Reading Islam's imperialist, intolerant history of expansion, war, violence and coercion reminds one of the endless wars in the creation and maintenance of the Chinese state and empire; or the unrelenting barbarism of the twin socialisms German Fascism, or Russian Communism. The story is the same, though the calendar may change. Previous centuries [found here] have already been discussed. The 13^th and 14^th centuries were more of the same. In fact Islamic blood-letting seems to have its own innate engine of energy and force. It never recedes over the centuries, but simply finds new outlets, new victims and new territories to plunder, rape and decimate. But of course we are told that Islam is love and moderation. The immoderate slaughter associated with Islam proves this lie to be bereft of any factual intelligence whatsoever. Over 300 million dead, erased by the Jihad, makes this abundantly clear.

One can start off the violence in the Islamic 14^th century with the forced conversion of Jews in Tabriz in 1318, and in Baghdad in 1333 and 1344. Failure to convert would earn the Jew in question either exile or death. His property would of course be forfeit. In scenes of loving tolerance in 1321 in Cairo, over 50 Christian churches were burnt, which resulted dozens of dead and wounded. Their property would likewise have been stolen. We see the same animus today in Egypt, with a general Jihadic holy war against the country's 30 million odd Christians. This is simply part of a 1400 year war against the Christian Egyptian, a fact which escapes the really clever people.

In Asia minor during the 14^th century the rising power of the Turkish Ottoman tribe regenerated the Muslim holy war against Byzantine 'Rum' or Eastern Rome. The Turks were justifiably famous for depopulating cities which opposed their expansion. By the mid 14^th century the Ottomans had reduced the Christian Byzantine state to a rump of its former 'Rum' glory, and its demise was a prefigured certainty. Mohammed's injunction to take Rum or Eastern Rome, was to become a reality in 1453 when Mehmed II slaughtered some 40.000 soldiers and civilians and put 30.000 or more into the chains of slavery in the great siege of Constantinople. As a comparison the supposed Crusader slaughter at Jerusalem in 1099 comprised no more than 3.000 Muslims and Jews – and no slaves. Just another comparative fact which escapes the legions of very clever people and Hollywood.

As the Turks expanded their power during the 14^th century, so followed carnage and destruction. Turkish imperialism in the name of the thing Allah was not benign, was uncivilized and was entirely Jihadic in scope, intent and impulse. Turkish Sultans were fond of invoking Mohammed's command to dominate and destroy Rum. Turkish racialism against non-Turks; and the impetus of Jihad mirrored very closely the savagery and speed of the Arab advances centuries earlier;

“...the ideal of gaza, holy war. Was an important factor in the foundation and development of the Ottoman state.,....continuous expansion of Dar al-Islam....until they conquered the whole world.” (contemporary Turkish scholar of Ottoman history, Halil Inalcik  ...Bostom p 61)

“From the very beginning....the Turks tried to consolidate their position by the forcible imposition of Islam. If (the Ottoman historian) Sukrullah is to be believed, those who refused to accept the Moslem faith were slaughtered and their families enslaved. “Where there were bells, Suleiman broke them up and cast them into fires.  Where there were churches he destroyed them or converted them into mosques....” (quoted in Bostom p 63-64)

It took the Turks about 2 centuries to conquer the Balkans including today’s Slovenia, Serbia, Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Greece, European part of Turkey, Bosnia-Herzegovina. The ruin was incalculable. Over the 14^th and 15^th centuries there were yearly massacres, enslavements, huge depopulations and resettlement of non-Muslims and the destruction of farming, trade, productivity, and the normal exchange of knowledge via Christian and Jewish societies. The states of Byzantium, Bulgaria, Serbia and the principalities of Eastern Europe, had reached a high level of economic and cultural development before the Muslim invasions. The Turkish Jihad effaced centuries of progress and eviscerated far superior societies. There was no benefit to the conquered populations of the Turkish Jihad. (Angelov p 463):

“The conquest of the Balkan Peninsular by the Turks meant not only the massive destruction of productivity, the depopulation of the occupied regions, mass enslavement, and forced colonization, but also the founding of a new feudal system.  This feudal system was the continuation, in a subsequent phase of development, of the Osmanli military feudalism that had been created in Asia Minor during the first half of the fourteenth century.  In essence, this system did not modify the feudal ties that existed in the Balkan states at the time when they were conquered by the Turks, but compared with them, the system was at an inferior, barbarous level, having as its foundation brutal coercion and terror, since the Muslims had the privilege of resorting with impunity to violence against the Christian population and of subjecting it to unlimited exploitation.” (Angelov p 506) 

Millions of Christians and Jews were killed and enslaved over these two centuries by the Ottoman Turks. Slaves were culled from White populations to provide sex harems for the Turkic commanders and warlords; and to provide administrators and fighters for the Turkish state. The Turks pulled some 2 million White slaves over 200 years from Eastern Europe, Russia and the Ukraine on yearly raids. 2 million over 2 centuries might even be a low figure since it entails a mere 10.000 slaves per annum. A good raid into the heartlands of Kyiv Rus' would extract at least that number in an average year. The numbers might well be double that or 10 times the number of Blacks who were transhipped to the USA during the 17^th to 19^th centuries. As the historian Dorcas notes in describing the palace of Ottoman ruler Bayezid (1389-1402):

“there one could find carefully selected boys and girls, with beautiful faces, sweet young boys and girls who shone more brightly than the sun. To what nations did they belong? They were Byzantines, Serbs, Walachians, Albanians, Hungarians, Saxons, Bulgarians, and Latins. Each of them sang songs in his own language, although reluctantly. He himself (the sultan) unceasingly gave himself over to pleasure, to the point of exhaustion, by indulging in debauchery with these boys and girls” (Angelov p 489, Bulgaru p567)

Islam and the Koran condone and admire slavery. The Infidel non-Muslim is of course not of the same value as the ardent follower of the Allah cult. To use slaves for sex, military affairs, building projects, mining or domestic duties pre-dates the Allah-Mohammed cult of course in Arabia. The use of slavery which was so common in Arabia pre-Islam, simply mutated and found itself exalted and defended by Muslims and their Allah. Why would anyone be surprised to know that 10-15 million White Europeans and a similar number of Blacks; and a factor more of Hindus and Buddhists were enslaved by the marching legions of Allah lovers? Slavery is after all a most vital element within Islamic liturgy. The 14^th and 15^th centuries of Turkish expansion within Asia Minor and Europe prove the point. This history needs to be read and remarked upon. Its vulgarity and barbarity is Islam.