Fakhri Pasha "The Defender of Madina"

[al-Hasani]

Your bs reply again,cant take the truth huh?
Palestine?
Just yesterday you posted that the Palestinian cause is not your problem,kid you need to stand by your words.
Never will the other Arabs accept you as their leaders and you know it,money doent buy evrything,i gues you will find out when you grow up.
Try to get of your high camel and see reality,you cant be taken serious with all your hollywood fantasies.
This was my last reply to you but if you do this bs again(writing a story book)i'll be back!

LOL. Who are you? GCC Is already leading the Arab world and is the richest part of the Arab world and arguably most influential. Several times richer than your country. You have no clue about Arab issues as you have demonstrated countless of times nor do any Arabs care about your opinion as an foreigner.

Once again I guess the fantasy was the fantasy that you have in your head and the one I countered by facts.

See your post. #26

I didn't make up quotes.

I just exposed your mindset that's it.






Then what is your point ?



Even mighty Genghis Khan failed the conquer Japan with a sea expedition and here you claim that you can do it......

A mindset that you have no proof of. That's the only mindset you want to see. Yet I did not write this directly hence you are inventing a quote that I have never written or call it a statement.

No, I said that it might have been possible. Stranger things have occurred. Nor does it matter. I just mentioned how Islam was spread by the Arabs to South East Asia through trade and settlement and rulers (many Indonesian, Malay, Bruneian etc. rulers were Arabs originally) and not through force.

The point was just that Arabs did not attack other Muslims unless during a civil Arab war. Ottomans on the other hand attacked Muslim lands.

 

[u.MP]

This thread is pretty funny, thanks for the late night entertainment @ arabwithsandinhisv-jayjay

 

[olcayto]

This thread is pretty funny, thanks for the late night entertainment @ arabwithsandinhisv-jayjay

Don't watch the show. Join it

 

[KingMamba]

We are talking about the first group of people. Don't make stupid comments when you know what I mean and what I am referring to. Islam was first really spread when Prophet Muhammad (saws) appeared and united his people the Arabs. The final messenger of Allah (swt). Claiming otherwise is a lie.

You are spreading fitna.

The first Muslims were Adam and Eve AS who were the first modern humans, they weren't Arab. Besides in the Quran itself God doesn't make a big deal that Prophet Muhammad PBUH was an Arab, and the Prophet himself stressed that fact just before he passed.

 

[usernameless]

Yet the people who call themselves Turks today have little genetic affinity with the real Turks who live on the Central Asian Steppe and in Siberia today but they have no problem calling themselves Turk. Let alone in terms of looks.

So, you're basically saying Turks were purely mongoloid people before they settled in modern Turkey? that's kinda silly considering that some Central Asian Turks, especially Uyghurs for example, have a (great) portion of non-Mongoloid features as well. So, it;s not impossible that the Turks of Turkey already had a portion of non-Mongoloid features when they entered the ME region and intermingled with the locals. im not trying to say that all Turks in Turkey are now suddenly central Asian, but just that the portion of Turks in Turkey with a background from Central Asia is probably bigger than you think it is.

 

[al-Hasani]

@Desert Fox

That is because Muslims especially Arabs shunned everything prior to Islam for solely religious reasons. Despite Arabs and other Semitic people having among the oldest and most influential civilizations. So them saying this is nothing new. Some of them want to bomb the Pyramids, Babylon, Mada'in Saleh in KSA, Petra in Jordan, Hatra in Syria etc TODAY. All World UNESCO Heritage Sites. So that kind of argumentation is baseless.

Do you think that any Arab Caliph cared about the ancient civilizations of Yemen (among the oldest in the world) or the Dilmun civilization in KSA and Bahrain a nearly 5000 year old civilization that was a trading partner with nearby Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley civilization across the Arabian Sea? No. But today we know about this.

Yet when I counter your initial biased and one-sided comment about the Arab Revolt and solely this you start to talk about the Sunni-Shia split that happened 1300 years ago.

No shit sherlock Arabs are not perfect nor is anybody else that. Never claimed otherwise.

Yet when I say that Arabs where the first people who really spread Islam and by most are recognized as the first Muslim group you talk about Adam and Eve in a literal sense of the world despite knowing that I am referring to.

Yet you call Shia Islam an Arab invention thus you must be of the opinion that Islam itself is an Arab invention. Otherwise you are not consistent.

I never said that myself.

When I mention that Prophet Muhammad (saws) and the Noble Qur'an already predicted division among Muslims and sects you blame it on the Arabs.

So you are not consistent nor are you even neutral despite claiming so.

You are spreading fitna.

The first Muslims were Adam and Eve AS who were the first modern humans, they weren't Arab. Besides in the Quran itself God doesn't make a big deal that Prophet Muhammad PBUH was an Arab, and the Prophet himself stressed that fact just before he passed.

You misunderstood my post as did Desert Fox. That can happen when I am debating 5-7 users at once (literary) writing long posts every 3-4 minutes. I already explained what I meant. Even in this very post again. Also I know my Islam very well.

 

[TurAr]

Earlier today we had an idiotic Turk who started insulting Arabs for no reason until I countered him and he became silent.

I told you i had no intention to discuss with a monkey who cannot respond to a legit question without insults. Go ahead, quote your 20 friend once again and ask a civilized one of them to discuss on behalf of you.

 

[-SINAN-]

Why are you starting a pointless discussion when I said that the family of the Ottomans were obscure? They did not rule anything prior to staring the Ottoman Empire. Hence obscure. Obscure compared to the Abbasid Dynasty that had ruled the Muslim world for 500 years previously and 250 years nominally only. Once again I meant the FAMILY not a whole people. I already wrote it more than once. Why continue to deliberately misunderstand it?

We are repeating the same thing over over and again. I made my point in my previous post. I won't add anything more on it.

Eh, ask all the sources used or what most historians say about being Persianized. Don't blame me for repeating the common held belief. I did not invent that claim.

Where did i blamed you. We are Turks not Persians. Seljuqs ->Ottomans->Turkey.

Well he did. We had two Turks who insulted Arabs before any Arab had written in this post. So don't blame me for replying in a similar fashion. Earlier today we had an idiotic Turk who started insulting Arabs for no reason until I countered him and he became silent.

Okay, than don't blame Turkish Users when they reply you with similar fashion.

Yes, I would like to see that and it is genuine.

I'm not really into subject. As i did a research i found this site.. but it is Turkish and it gives sources. there is also some Arabic scripts in the site.

Prof. Dr. Mustafa Karataş 'ın Resmi Websitesi

No it is not for me. When somebody takes a throne from a dynasty that ruled for centuries they are referred to as usurpers or at least can be.

Civil wars.[/quote]

usurp: definition of usurp in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

You should use the same word for
Umayyads
Abbasids
Fatimids
Ayyubid
Mamluk

 

[al-Hasani]

I told you i had no intention to discuss with a monkey who cannot respond to a legit question without insults. Go ahead, quote your 20 friend once again and ask a civilized one of them to discuss on behalf of you.

Now go take your donkey and go back to your barren Mongolia where you left no traces of anything.

 

[Hyperion]

You guys are fighting for nothing.... we are actually the only eternally pure race..... the proud Pashtuns....

Our people:

Our playground:

 

[KingMamba]

@al-Hasani

You make many mistakes like Saladin was fighting for an Arab empire lol? Saladin did not care for none of that all that mattered was Islam and returning our holy lands to Muslim sovereignty. I don't know why you look at everything through racial lens bruv.

 

[al-Hasani]

We are repeating the same thing over over and again. I made my point in my previous post. I won't add anything more on it.



Where did i blamed you. We are Turks not Persians. Seljuqs ->Ottomans->Turkey.





Okay, than don't blame Turkish Users when they reply you with similar fashion.



I'm not really into subject. As i did a research i found this site.. but it is Turkish and it gives sources. there is also some Arabic scripts in the site.

Prof. Dr. Mustafa Karataş 'ın Resmi Websitesi

No it is not for me. When somebody takes a throne from a dynasty that ruled for centuries they are referred to as usurpers or at least can be.

Civil wars.

usurp: definition of usurp in Oxford dictionary (British & World English)

You should use the same word for
Umayyads
Abbasids
Fatimids
Ayyubid
Mamluk[/quote]

Why then talk about a few empires when I am only referring to one FAMILY?

Once again you claimed that they were not Persianized without providing any sources while I quickly posted 1 link that had about 10 sources to support that commonly held claim among historians. Yet you blame me for doing so.

Yes, they were usurpers too. Why do you think I otherwise told you that if an local family removed the Al-Saud family from their power and gained it they would be called usurpers?

 

[-SINAN-]

A mindset that you have no proof of. That's the only mindset you want to see. Yet I did not write this directly hence you are inventing a quote that I have never written or call it a statement.

You misunderstood Mandmusti's post.

But still no reason ro use of insulting words.

No, I said that it might have been possible. Stranger things have occurred.

Nor does it matter. I just mentioned how Islam was spread by the Arabs to South East Asia through trade and settlement and rulers (many Indonesian, Malay, Bruneian etc. rulers were Arabs originally) and not through force.
The point was just that Arabs did not attack other Muslims unless during a civil Arab war. Ottomans on the other hand attacked Muslim lands.

When Arabic caliphates, begin to expand their territory there were no Muslim countries to being with.....

 

[u.MP]

You guys are fighting for nothing.... we are actually the only eternally pure race..... the proud Pashtuns....

Our people:

Why would you carry a bandolier with pistol ammo

 

[-SINAN-]

Why then talk about a few empires when I am only referring to one FAMILY?

I still don't understand your reasoning. What are you trying to say ?

Once again you claimed that they were not Persianized without providing any sources while I quickly posted 1 link that had about 10 sources to support that commonly held claim among historians. Yet you blame me for doing so.

Yet you didn't read your sources well.

Persinization of Selcuks is an invented thing.

Quating from source

"For the Seljuks and Il-Khanids in Iran it was the rulers rather than the conquered who were "Persianized and Islamicized"

So this saying we didn't get conquered but they are....... laughable.

And how did we became Persinizaned ?

Because the Turkish Seljuqs had no Islamic tradition or strong literary heritage of their own, they adopted the cultural language of their Persian instructors in Islam. Literary Persian thus spread to the whole of Iran, and the Arabic language disappeared in that country except in works of religious scholarship ..."

By embracing Islam, and by adopting some Persian words into our vocabulary..... again laughable.

Yes, they were usurpers too.

So, we can say every country in history who expanded their territory are usurpers.