If u are to stand up to ur words... please explain the term... looter.
He looted a divine place.Somnath Temple.So he is a looter by all means.
Re: Mehmood Ghaznavi
This looter did not even spare Muslims…
From wiki…
Mahmud’s campaigns seem to have been motivated by both religious zeal against both the Fatimids Shiites and non-Muslims; Buddhists, Jains and Hindus
As somebody here said he was beneficial to both Muslims and Hindus… :hehe:
Is this the best you could come up then I see no problem.
He was not a religious scholar.
His rule benefitted everyone and hindus should be thankful to him for freeing so many hindus from finacial and religious slavery…by Somnath one of the center of evil people.
Interestingly, you call that place a ‘divine’ place? lol
Re: Mehmood Ghaznavi
^If you can call Mecca a divine place,then ofcourse I can call Somnath a divine place.Thanks...
yes by killing Muslims he was beneficial to Muslims (according to your view)
What a way to admire a blood thirsty looter......
Tomorrow you will start epitomize those idiot jihadis who kill their other Muslim brothers and sisters. Excellent............
Re: Mehmood Ghaznavi
Those days, temples and Burhamans the keepers of these temples were hiding money and knwledge to themsleves. These temples were the political seats as well. Hindus in the area not only were involved in looting the people coming to pilgrimage but even the temples were taking their money in the name of religion.
Ever heard of Chudasamas, Abhiras and Yadavas the hindu Rajas who regularly attacked and looted the people coming there to donate to the temple?? Off course not. ;-)
^If you can call Mecca a divine place,then ofcourse I can call Somnath a divine place.Thanks...
yes by killing Muslims he was beneficial to Muslims (according to your view)
What a way to admire a blood thirsty looter......
Tomorrow you will start epitomize those idiot jihadis who kill their other Muslim brothers and sisters. Excellent............
You have a habit of deviating from the topic. A very known trolling tactics. Quit that please. :-)
First of all Mr. Aleitter, Our hero is always going to be your villain, its simple as that. So no matter how much i would like to think otherwise, your needle is going to stuck where ever it’s stuck. Agree???
Secondly, i like how u try to come up with wiki as your help, but how unlikely that a person as astute as yours in your personal views, would like to omit what he would like and would like to justify what he wants, from the same website link.
Well, lemme bust your bubble…
From wiki,
The later invasions of Mahmud were specifically directed to temple towns as Indian temples were depositories of great wealth and the Economic and Ideological Centers of Gravity for the Hindus, Destroying them would destroy the will power of the Hindus attacking the Empire since Mahmud never kept a permanent prescience in the Subcontinent; Nagarkot, Thanesar, Mathura, Kanauj, Kalinjar and Somnath were all thus raided. Mahmud’s armies stripped the temples of their wealth and then destroyed them at Varanasi, Ujjain, Maheshwar, Jwalamukhi, Narunkot and Dwarka. During the period of Mahmud invasion, the Sindhi Swarankar Community and other Hindus who escaped conversion fled from Sindh to escape sectarian violence, and settled in various villages in the district of Kutch, in modern-day Gujarat, India.
And if u read carefully… it goes on to establish Ghaznavi as a very shrewd planner and military strategist… why…
1- By stripping the temples off their wealth, he actually destroyed the will power of hindus, from military point of view.
2- R.S.Jayaswal writes that “ In these kingdoms there was a lot of inefficiency, the so called heads grabbed lands and distributed among themselves, the rest were persecuted.”
3- And u don’t use a horrid term like a ‘looter’ with a SULTAN. Get it?
Its just like Europe’s old opinion against Napoleon Bonaparte. Unlike the French.
So dear, its just the mind set. Unfortunately, and regrettably, i do understand ur pain, as Hindus can’t come up with a single Heroic entity. All through history and beyond. So yeah, i feel for you.
Apologies for a long reply. Adios.
I have supplied a couple of links to substantiate my claim. Why dont you substantiate that he wasn't gay if you are so sure ?
And yet again, I would ask you to revert back to my original Q.
And how can one so called substantiate he wasn't gay... hmm lemme think, does historians actually WRITE this down for every other person of important figure in history...
Like Jesus, Prophet and blah blah blah.... as yes...not gay.
Hitler, general and blah blah blah... and yes. sorry but not gay.
.......
........
.........
Hahah... the historian after writing this down, would add his own personal remarks...
P.S. the historian... also not gay... or maybe... As of now i am not.
LOL.
I dont understand how you can compare robbing people and robbing the temple (and demolishing idols) ?
Wikipedia is not the Bible - the link I have provided is from a research on "Homosexulaity in Islam". Just because Wikipedia "does not mention" it does not mean it did not happen.
So the links u provided... are bible in histories.
Huh!
My 8 year old nephew can make a better web site than the ones u mentioned Sir. Sorry no offense but thats just lame.
^^ Mehmood of Ghazni was one of the invaders/warriors who were seldom seen the face of defeat and/or retreat in their campaigns, His name and leadership was enough to scare of his Hindu counterparts, who use to commit to stay in the battlefield till their death but used to look for a escape route by the sunset.
His famous invasions to India has set the foundation for the Muslim Sultanate in the Indian sub-Continent, Hindu and other Haters of him only consider him a looter, but none of them answer this question that y almost all the armies of Northern Indian Raj cannot defeat a simple looter...
He has one more credit under his belt, he killed, eliminated Qaramites, a group who cliams to be muslim but love to kill all the muslims.
You must be knowing he is successfull only after 14 attempts and he won only illegally
My dear friend,could not you come up with anything else better than this?Your own fabricated analysis does not make any impression in us other than going through a post,which is pretty similar in nature as of other Pak guppies,who have been posting here for many years,but without making any sense at all.
A looter and a bloodthirsty gay like Mehmood Ghaznavi does not deserve to be called a Sultan.First of all,he did not have any respect or values towards Islam ,and his barbaric deeds on other Muslims show it.His relationship with his slave Ayaz Amir(Either Ayas was the queen' and Ghaznavi was his Pappoo or Ghaznavi was the queen’ or Ayaz was his Pappoo , either way :hehe)shows he had little care for Islamic values and he is not just a looter but a low life looter who did not have any self laws or policies in place.
Yes you feel for it.I welcome it because I understand the trauma Islam is facing now,despite having so many great leadres (Like ShehenShah,Akbar,Abdali,Kamal Pasha of Turk etc )and having so many so many blood thirsty Anti-Islamic Muslim looters(Like Ghaznavi,Aurangazib,Shahjahan,Timor etc etc ).Your state sponsored statement like Hindus can’t come up with a single Heroic entity is all you can sell with Kids in Pakistan 
Sorry for being sarcastic… Your leaders and historians wont comment it again … You know what I mean…hopefully…
Also you said…
**First of all Mr. Aleitter, Our hero is always going to be your villain, its simple as that… **
And viceversa… You forgot it nicely…
And burn oil for many… is,We rennovated Somnath Temple and it attracts millions of people… So the power of destruction is failed and has given way for power of construction,beauty and charmness…
Those days, temples and Burhamans the keepers of these temples were hiding money and knwledge to themsleves. These temples were the political seats as well. Hindus in the area not only were involved in looting the people coming to pilgrimage but even the temples were taking their money in the name of religion.
Ever heard of Chudasamas, Abhiras and Yadavas the hindu Rajas who regularly attacked and looted the people coming there to donate to the temple?? Off course not. ;-)
Ideological diversity and differences still exist now everywhere and in every religion.It's like Sunnis attacking Shias in their msques and Shias repaying it back in grand style.
My dear friend,could not you come up with anything else better than this?Your own fabricated analysis does not make any impression in us other than going through a post,which is pretty similar in nature as of other Pak guppies,who have been posting here for many years,but without making any sense at all.
A looter and a bloodthirsty gay like Mehmood Ghaznavi does not deserve to be called a Sultan.First of all,he did not have any respect or values towards Islam ,and his barbaric deeds on other Muslims show it.His relationship with his slave Ayaz Amir(Either Ayas was the queen' and Ghaznavi was his Pappoo or Ghaznavi was thequeen' or Ayaz was his Pappoo , either way :hehe)shows he had little care for Islamic values and he is not just a looter but a low life looter who did not have any self laws or policies in place.
Yes you feel for it.I welcome it because I understand the trauma Islam is facing now,despite having so many great leadres (Like ShehenShah,Akbar,Abdali,Kamal Pasha of Turk etc )and having so many so many blood thirsty Anti-Islamic Muslim looters(Like Ghaznavi,Aurangazib,Shahjahan,Timor etc etc ).Your state sponsored statement like Hindus can't come up with a single Heroic entity is all you can sell with Kids in Pakistan :) Sorry for being sarcastic.......... Your leaders and historians wont comment it again ...... You know what I mean...hopefully...........
Also you said........
*First of all Mr. Aleitter, Our hero is always going to be your villain, its simple as that............... *
And viceversa................... You forgot it nicely......
And burn oil for many.......... is,We rennovated Somnath Temple and it attracts millions of people............... So the power of destruction is failed and has given way for power of construction,beauty and charmness........... :)
Mr. Alietter, sorry but where opposing might be good...venting is not.
All is see is a very sophisticated guy *****ing on unrelated topics.
Nothing I claim is fabricated. I can go on as how you my friend have tried to get personal on the subject... but it's no use. Lets just call a spade a spade.
Thanks.
Re: Mehmood Ghaznavi
^Cold Bhai..There is nothing personal here.Only thing is we both do differ in our views.
The analysis you have given in your earlier thread was called `fabricated analysis'. There is nothing personal there.
If you have used the word Sultan' or any other similar term for a person like Abdali,I could accept it. But for a bloodthirsty criminal,who used to vent his anger even against a group of people,who hail from his same religion and belonging to aholy root',deserves the name looter or a much worser than that.Moreover I do not think you can forgive somebody who touches your divine or holy shrines. It's a simple logic...
What would you call and what would be your feelings for those Iranians who unleashed riots in Mecca in 1986?or those who planted and caused explosions around the holy site of Mecca in 1989?
^Cold Bhai..There is nothing personal here.Only thing is we both do differ in our views.
The analysis you have given in your earlier thread was called `fabricated analysis'. There is nothing personal there.
If you have used the word Sultan' or any other similar term for a person like Abdali,I could accept it. But for a bloodthirsty criminal,who used to vent his anger even against a group of people,who hail from his same religion and belonging to aholy root',deserves the name looter or a much worser than that.Moreover I do not think you can forgive somebody who touches your divine or holy shrines. It's a simple logic...
What would you call and what would be your feelings for those Iranians who unleashed riots in Mecca in 1986?or those who planted and caused explosions around the holy site of Mecca in 1989?
Arli dear, & yet again... u are speaking as if u are on mars. Please check historical figures again, especially when u take context from a website and then not agree if another uses the same to reciprocate your approach.
I am not the one who decorates Ghaznavi as Sultan dear... As i said, it's keeping a blind eye to what's what and not. Its personal. Its to do with your OWN thinking stream.. nothing much, nothing more.
Dear friend.......I am not refuting that reciprocal response from you but I was negating the analysis provided by you,my dear friend :)
Chalo, this debate is not going to port us anywhere.Thats why I said we both differ in our perspectives and opinions,just like any other two persons. Thats all.I will have my own examples and instance and you will have your own to prove/state one's side.
But I have contempt for those who attack other's religious sites.Whether it is in Islam Christianity Judaism or in Hindusim. Thats pure cowardice.
Dear friend.......I am not refuting that reciprocal response from you but I was negating the analysis provided by you,my dear friend :)
Chalo, this debate is not going to port us anywhere.Thats why I said we both differ in our perspectives and opinions,just like any other two persons. Thats all.I will have my own examples and instance and you will have your own to prove/state one's side.
But I have contempt for those who attack other's religious sites.Whether it is in Islam Christianity Judaism or in Hindusim. Thats pure cowardice.
It was not really a religious place. Money, knowledge and political power was kept inside and hidden from common people by Evil Berhamans who treated others like low class people.
Jesus Christ (Issa AS) in his days was also against institutionalization of religious places to make common people 'slaves' so to speak.
The attack needed to be done one way or other. Hindus of the time were in Mehmood's kingdom later and supported him very well.
In fact Mehmood treated hindus very nicely. Your information is based on limited knowledge based on hatred.
Besides as I mentioned earlier, Hindu Rajas commonly attacked other hindu people for centuries and robbed them of their money or killed them. These poor people were robbed twice or in two ways. Outside by this Hindu Rajas and inside by Berhamans.
Moral:
**Don't rob people and hide the money in Idols.
Don't use these placed to make others slaves in the name of religion.**
A man whose respected alot in the North of Pakistan. A great leader :)
It was not really a religious place. Money, knowledge and political power was kept inside and hidden from common people by Evil Berhamans who treated others like low class people.
Jesus Christ (Issa AS) in his days was also against institutionalization of religious places to make common people 'slaves' so to speak.
The attack needed to be done one way or other. Hindus of the time were in Mehmood's kingdom later and supported him very well.
In fact Mehmood treated hindus very nicely. Your information is based on limited knowledge based on hatred.
Besides as I mentioned earlier, Hindu Rajas commonly attacked other hindu people for centuries and robbed them of their money or killed them. These poor people were robbed twice or in two ways. Outside by this Hindu Rajas and inside by Berhamans.
Moral:
Don't rob people and hide the money in Idols.
Don't use these placed to make others slaves in the name of religion.
You failed to provide me a response to my earlier post.That shows all.....
You cant even give us a satisfactory answer to why this gay looter attacked the roots of a holy family,of ISLAM.
So from now onwards I should reckon Shia/Sunni mosques in to your category because Shias and Sunnis often attack each other and each other's worship places?
What could be the justification of Iranian terrorists who attacked Mecca?A place you consider holy or divine.
Ghaznavi treated Hindus well? Such a gay looter was only interested in killing Muslims Hindus and others and nothing else.
So the bottom line is that:-
Do not side with,even for the sake of invainly defaming one side, a brabaric gay looter who even attacked the family roots of a holy figure.
Do not be subjucted to state sponsored programmes.It can't even give you limited knowledge,but just craps .
You failed to provide me a response to my earlier post.That shows all.....
You cant even give us a satisfactory answer to why this gay looter attacked the roots of a holy family,of ISLAM.
So from now onwards I should reckon Shia/Sunni mosques in to your category because Shias and Sunnis often attack each other and each other's worship places?
What could be the justification of Iranian terrorists who attacked Mecca?A place you consider holy or divine.
Ghaznavi treated Hindus well? Such a gay looter was only interested in killing Muslims Hindus and others and nothing else.
So the bottom line is that:-
Do not side with,even for the sake of invainly defaming one side, a brabaric gay looter who even attacked the family roots of a holy figure.
Do not be subjucted to state sponsored programmes.It can't even give you limited knowledge,but just craps .
The above response just shows how frustrated u've become.
Need some fresh air...