Sassanids vs Arabs

Originally posted by Maziar Specially jewish tribe must suffer under the new religion, they were converted with violence.

I think you overstepped the fact that with this "new religion", those Jewish tribes that "suffered" where the one that betrayed the treaty with the "Prophet" and co-operated with the invading Arab tribes. The jewish tribes of Yemen did not face any prosecution and they continued to live peacefully for over 1400 years and till now.  The "Prophet" died and his armor was mortgaged to a Jew of the Madinah, so I'm not sure how did he escape the so-claimed force conversion of Jewish tribes. You also again stress on one historically debated incident to built a concolusion that this "new religion" means a new era of prosecution, where actually it is the total opposite to the biased conclusion presented here. Refer back to Moorish Spain, Jews of Morocco and Syria, Jewish exodus from Europe to the Ottoman controlled areas and finally Jews of the Balkan, and compare them to the ill-treatment they received else where. Afterall, the biggest massacre of Jews in the history was not far from what you live in now Maziar.

Originally posted by LilLou If you look at the facts, there was no happy convert, islam or get your head chopped.

Present those facts that you claim to have, to support this absurd statement of yours that "No happy convert" in Islam. After all, this is a history section of the forum, not a fiction one.

Originally posted by LilLou In the q'uran, it says for all unbelievers(non-muslim) to be slaughtered wherever they could be found, many people instead of getting killed decided to convert to save their lives when the arabs took over the sassanids.

 

Ah, so you understood the verse better than most Muslim scholars. I wonder why they failed to slaughter the non-believers when they invaded the Sassanids. Oh by the way, maybe you can tell us why do we have Zoroastrains till now in Iran? or Why do we have Christians till now in Syria, Egypt, Palestine, Lebanon? Egypt took hundred of years before Muslim population passed it to the majority. I guess they are good at hiding.

Please read the Muslim scholars interpretation of your verse instead of Jihadwatch.com and second hand processed information.

 

Originally posted by Maziar What can i say, if i read about rudeness of muslims to jews, from the very first years of Isalm until now?

 

You over-stepped AGAIN my question. I mentioned to you Jews of Yemen who came under the Muslim domain during the life of the prophet. Why did he retaliate against the Jewish tribes of Madinah but not the one in Yemen? 

Also, you say the rudeness of Muslims to jews from "the very first years of Islam till now", then it must be a consistent rudeness. Which I again ask you to show a proof of this consistent behavior as you claim in HISTORICAL FACTS.

 

Originally posted by Maziar   for sure they were not as horrible as the Houlocaust, but butchering is butchering.

You again take one debatable incident and shape it as the consistent behavior of Muslims. Butchering is Butchering? For some reason your theory suggest that the Jews were not so smart escaping from a European Butcherer to a Muslim Butcherer.

 

Originally posted by Maziar   We have discused this many times befor, didn't we? Neither you can convince me nor i you, so what to do now? lets each of us believe in what we like to believe.

Edited by �ok ge� - 28-Sep-2006 at 01:23

 

That's very sad, you quote my post and give me answers, and now you take me away a posibility to answer you back, really sad...

 

But it's ok, you are the moderatore, i won't conteradict.

How about more objectivity?

Maziar, You claimed that Jewish tribes were forced to convert, and I asked you if you can explain then why do we have Jewish Yemani tribes or why at the death of the prophet would his armor be mortgaged to a Jew of Madinah?  You decided to switch claiming that there is consistent "rudness" and "butchering" of Jews by Muslims. I asked you for proof and  again you have chosen to over-step those questions. Does it matter now if you can answer or not?

I politely asked you to open a proper thread that discuss what you want to discuss and not deviate this topic to an anti-Islamic compaign. So you even had the option again to continue your irrelevant criticism in a new thread.  If you had any answers, you would have gladly opened that thread upon my request to provide the answers, but you didn't. Yet to hijack a thread, that is honestly what I see a really sad thing.

 

P.S: If I can hide the stars, I would have done that as I'm not the moderator of this section. Therefore count me as a regular member.

 

"The Persians were unprepared for the fury of the Islamic Arabs in the 7th century. The Sassanid dynasty of Persia ended in battle in 636. The Persians did not have a capital with defenses comparable to Constantinople. Muslim conquest of Persia was completed by 651."

 

"The Sassanid dynasty ended when Yazdegerd III lost a 14-year struggle to drive out the early Caliphate (the first of the islamic empires).".