Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Islamic India: The Biggest Holocaust in World History Whitewashed from History Books

Discussion in 'Internal Affairs' started by omya, Jan 27, 2015.

  1. omya

    omya Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    7,327
    Likes Received:
    3,575
    Country Flag:
    India
    [​IMG]
    The genocide suffered by the Hindus and Sikhs of India at the hands of Arab, Turkish, Mughal and Afghan occupying forces for a period of 800 years is as yet formally unrecognised by the World.

    The only similar genocide in the recent past was that of the Jewish people at the hands of the Nazis.

    The holocaust of the Hindus in India was of even greater proportions, the only difference was that it continued for 800 years, till the brutal regimes were effectively overpowered in a life and death struggle by the Sikhs in the Punjab and the Hindu Maratha armies in other parts of India in the late 1700’s.

    We have elaborate literary evidence of the World’s biggest holocaust from existing historical contemporary eyewitness accounts. The historians and biographers of the invading armies and subsequent rulers of India have left quite detailed records of the atrocities they committed in their day-to-day encounters with India’s Hindus.

    These contemporary records boasted about and glorified the crimes that were committed – and the genocide of tens of millions of Hindus, mass rapes of Hindu women and the destruction of thousands of ancient Hindu / Buddhist temples and libraries have been well documented and provide solid proof of the World’s biggest holocaust.

    Dr. Koenraad Elst in his article “Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?” states:

    “There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like punishing the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty.

    The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526).”

    He also writes in his book “Negation in India”:

    “The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter.”

    Will Durant argued in his 1935 book “The Story of Civilisation: Our Oriental Heritage” (page 459):

    “The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period.”

    Francois Gautier in his book ‘Rewriting Indian History’ (1996) wrote:
    “The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.”

    Writer Fernand Braudel wrote in A History of Civilisations (1995), that Islamic rule in India as a

    “colonial experiment” was “extremely violent”, and “the Muslims could not rule the country except by systematic terror. Cruelty was the norm – burnings, summary executions, crucifixions or impalements, inventive tortures. Hindu temples were destroyed to make way for mosques. On occasion there were forced conversions. If ever there were an uprising, it was instantly and savagely repressed: houses were burned, the countryside was laid waste, men were slaughtered and women were taken as slaves.”

    Alain Danielou in his book, Histoire de l’ Inde writes:

    “From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of ‘a holy war’ of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races.”

    Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes:

    “While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed..Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster.

    “Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful. These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage…”

    A sample of contemporary eyewitness accounts of the invaders and rulers, during the Indian conquests

    The Afghan ruler Mahmud al-Ghazni invaded India no less than seventeen times between 1001 – 1026 AD. The book ‘Tarikh-i-Yamini’ – written by his secretary documents several episodes of his bloody military campaigns : “The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously [at the Indian city of Thanesar] that the stream was discoloured, notwithstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it…the infidels deserted the fort and tried to cross the foaming river…but many of them were slain, taken or drowned… Nearly fifty thousand men were killed.”

    In the contemporary record – ‘ Taj-ul-Ma’asir’ by Hassn Nizam-i-Naishapuri, it is stated that when Qutb-ul- Din Aibak (of Turko – Afghan origin and the First Sultan of Delhi 1194-1210 AD) conquered Meerat, he demolished all the Hindu temples of the city and erected mosques on their sites. In the city of Aligarh, he converted Hindu inhabitants to Islam by the sword and beheaded all those who adhered to their own religion.

    The Persian historian Wassaf writes in his book ‘Tazjiyat-ul-Amsar wa Tajriyat ul Asar’ that when the Alaul-Din Khilji (An Afghan of Turkish origin and second ruler of the Khilji Dynasty in India 1295-1316 AD) captured the city of Kambayat at the head of the gulf of Cambay, he killed the adult male Hindu inhabitants for the glory of Islam, set flowing rivers of blood, sent the women of the country with all their gold, silver, and jewels, to his own home, and made about twentv thousand Hindu maidens his private slaves.

    Islamic India: The Biggest Holocaust in World History Whitewashed from History Books
     
    lca-fan, OSO, kiduva21 and 2 others like this.
  2. TickTickIndian

    TickTickIndian BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    999
    Likes Received:
    189
    Country Flag:
    India
    The west will talk of Islamic rule as a decoy to their own atrocities in Bharat. They like to make it sound like they were heros against Mughals. All this is a lie. British atrocities were the worst. British made holocausts were the worst. The day we start writing our own history, then we'll see things more clearly.
     
  3. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,011
    Likes Received:
    14,019
    Country Flag:
    India
    I am extremely pained by the stupid statement that muslims ruled India for 800yrs. the truth is far from that. The Ghori and slave dynasty or Khilji never went beyond Delhi, Rajasthan & Gujrat. Even Baber who came in 1526 did not venture beyond Allahabad. Akbar came in 1556 and he too never ruled whole of India. Even Aurangzeb cud never conquer South India and Ahom. The Mongols were finally reduced to just Delhi by 1720 after the death of Aurangzeb in 1707. So the muslims never ruled us for 800 yrs and even at the top of their power, they lasted only 1707-1556=151 yrs.
    I hope the members will reset their knowledge of history with this post.
     
  4. TickTickIndian

    TickTickIndian BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    999
    Likes Received:
    189
    Country Flag:
    India
    They ruled certain Bhuddist zones in north Bharat. He must've read history from the British or from Pakistanis.
     
    m2monty likes this.
  5. vstol jockey

    vstol jockey Colonel MILITARY STRATEGIST

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Messages:
    13,011
    Likes Received:
    14,019
    Country Flag:
    India
    They ruled mostly what is now Pakistan. Anyone who says tat muslims ruled Hindus for 800yrs has a warped knowledge of History. What they also forget to mention is that Hindus always fought back and rebelled to throw these very muslims out of India. The History must report the facts properly. Even the the Ayodhya -masjid case has a history of repeated assaults by Hindus to liberate it and it changed hands many times as it became an issue of Libration v/s dominance between Hindus and Muslim invaders.
     
    omya likes this.
  6. omya

    omya Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    7,327
    Likes Received:
    3,575
    Country Flag:
    India
    britishers may have killed thousands but muslims have killed millions.
     
    m2monty likes this.
  7. uniqueudai

    uniqueudai IDF NewBie

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    4
    they killed hindus when they were ruling because of their religion make sure this never happen again in name of secularism
     
  8. m2monty

    m2monty Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Messages:
    459
    Likes Received:
    232
    Country Flag:
    India
    Hyderabad, Mysore, Bihar, Indonesia, Gujarat, Kashmir, Bengal, most of UP-MP, Rajasthan,most of Bombay too, Malesiya, etc were not north India.
    Muslim ruled India were defeated by Britishers
     
  9. omya

    omya Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    7,327
    Likes Received:
    3,575
    Country Flag:
    India
    wrong if thats true then my name would had been ali n urs mohamand
     
    Anish, uniqueudai and m2monty like this.
  10. m2monty

    m2monty Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2013
    Messages:
    459
    Likes Received:
    232
    Country Flag:
    India
    Hahaha GREAT compliment
     
  11. rocky.idf

    rocky.idf BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,829
    Likes Received:
    478
    Country Flag:
    Bangladesh
    [​IMG]

    The real destruction of Somnath was carried out by the British in 1939. Mahmud Ghazna was invited each time by one of warring Sarpanths to size up an opponent, and also to ransack the temples to weaken the clergy who had gone out of control. Compliant priests had told him that a huge amount was hidden inside the idol Sirva. To spare the embarrassment to his accompanying Hindu generals Mahmud himself broke open the idol. He employed many Hindu generals in his army which had a multitude of Hindu soldiers.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015
  12. rocky.idf

    rocky.idf BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,829
    Likes Received:
    478
    Country Flag:
    Bangladesh
    [​IMG]

    The false gates displayed by the English to create rift between the Hindus and Muslims.
     
  13. TickTickIndian

    TickTickIndian BANNED BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    999
    Likes Received:
    189
    Country Flag:
    India
    No. British killed more. Mughals controlled certain pockets and looted gold, they were after gold and nothing else. They killed occassionally (the brutal ones were Aurangzeb, Tipu and one more I think Ghazni) but nothign matches what the british did. Most of the deaths written off as Muslim atrocities were actually British atrocities, they simply blamed it all on Mughals to coverup.

    British were worse than savages. They're nothing more than well dressed pirates. The political doctrine "Probem Reaction Solution", called Dialetic Principle, it is all their hand behind it. You want to understand the mentality of the British yu have to read Chanakyaneeti (the criminals parts of it, like false flag terrorism).
     
  14. omya

    omya Lt. Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2013
    Messages:
    7,327
    Likes Received:
    3,575
    Country Flag:
    India
    mogals where killing n converting nothing else.. and brits where after gold
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2015
    kiduva21 likes this.
  15. kiduva21

    kiduva21 Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2012
    Messages:
    726
    Likes Received:
    236
    Country Flag:
    India
    North India not means India its just north India. On that sense Lahore and Karachi is part of North India but not India.
    Some south Indian states like Thiruvithamcore not allowed Muslims or Brits to rule them (ya paid money as kappam to Brits). And that helped it to defend Tipu sultan.

    Off topic
    Battle of Colachel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    [​IMG]

    what so ever Thiruvithamcore succeeded in saving padmanabha swamy temple from muslims and brits
     
    INDIAN NATIONALIST and m2monty like this.

Share This Page