(This Article used by permission of "History of Jihad.Com.")

The saga of how the Franks decisively defeated the Jihadis just 300 miles from Paris and saved Europe from the flames of Islam.

___________________________________________

The jihad is an institution, and not an event, that is to say it is a part of the normal functioning of the Muslim world. The conquered populations change status (they become dhimmis), and the shari’a tends to be put into effect integrally, overthrowing the former law of the country. The conquered territories do not simply change ‘owners’.

___________________________

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 canno
t 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 ed
ge 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.

__________________

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 h
ave 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!

_____________________________

Select Bibliography

Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries (Hardcover) by Paul Fregosi

The Sword of the Prophet: History, Theology, Impact on the World by Srdja Trifkovic

Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World’s Fastest Growing Faith by Robert Spencer

Studies in Muslim Apocalyptic Literature (Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam) by David Cook

Why I Am Not a Muslim by Ibn Warraq

Onward Muslim Soldiers by Robert Spencer

Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis by Bat Ye’Or

Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide by Bat Yeor

What the Koran Really Says: Language, Text, and Commentary by Ibn Warraq

Islam and Terrorism: What the Quran Really Teaches About Christianity, Violence and the Goals of the Islamic Jihad by Mark A. Gabriel, Mark A. Gabriel

A Concise History of the Crusades by Thomas F. Madden

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer

The Great Divide: The failure of Islam and the Triumph of the West by Marvin Olasky

The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats Non-Muslims by Robert Spencer

Islam Unveiled: Disturbing Questions About the World’s Fastest Growing Faith by Robert Spencer, David Pryce-Jones

The Koran (Penguin Classics) by N. J. Dawood

Don’t Keep me Silent! One Woman’s Escape from the Chains of Islam by Mina Nevisa

Christianity And Islam: The Final Clash by Robert Livingston

Holiest Wars : Islamic Mahdis, Their Jihads, and Osama bin Laden by Timothy R. Furnish

The Last Trumpet: A Comparative Study in Christian-Islamic Eschatology by Samuel, Ph.D. Shahid

Unleashing the beast: How a fanatical islamic dictator will form a ten-nation coalition and terrorize the world for forty-two months by Perry Stone

Contemporary Muslim Apocalyptic Literature (Religion and Politics) by David Cook

Islam and the Jews: The Unfinished Battle by Mark A., Ph.D. Gabriel

The Challenge of Islam to Christians by David Pawson

The Prophetic Fall of the Islamic Regime by Glenn Miller, Roger Loomis

Prophet of Doom : Islam’s Terrorist Dogma in Muhammad’s Own Words by Craig Winn

The False Prophet by Ellis H. Skolfield

The Approach of Armageddon: An Islamic Perspective by Muhammad Hisham Kabbani

The Cube and the Cathedral: Europe, America, and Politics Without God by George Weigel

Infiltration : How Muslim Spies and Subversives have Penetrated Washington by Paul Sperry

Unholy Alliance : Radical Islam and the American Left by David Horowitz

Unveiling Islam : An Insider’s Look at Muslim Life and Beliefs by Ergun Mehmet Caner

Perfect Soldiers : The Hijackers: Who They Were, Why They Did It by Terry McDermott

Islam Revealed A Christian Arab’s View Of Islam by Anis Shorrosh

Leaving Islam: Apostates
Speak Out by Ibn Warraq

The Origins of the Koran: Classic Essays on Islam’s Holy Book by Ibn Warraq

____________________________________________

This Article used by permission of "History of Jihad.com." Thank you!

© 2009 – 2011, Matt. All rights reserved.