Islamic history is insane

So I was reading about the rise of Islam and discovered that Mu'awiya I, the first Umayyad Caliph, took power by killing Ali, Muhammad's son in law. The greatest Islamic empire ever was literally founded on the bones of Muhammad's family.

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The fricknare you talking about? That's not how it happened

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Not exactly, but close enough, he had Hassan, Muhammads grandson poisoned, and then Muawiyas son and successor Yazid had Husayn, Muhammads other grandson, massacred.

      No that’s not it wtf have shia trannies been feeding you

      He read Wikipedia and couldn't distinguish between Ali and his sons. Still that's what Mu'awiya wanted to do.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No that’s not what muawiya wanted to do

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That is explicitly what he said he would do. Denying it makes you dumb.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            is like saying egyptians are egyptians who worship the sun once upon a time

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            There was a power struggle between the two but he agreed to negotiations, and I'm sure the fact that Ali had a family connection to Muhammad loomed large in Muawaiya not just crushing him as a rebel.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Muawiya crushing Ali as a rebel? Even though Ali was the accepted caliph and Muawiya rebelled against him? How did you come to that conclusion?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Ali was the accepted caliph
            not by Muawiya (or Syria, which he governed, or Egypt) he wasn't
            was the type of dispute where both sides viewed themselves as the legitimate successor and the opponent as a rebel

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not exactly, but close enough, he had Hassan, Muhammads grandson poisoned, and then Muawiyas son and successor Yazid had Husayn, Muhammads other grandson, massacred.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      didn't all the nine first caliphs get assassinated?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No? Of the first 14, only 3 were assassinated, Ali being the last. Umayyad rulers were safe until Abbasids came along and started chopping their heads off.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        No? Of the first 14, only 3 were assassinated, Ali being the last. Umayyad rulers were safe until Abbasids came along and started chopping their heads off.

        Umar
        Uthman
        Ali
        Muawiyah II
        Umar II
        and a few others but I forgot their names

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Muawiyah II and Umar II both died to illness

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            They were very clearly killed why are you lying? The muslim sources themselves claim this

            >Ali was the accepted caliph
            not by Muawiya (or Syria, which he governed, or Egypt) he wasn't
            was the type of dispute where both sides viewed themselves as the legitimate successor and the opponent as a rebel

            That's nice but that's not the muslim view

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >It is unclear how Mu'awiya died, although jaundice and a plague have been named as causes. Since he had no children and either refused[4]:577 or was not given the opportunity to appoint a successor, the campaigns against Ibn al-Zubayr's revolt came to a complete stop. Umayyad power temporarily collapsed until Marwan I took back control.[1]

            >On his way back from Damascus to Aleppo or possibly to his Khunasira estate, Umar fell ill.[33] He died between 5 February and 10 February 720,[33] at the age of 39,[34] in the village of Dayr Sim'an (also called Dayr al-Naqira) near Ma'arrat Nu'man.[33]

            KEK

            >Ali was the accepted caliph
            not by Muawiya (or Syria, which he governed, or Egypt) he wasn't
            was the type of dispute where both sides viewed themselves as the legitimate successor and the opponent as a rebel

            Who cares what he thought you dumb Black person?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >posts wikipedia quotes
            moron confirmed. The primary muslim sources like tabari claim murder

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No that’s not it wtf have shia trannies been feeding you

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >sunnis think non-muslims have to accept their fake and gay history where their first century which was filled with civil war after civil war was just a misunderstanding
      Bro your concept of history is laughable

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Kill rivals for power and take it for yourself. Pretty standard behavior for most of history, not really extraordinary in any way tbh.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nah it would be like Paul massacring Jesus disiples and family and declaring himself pope or whatever the equivalent was at the time

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        that's basically what Paul did to Jerusalem church, yes.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >an empire was founded after someone got murdered
    INSANE

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think what makes it insane is how Muslims try to present the circumstances surrounding the establishment of their religion as clean and noble

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Umayyads were always a dynasty that muslims accepted reclutanty as part of their history just for their conquests and successfull stabilization of the Ummah; not for their - questionable - piety.
        Especially for the first branch of the dynasty, that did the stuff OP mentioned.
        The cadet branch that took power after the second islamic civil war wasnt telated to all those crimes against Muhammad's family, but still promoted many stuffs that muslims nowadays consider non-islamic, like human/animal paintings (see the Ummayad desert castles) and their idea of Islam as a ethnic religion for arabs only (with exceptions)

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Umayyads were insane but saying "Islam was only muh arab religion" is unironically moronic because literally before the beginning of the war, a lot of times the Muslim leaders would just ask to convert and if they'd refuse then the war would start instead of just a straight invasion.

          Also about drawings, there are a frick ton of opinions about how to draw or not, most agree that as long as the face is censored, there's no issue as it makes the image unalive so you can't really say they did "unislamic stuff"

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yea brow paintings like pic related were totally accettable for the islamic laws, totally legit.

            And keep in mind they didnt painted naked women only on the palace's harems. Every single palace's rooms of the Ummayads had similar art

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >just for their conquests and successfull stabilization of the Ummah
          most of their conquests were not successful. They lost most of north africa to the berber revolts and were stymied in transoxiana by a small turkic emirate the turgesh. Spain and Sindh were successful. They ended up floundering against the byzantines which did a lot to damage their legitimacy. They were a 90 year dynasty that suffered through many civil wars. The Abbasids weren't much better. They lasted as a major power for almost twice as long but it's very telling that merely 2 centuries after islam was founded the arabs lost their power. The arabs never stabilized as they always operated as a military caste over their populace and were reliant on jizya from non muslims. This legacy was passed on to their successive dynasties and they too never learned from this and continued to operate as a miltary caste on top of another structure.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Ummayad conquered some places, but their biggest achievement was consolidating the immense empire muslims built in not even 50 years.
            In most timelines, It would had collapsed/balkanized by the time of the Second Fitna, thus severely weakening the power and expansion of muslims in the 8th Century, as most of their conquered lands were recent.
            Lucky and two impressive Ummayad caliphs (Arwan and later And al-Malik) allowed the Ummah to remain unified, the islamic empire as a permament bureucratic empire (and not as a conquered land to be looted by nomadic warlords like during the first caliphs) and the legacy of the islamic power long-lived

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >consolidating the immense empire muslims built in not even 50 years.
            They didnt consolidate anything. As I mentioned they were a short lived dynasty, with mixed militaty results. The successor dynasty started crumbling in 100 years. As I mentioned two centuries of arab power.
            >ucky and two impressive Ummayad caliphs (Arwan and later And al-Malik) allowed the Ummah to remain unified, the islamic empire as a permament bureucratic empire
            Except this isn't true since the muslims always acted as a military caste reliant on dhimmis. You should read a post before replying to it abdul

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >The cadet branch that took power after the second islamic civil war wasnt telated to all those crimes against Muhammad's family,
          the empire wide cursing of Ali was state policy

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Muslims regularly lie about their religion, assuming they know about it in the first place

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hijacking this dogshit thread, what do we think of 'Hagarism'?

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >The greatest Islamic empire ever was literally founded on the bones of Muhammad's family
    The funny thing is, even some of Muhammads most senior companions never really respected him, as proven by Umar refusing to give pen and paper to Muhammad on his deathbed, and calling him "delirious" on top of it. Most of the early companions helped Muhammad mainly for self-serving purposes, and later companions pretty much had a choice between following Muhammad or death. So when Muhammad died, his companions pounced on the opportunity they had been waiting on all along, and went to the extent of butchering Muhammads own family, especially through Ali's lineage, if they saw them as a threat to their leadership, as Muhammad had already implicitly given them a special status above all other companions.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    you are presenting muawiya as a nobody who came out of nowhere, this is completly false, he was the son of abu sufyan the chief of quraysh, was a distant cousin of muhammad and his sister was married to muhammad. also he and his elder brother yazid led the conquests of parts of syria

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *