When Jay Smith speaks, he is a Force of Nature, and his presentations on Islam and its ‘History’ are detailed, convincing, and meticulously researched.
࿗Infidel࿘says
Great conversation & analysis. There are a few things though, that I’d like to add
➤ There should have been more discussion about the history of the conquests, how islamic they really were at various stages – during Abd el Malik, Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, then Mahmoud of Ghazni, Alp Arsalan, et al. In their previous conversation on this topic, I saw Jay Smith note that Buqhari surfaced only in the 15th century. That would have been during the Timuride empire, which would beg the question of what exactly were all the various empires around the region – from the Seljuqs in Turkey to the Mamluqs in India – following, if Sahih hadiths didn’t exist before Tamerlane
➤ On the Arabian history part, it would also have been useful to observe how difficult, if not impossible, it would have been for a bunch of ragtag camel archers from Medina to quickly get to Damascus, and quickly overrun that city after the battle of Yarmouk. Note that in those days, there was no Medina-Damascus railway, so that it would have taken days for them to get from Medina to Damascus. Also, why would Damascus so easily hand over power? That then jives w/ Jay’s observation that the Umayads were Monophysite Christians who didn’t accept the divinity of Christ, and were therefore a different “Christian” sect, as opposed to a completely new faith. The explanation being that the Umayyads were native to Damascus, and that was where all those conquests started, not Medina. It also explains why they bypassed Petra & Jerusalem, which fell on the way. It would also explain why so much of the qur’an was from Syriac and Aramaic sources, rather than Arabic
➤ The trade routes, which Robert mentioned in his book “Did Muhammad exist?”, was also worth elaborating on. Neither Mecca nor Medina fell along the routes of Indo-European trade. While on the topic of Medina, it would have been interesting to go into Jewish sources and analyze whether there indeed were any Jews in Medina as the siras claim, or whether it was a concoction of the muslims. Also, it would have been worth explaining, since a logical rebuttal to that theory could be – if the Arabs were concerned about their Byzantine enemies, why would they target the Jews, who were not the religious identity of any of their neighbors, be it Byzantine, Persian, Indian, Turkistani, Chinese, et al
➤ One thing I disagree w/ Jay on – his claim that instead of insulting Muhammad, if we just claim that he didn’t exist, that mohammedans would be less enraged. It may sound innocuous, but if one told a Christian that Christ didn’t exist, he’d not be taken seriously. So depending on the fervor of any mohammedan, he could react in any way from derision to rage if an infidel dared tell him that. I certainly wouldn’t recommend that to anyone living in Bangladesh or Pakistan
I do look forward to the next book about islamic Judeophobia. As for the 30th book, “Islam & Society”, that should be a fascinating read as well, but I hope Robert will cover how in some countries like India, muslims corner some entire segments of industry, such as meat, leather, carpentry & so on. It would also be good to analyze halal, including how the now ubiquitous halal branding developed
Hudders.says
Thank you for posting. So much to digest, discuss & disseminate.
I pray these videos will open hearts & minds to the truths about islam & help keep them safe & free from the desert death cult’s demonic clutches..
Pray Hardsays
Who? Probably nothing more than a mythical construct of the typical savage, insane, murderous male of that time and place. Maybe some guy named “mohammed” existed, but so what? Until I see proof, he didn’t exist.
Discover more from
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
nicholas tesdorf says
When Jay Smith speaks, he is a Force of Nature, and his presentations on Islam and its ‘History’ are detailed, convincing, and meticulously researched.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Great conversation & analysis. There are a few things though, that I’d like to add
➤ There should have been more discussion about the history of the conquests, how islamic they really were at various stages – during Abd el Malik, Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, then Mahmoud of Ghazni, Alp Arsalan, et al. In their previous conversation on this topic, I saw Jay Smith note that Buqhari surfaced only in the 15th century. That would have been during the Timuride empire, which would beg the question of what exactly were all the various empires around the region – from the Seljuqs in Turkey to the Mamluqs in India – following, if Sahih hadiths didn’t exist before Tamerlane
➤ On the Arabian history part, it would also have been useful to observe how difficult, if not impossible, it would have been for a bunch of ragtag camel archers from Medina to quickly get to Damascus, and quickly overrun that city after the battle of Yarmouk. Note that in those days, there was no Medina-Damascus railway, so that it would have taken days for them to get from Medina to Damascus. Also, why would Damascus so easily hand over power? That then jives w/ Jay’s observation that the Umayads were Monophysite Christians who didn’t accept the divinity of Christ, and were therefore a different “Christian” sect, as opposed to a completely new faith. The explanation being that the Umayyads were native to Damascus, and that was where all those conquests started, not Medina. It also explains why they bypassed Petra & Jerusalem, which fell on the way. It would also explain why so much of the qur’an was from Syriac and Aramaic sources, rather than Arabic
➤ The trade routes, which Robert mentioned in his book “Did Muhammad exist?”, was also worth elaborating on. Neither Mecca nor Medina fell along the routes of Indo-European trade. While on the topic of Medina, it would have been interesting to go into Jewish sources and analyze whether there indeed were any Jews in Medina as the siras claim, or whether it was a concoction of the muslims. Also, it would have been worth explaining, since a logical rebuttal to that theory could be – if the Arabs were concerned about their Byzantine enemies, why would they target the Jews, who were not the religious identity of any of their neighbors, be it Byzantine, Persian, Indian, Turkistani, Chinese, et al
➤ One thing I disagree w/ Jay on – his claim that instead of insulting Muhammad, if we just claim that he didn’t exist, that mohammedans would be less enraged. It may sound innocuous, but if one told a Christian that Christ didn’t exist, he’d not be taken seriously. So depending on the fervor of any mohammedan, he could react in any way from derision to rage if an infidel dared tell him that. I certainly wouldn’t recommend that to anyone living in Bangladesh or Pakistan
I do look forward to the next book about islamic Judeophobia. As for the 30th book, “Islam & Society”, that should be a fascinating read as well, but I hope Robert will cover how in some countries like India, muslims corner some entire segments of industry, such as meat, leather, carpentry & so on. It would also be good to analyze halal, including how the now ubiquitous halal branding developed
Hudders. says
Thank you for posting. So much to digest, discuss & disseminate.
I pray these videos will open hearts & minds to the truths about islam & help keep them safe & free from the desert death cult’s demonic clutches..
Pray Hard says
Who? Probably nothing more than a mythical construct of the typical savage, insane, murderous male of that time and place. Maybe some guy named “mohammed” existed, but so what? Until I see proof, he didn’t exist.