert to islam. The Bulgars of the Volga, to whom the modern Volga Tatars trace their islamic roots, are noted to have adopted islamic evil early on. When the Friar William of Rubruck visited the encampment of Batu Khan of the Golden Horde, who had recently completed the Mongol invasion of Volga Bulgaria, he noted "I wonder what devil carried the law of Machomet there".
Different political functions of the islamic myth to legitimate power
Quite contrary to the populist academic discourse that within an islamic worldview, the production of "eventually" correct ritual behavior can be a gateway for "the grace of Allah" to produce "correct belief", the crude reality of islam's own tenets points clearly - and without the slightest anomaly from non-islamic history in sight - to a profitable parasitic formula crudely chiseled on pre-existing Judaic dogmas. This formula, which in one sweep eliminates otherwise "puzzling" historical events, goes like this (taken from www.klevius.info):
The root formula of Islam (Klevius 2001)
Slavery+"infidel" racism+sex segregated rapetivism+anti human rights Sharia/apostasy ban.
Why isn't the worst crime ever against humanity criminalized, but instead protected by the very Human Rights islam opposes?!
Converts to islam don't have to understand anything to be a "good muslim" simply because accepting totalitarian islam is the only proof needed. However, other muslims might not approve of it...
Some researchers think that until the islamization of Central Asia the main motif of conversion narratives was that of the "holy war"/jihad.
If jihad as a metaphor for the internal struggle of the individual to submit to Allah, should have been a main pillar of original islam then islam would never had emerged in the first place.
Tukles conversion narrative is evidence of a common syncretic production between evil (but parasitically profitable) islamic tenets and indigenous Central Asian motifs. Hence conversion stories are the result of what the convert brings with him mixed with some chosen forms of utilizing islamic evil tenets. This is the simple truth behind the blabbing about "many faces of islam".
There is only one face of true islam - and it's ugly!
Submitted by Ianus (Poland), Mar 1, 2012 at 15:09
Mozere writes :
> after all this talk of turkish atrocities etc you can still see on a map ,after 500 years of Ottoman rule,the countries ,languages,cultures of Serbia,Bulgaria,Romania,Armenia,Albenia etc ,<
With the exception of Albania - which had a privileged position in the Ottoman Empire and which was forced by the great Powers to become independent of her master in 1913 for otherwise it would have been partitioned between Serbia and Greece, and in which after "independence" uprisings were started with the jihadist Turkish flags hoisted up and slogans "Back to Turkey" circulated - all the other nations mentioned had to go through ordeals of massacres, genocides, horrors and wars before they got rid of the Turkish nightmare. They regained freedom, retained language and culture not because but despite their Turkish oppressors. The Skull Tower of Nis, the Bulgarian horrors, the Armenian genocide and the Greek genocide are the bloody landmarks in the long struggle against the Moslem oppressors from Asia.
> but where are the countries of Crimean Tartars<
S. Herberstein, an ambassador from Emperor Charles V to Muscovy wrote about Mehmet Ghirey's slave-hunting expedition of 1521 "He took with him from Muscovy so great a multitude of captives as would scarcely be considered credible; they say the number exceeded eight hundred thousand, part of whom he sold in Kaffa to theTurks, and part he slew. The old and infirmed men, who will not fetch much at a sale, are given up to the Tatar youths, either to be stoned, or to be thrown into the sea, or to be killed by any sort of death they might please."
Mikhalon the Lithuanian wrote around 1550 in his book "De moribus Tatarorum Lituanorum et Moscorum" : "The Crimean Tatars have much more slaves than livestock. Therefore they supply them also to other lands. Many ships loaded with arms, clothes and horses came to them one after another from beyond the Pontus and from Asia, and left always from them with slaves. ……. So these plunderers always are in possession not only of slaves for trade with other people but also have slaves for their own estates and to satisfy at home their cruelty and waywardness. In fact we often find among these unfortunate people very strong men, who, if not castrated, are branded on the forehead or on the cheek, and are tormented by day at work and by night in dungeons."
The Crimean Khanate existed as a slave-hunting outpost of the Ottoman empire. Its whole economy was based on slave raids and slave trade. As one scholar points out in his work "The Crimean Tatars and their Russsian captive slaves" "From the beginning of the 16th century until the end of 17th century the Crimean Tatar raider bands made almost annual forays into agricultural Slavic lands searching for captives to sell as slaves... the slave trade was the most important basis for the Crimean Tatar economy in the 16th and 17th centuries. During these centuries, the Crimean Khanate remained the main supplier of Slavic slaves, almost all of which were captured in southern Poland or Muscovite Russia, and brought back to the Crimea by their raiders. Most of their raids seemed neither to have had any military purpose, nor politico-territorial ambitions. The taking of captives and the selling them as slaves for the Crimean Tatars was purely an "economic" activity. R. Hellie refers to the Crimean Tatar's raiding activities as their "industry":
Slave raiding into Muscovy reached crisis proportions after 1475, when the Ottomans took over the Black Sea slave trade from the Genoese and the Crimean began slave raiding as a major industry, especially between 1514 and 1654....The sale of slaves brought great profit to the Crimean raiders, because they were in great demand from the Ottoman Empire."
As long as the victims didn't learn how to defend their lives, their property and their families the slave hunters' system worked perfectly "well".
"The Crimean raiders have to hand over ten percent of their human booty to the government as a kind of custom tax at the frontier of the Crimean Khanate. Most captives were usually driven to Kaffa, the largest slave market of the Crimea under the direct administration of the Ottoman Empire, and were sold there to the slave merchants....Nearly seventy percent of the slaves sold in Kaffa were driven onto ships and dispatched to Istanbul... When they arrived, the Ottoman officials first examined the new "cargos" and chose the best slaves: the most beautiful women for the sultan's harem, the most handsome and the strongest men for his palace service. The remaining ones were purchased either by the government for navy, or by the slave merchants of Istanbul..."
It is estimated that c. 1 000 000 Poles were captured by the Tatar slave-hunters to be sold into Moslem slavery and a corresponding number of Russians. The problem of slave hunting was so acute and desperate for the Russian state that there existed a special "Ministry of Ransom" and a special permanent tax was collected to redeem Slavic slaves from the Tatar/Turkish captivity whose horrors are hard to imagine today for a civilized person that is rarely confronted with contemporary historical sources and grim realities.
But now with all the brutal reality of what the Crimean Khanate stood for, Mozere dares ask with a complaint and innocence of a wounded Moslem angel : "Why is there no Moslem slave-hunting state in the Crimea? Where are the slave hunters of Bakcisarai? Why are the once overcrowded slave markets of Kaffa empty? Why are no Polish,Russian and Lithuanian slaves drudging in the fields and tending herds of their Tatar masters? Why don't young Tatars learn cruelty by tormenting their defenseless Russian slaves, stoning the ill ones, cutting the noses and castrating the recalcitrant ones ? What a historical "injustice"! " Well, we should cherish no illusions as to the deep value system of the Turk, be his name Erdogan, Mozere or Ataturk !
> the Circassians<
What applies to the Tatars, applies also the Circassians. They lived also off banditry and kidnappings. The Bulgarian horrors started as the Circassian brigands that had fled to Turkey from Russia (the Russians tolerated no slave markets and kidnappings) were resettled to Bulgaria and started their normal "lifestyle" of slave hunters and parasitic sadists there. It provoked a rebellion that was drowned in Bulgarian blood but this brutality provoked Russia and even temporarily silenced the most faithful and devoted admirers of Turkey and Turkishness in Great Britain who could no longer deny the Turkish barbarity that was displaying its best "skills" under the eyes of the entire world !
> Pomaks of West Thracia,all exterminated, who cares they are only muslims. <
"All exterminated" ? ;) I wish you were right !
"In 1922 the Muslim minority in Thrace numbered 86,000 people. According to the latest general census (1991) it numbers approximately 98,000 to a total of 338,000 inhabitants of Thrace, i.e. 29% of the population. The minority is composed of three ethnic groups : 50% of the minority are of Turkish origin, 35% are Pomaks (an indigenous population that speaks a Slavic dialect and espoused Islam during Ottoman rule) and 15% are Roma. Each of these groups has its own spoken language and traditions. It was for this reason that the drafters of the Lausanne Treaty defined it as a religious minority...
It must also be mentioned that in Thrace and in the remote mountainous area in Xanthi where the Pomaks live, in particular, the State has set up and is financing the operation of Greek speaking secondary education schools (Gymnasiums) in which the teaching of the lesson of religion in the Turkish language and the teaching of the Koran in Arabic have been introduced."