They lied to us and continued to deceive us with our consent.They erased the whole history of the centuries and made us believe that a superman arab was fanatising by a prophet, who did not exist yet, riding a flying horse and annihilating all resistance on his way to impose a god whose name does not exist, and was yet to be spoken about. But who in good spirits could ever imagine the existence of a horse in the Arabian desert, an animal that needs several tens of liters of water a day. Who could honestly believe that the small water points of this region concealed cities that were supercitys which were as important as Paris or London, two cities of which we find a rich history, dating from centuries before the time of supposed Mohamed.
It was Napoleon who said that history is a series of lies on which we agreed. He knew what he was saying, the guy!
Here is a piece of history that they have hidden about centuries ago whose history has been erased and replaced by fantasy stories that have given birth to Islam.
At the time of the birth of the supposed Mohammed, the sixth century, the religious conflicts were numerous in all the Mediterranean rim, two Christian sects (Not to mention the Jews blowing on the embers between the two), the Trinitarians and the Unitarians. The advantage was on the side of the Unitarian Arianists.
Apart from the Byzantine state, which was a trentary Catholic Orthodox, it would seem that the majority was Unitarian around the mediterranean counties, South, North, East and West.
The Germanic tribes, the Goths (East and West), with their states in Ravenna and Spain were Unitarian, like the Langobardes and the Vandals in North Africa. The Franks were Arianists too.
The region of Damascus and Jerusalem was only “officially” a part of the Byzantine empire. The real power was already in the hands of the Unitarians, the Judaeo-Arameo-Christians were in the Unitarian majority of a long tradition.
Egypt, the base of Arianus, founder of the Arianism doctrine, as well as North Africa, were also predominantly Unitarian.
Even later, in the 7th century after the death of the supposed Mohamed, things are not clear. The first Umayyad caliphs, do not seem to have been “Muslims”. Some archaeological data confirms the Unitarianism of the time:
– The Al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem does not have a qibla. Unitarians in Jerusalem did not need a qibla. In addition, the mosaics at Al-Aqsa are interpretable as pure Arianism, especially if we consider that the language spoken and written in Jerusalem was not Arabic, a language that did not exist yet, but Arameen .
– The old mosque in Kairouan and the great mosque in Cordoba have a qibla ….. in the direction of Jerusalem and not towards Mecca! A city that contains no trace of life of that time.
There were two big lies on which millions of others were built.
The first is that of the false birth of Islam in Arabia. The second is the perception of the “Arab / Sarazins” by the Catholic Church and the role they wanted to give them. The term “Arabic” only first appeared when modern Europe was interested in the Ottoman Empire, at least officially.
A few bands of nomadic villains scattered in a huge desert does not make a people capable of suddenly creating a religion and imposing it by force on nations, which were more powerfull in all areas; social, military, technical, cultural, etc. whereas some were located thousands of kilometers from the Hejaz desert.
According to the official history of Islam written by Catholic and Muslim fanatics, the Sarazens were those who were cited as the conquerors who spread the Islamic faith in the 700 hundreds. A faith whose sacred book would only exist a century later.
Let’s see whom the sarazins were in the middle ages.
In his book « The Sarazins were from the area » (Les Sarazins étaient du coin), the French historian Joseph Henriet demonstrates that those whom history has named Sarazens were not Arabs. They would be, more generally, pagans, peoples who had not converted to Christianity, and assimilated to Muslims by a confusion due to the idea, formerly believed, that Islam adapted certain traits estimated prior to Christianity. Heresy was generally regarded as a superficial garment given to old beliefs; this was also the case of Arianism, which had been adopted by the Burgundians. In the heart of the Alps, according to Henriet, different heretics and pagans could live side by side, but at the end of the day, they were no stranger to the area: it was a native people, settled in places since the beginning. They are those whom we today call Ligures, whose language was no doubt close to Basque. In opposite from the Allobroges, they remained at the top of the mountains or in the depths of the valleys.
According to Henriet, the description of « Sarazins » by medieval authors refers to indigenous peoples, not Eastern invaders.
The history of Islam is a series of lies that can not be retold in one single article. For almost three centuries the religious have erased the history of the spread of Islam and have imagined a story that saves the honor of the three monotheistic sisters, Judaism, Catholicism and Islam.
– Muhammad Sven Kalisch professor of Islamic Religion :The prophet Muhammad never existed.
– Karl-Heinz Ohlig: The Hidden Origins Of Islam
– Patricia Crone: Meccan Trade And The Rise Of Islam
-Ignaco Olague: Los árabes no invadieron jamás España (The Arabs never invaded Spain)
-Joseph Henriet: Nos ancêtres les Sarrasins des Alpes
]]>
This article is the translation of a comment in a discussion about kabyles in the Wikipedia website
The subject of the discussion was the origin of the Kabyle word that Arab militants claim comes from the Arabic word and means tribe
The Wikipedia site is becoming more and more a site of pro-Arab propaganda. As soon as a subject deals with Amazigh people in general and especially the Kabyle people; they attribute it to the Orientals.
Before wanting to attribute everything to the Arabs, one should already know who they really are. We need to restore the credibility of Wikipedia !!
Far from the Western and Orientalist propaganda that is trying to produce an Arab people on the ashes of peoples that the West has conquered several times in post-medieval history.
The Kabyle name was established long before the invention of the so-called Arab people. The name Kabylie is mentioned for the first time by the historian Herodotus to designate the Cabales a Libyan people of Cyrenaica. For a reason that is totally unknown to us and long before the gestation of Islam, this name has disappeared from the history of North Africa. In the Middle Ages no one mentions the Kabyle name, neither Leon the African nor Ibn Khaldun make use of this denomination. We must wait for the Europeans of the 18th century to see it resurrect in Cabalis, Cabile Cabyle and Kabyle.
The Kabyle name can not in any case come from the Arabic word which according to them means “a tribal people”, because the tribal system does not exist in Kabylie. Political and social unity is the village. The federation of several villages on a territory does not constitute a tribe in the sense understood by ethnologists. Instead these federations refer to a territory.
The falsification and denaturing of the Kabyle political organization is the result of the Europeans who wanted to harmonize their terminology by applying to all the peoples they have conquered the same social organization, in spite of themselves. For them whether in Australia, Amazonia, Arabia, Africa or America, all that is not “white” is tribal because some ethnic groups claim this form of social organization. These ethnic groups are often non-sedentary and therefore can not refer to a territory to identify themselves. The nomad has no other references than the lineage, somehow a right of blood to belong to the group.
Since the Arabs are a tribal people, it is illogical for them to call out other people as tribes.
I have no prejudices about this or that form of political and social organization. But as far as Kabylia is concerned, I do not find any terms of this tribal organization. I speak of visible, concrete traces.
But if we want to pull everything by the hair, today we can call anything “tribe”.
We must mention this mania of this Wikipedia media that gives an Arabic version to everything related to North Africa. This version is often made by Islamist embudlers acting as veritable jihadists of the pen. Arab-Islamic militants denature while weakening the North African languages and thus emerging the so-called Arabic language like mother of all the languages.While in truth the language of the bedouins can not be of any use by itself because in fact every word that these islamic militants appropriate comes from other languages such as Persian, Hindu, Arameen, Berber. The desert of Arabia is not fertile ground for a wealth of a language. The so-called Arabic language exists only for the needs of a Koran. There is no written record of this language before the gestation of Islam.
]]>
According to the official history of Islam written by Catholic and Muslim fanatics, the Sarazens were those who were cited as the conquerors who spread the Islamic faith in the 700 hundreds. A faith whose sacred book would only exist a century later.
It seems that the Europeans took ingredients they had at home and made a great story for Islam. Let’s see whom the sarazins were in the middle ages.
In his book “The Sarazins were from the area” (Les Sarazins étaient du coin), the French historian Joseph Henriet demonstrates that those whom history has named Sarazens were not Arabs. They would be, more generally, pagans, peoples who had not converted to Christianity, and assimilated to Muslims by a confusion due to the idea, formerly believed, that Islam adapted certain traits estimated prior to Christianity. Heresy was generally regarded as a superficial garment given to old beliefs; this was also the case of Arianism, which had been adopted by the Burgundians. In the heart of the Alps, according to Henriet, different heretics and pagans could live side by side, but at the end of the day, they were no stranger to the area: it was a native people, settled in places since the beginning. They are those whom we today call Ligures, whose language was no doubt close to Basque. In opposite from the Allobroges, they remained at the top of the mountains or in the depths of the valleys.
According to Henriet, the description of “Sarazins” by medieval authors refers to indigenous peoples, not Eastern invaders.
These natives would have preserved for a long time, in the Middle Ages, their pagan cults, their way of mountainlife, and also their habits of plundering the convoys of travelers when their productions were insufficient. Christian writers, living in the cities, would therefore have claimed them to be “Sarazins”, referring both to the terror they inspired, and to their ignorance of the Christian religion.
One day, perhaps soon, thanks to the rapid progress of genetic sience, honorable scientists should be able to determine with certainty whom the Sarazins of the Alps were. In the meantime, Joseph Henriet’s hypothesis seems to be particularly convincing …
]]>Alhambra Palace Wall painting
Blonde blue-eyed from Hedjaz desert , Arabia ? In 2010, I visited the Alhambra Palace in Granada. The building was built by Banu Nasr (Nasrid, or “Red sons”). Nasrid claims to be descendants from the desert in the Arabian peninsula. That their roots return to the “Khazraj Qahtaniyah tribe” and it is only the descendants of the “Saad bin Ibada Khazradji”.
What caught my attention is the presence of the epigraph expression “It is no more powerful than Allah” (Allah Ghalleb) in all the rooms and courtyards of the Alhambra Palace. Something quite curious is the murals depicting the Nasrid kings, who succeeded each others in the throne of the kingdom of Granada. These murals show us kings with very pale skin, red or blonde hair and blue eyes.
It is obvious what these paintings shall clarify: that these kings and their subjects had nothing to do with the Arab desert. They are descendants of Germanic vandals who become “muslim” and invented an Arab descent, like Abd El Rahman as invented Oumeyade’s ancestors, and that some even considered a descendant of Muhammad, while we knew that it was a pure Germanic blueeyed blondes, and their offsprings held their physical qualities for two centuries. They had children with white skin and blond hair!
]]>This image is that given by the Arabs of their ancestors.Yet it is impossible for primitive beduin living in the Arabian desert. Neither the horse nor the sword nor the clothes can be in Arabia
The debate between Alexandra Irene Larsen and Harald Olsen (two Norwegian intellectuals) shows that what Islam says about itself has never been questioned. Yet, for Muslims the Quran is something that was revealed and then kept pure as a fresh fruit kept in the fridge.The whereas in fact the Quran had several oral and written versions. It was then embroidered over the years and over the centuries. It is not a book ready, intelligibly written, ordered, bound and thrown at the head of Mohammed by a well-identified flying angel.
The present quran is the result of a work, a reflection and a choice of texts.The Quran is a human work and has nothing miraculous about it. All the concepts and stories which the Quran contains are known for millennia before. Even the Muslim rites are not new. Other peoples practiced them in other forms, sometimes even as recommended or ordained by the Quran. The Quran reveals nothing, so it is not a revelation. Just as the 10 commandments reveal nothing unknown until then.
I know that it is impossible for a lambed person to know that Islam is a lie on which thousands of lies are built.
However, a professor or an intellectual has the duty to approach these subjects impartially, with the ethics of doubt and the respect of the historical truth to provide more information on the arabian peninsula desert of the 6th century, and on the civilization of the Beduins who inhabited the region. What is it of its manners, its social organization, its political organization, its literature, its authors? The intellectuals of the free world have the duty to ask these questions.
But instead of asking questions about what is possible and impossible in Arabia in the 6th century, Western intellectuals repeated, tirelessly, word for word what any imam obscurantists tells them about Islam And on pseudo conquests made by the Muslims. They repeat stories without ever going to the historical sources which tells the stories related to Islam since its gestation.
No one questions the impossibility and possible feasibility of the actions often described as justified by the magical power of the eternal powerful omnipotent. What do we know of these tribes where only intrigue, fear, fighting, the miracles of the mysteries are brought back to us? On the other hand, those concerning scientific, anthropological, ethnological, historical and epigraphical studies, etc., are non-existent.
Why are searches in Arabia not carried out or authorized, if there is nothing to hide, when people from all countries of the world seek to discover their ancestors through their civilization? What do we know about the number of tribes, their tongues, their numbers, their descendants, their pagan and religious heritage, their degree of civilization, their various arts and their ability to build an army in a fraction of the time, ready to the conquest the a more enlightened and advanced world, whose history we know?
What was supposed to be a short introduction to an article, becoms endless if I continue to quote the clutches which I have to address to the European intellectuals. I end the introduction here to continue the original article.
The religion that today is called Islam, was originally a combination of different beliefs of its time. The core is Talmud and was a vulgar imitation of the Torah. The word Islam appeared only centuries after the alleged revelation. Everything is Jewish. Muslim hatred against Jews is deliberately exaggerated, deliberate, repeated and continually updated so no-one should suspect them to be Jews of ebionite rabbinical teaching. The gestation of what became Islam in the 9th century occurred completely in Syria and and in regions won by Arianism, far from the Hijaz desert
There are no traces of Islam in Arabia. The only Islamic sanctuary in Arabia (Kaba), attributes the Muslims its origins to Abraham. This figure might have been Islamized by anti-dated decree to give a skin of context in the release of dissident rabbis. Not even the Arabic language existed.
Photo of Mecca in the 19th century. It’s not exactly the equivalent of the Vatican
The scattered texts that later formed the Quran were written in Syrian-Aramaic. The official Quran was prepared after the Arabic language had been formalized to be readable. The Arabic language was not developed by Arabs from Arabia. It was developed somewhere else, possibly by Jews and Christians an north Africans Christian probably contributed to the construction of so-called Arabic grammar . It was only then that the Islam we know today became this religion. All this occurred during the following centuries after the abandonment of the supposed prophet Mohammed.
This character Mohammed was created by all the pieces from the characteristics of well-known Jewish, Christian, Zoroastristic, Greek and legendary personalities. Mohammed is a puzzle, assembled and placed in Arabia. A bit of Moses, some of Jesus, some of Abraham, some of Alexander the Great, some of Adam, some of John, some of David, some of Satan and some of Rocco Sifredi. He is like the Quran: incoherent, messy, changeable, unstable and without substance.
As in the preparation of the Quran, different authors have embroidered on the character Mohammed. Most of them had nothing to do with Arabia. At these times, the infamous Saracen lived mostly in Syria and most were former soldiers serving the Persians. The Islam we know today is a very modern doctrine, and has very little with Islam in the 11th century. This religion started to become popular only since European colonialism with the emergence of modern states organized in nations led by kings supported by an administration. It is the emergence of mass education funded by states that have Islamized peoples who are Muslims today. The more this education in the Arab states becomes universal and effective, the more people learn and understand their religion.
This explains the damage today. A schizophrenic religion, a schizophrenic text, a schizophrenic prophet, today results in that one and a half billion people are schyzophrenic. The Judeo-Nazerian rabbis have won. Ironically, today, Jews and Christians themselves believe in the story of Mohammed, the Quran, the revelation and Islam born in Arabia.
Thanks to my friend Aliz Aich
]]>
