Vlad Tepes: I don't mind the cruelty, do you?

General Topics

Moderators: Shish-kabob-Forrest, Vlad, webmaster

Ottoman schooling, nevertheless

Postby Vlad » Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:16 am

turk wrote:I repeat he managed to defend his values BUT as a coward.He hit and run away,like todays Iraqi insurgents in Iraq.He had never fought as a gentleman face to face.If you think impaling women (whether Turks or Romanian citizens) is a heroism then its your way to choose.

And he was killed at his FIRST face to face war against Turks near Bucharest in December of 1476.

The Lazy Woman

Dracula once noticed a man working in the fields while wearing a too short caftan. The prince stopped and asked the man whether or not he had a wife. When the man answered in the affirmative Dracula had the woman brought before him and asked her how she spent her days. The poor, frightened woman stated that she spent her days washing, baking and sewing. The prince pointed out her husband's short caftan as evidence of her laziness and dishonesty and ordered her impaled despite her husband's protestations that he was well satisfied with his wife. Dracula then ordered another woman to marry the peasant but admonished her to work hard or she would suffer her predecessor's fate.

Is that heroism? OR just a coward madness?


Should we repeatedly remind everybody that Vlad TEPES/Vlad Dracula had been brought up at the ISTANBUL COURT and learned the techniques of beating women into submission from ISLAMIC OTTOMANS???

To this day, Islam has yet to allow women to speak/be themselves, and VOTE. Think this is too much to ask, TURK??
500 years later??? I mean, why do most of the Muslims still live in the MEDIEVAL TIMES??? HUH, TURK??
User avatar
Vlad
Site Admin
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:44 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Yeahh,

Postby Vlad » Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:27 am

turk wrote:
Vlad wrote:Isn't it funny how TURK disappeared?
I wonder why :roll:

Could it be a Muslim Convention going on?

Or could it be the beginnings of WWIII??


Ehm..Vlad..i have a life (i am sure i already told it before) unlike you..i have lots of things to do..i cant spend all my life on virtual bullshit.. but i will visit this website from time to time..to have some fun :lol:


ARKADASH, please ask yourself why the MUSLIM world is in disarray right now, and then, give us your RESULTS.

It could be an eye opener for many.

Thanks.
User avatar
Vlad
Site Admin
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:44 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Could you BE

Postby Vlad » Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:35 am

Phoenix wrote:The Ottoman Empire Sodomized Lebanon for over 300 years!!! i'd say WAY TO GO VLADY!!!!!!!!!!!!


MORE EXPLICIT, PLEASE??

PEOPLE, mostly youngsters, need To KNOW and FIND OUT, and DRAW their own conclusions, regardless of what the BS MEDIA and BIASED schools tell them. RIGHT??

Thank YOU
User avatar
Vlad
Site Admin
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:44 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Here comes KOSOVO - Post Renewal from 2006 - I told you so

Postby Vlad » Mon Feb 25, 2008 3:40 am

Vlad wrote:HERE COMES KOSOVO region - Ancestral region of the SERBIAN population.
A province of southern Serbia. Settled by Slavs in the seventh century.
The biggest mistake the SERBIANS ever did, was to allow Turks to settle in that region after:
At Kosovo Field, Serbo-Croatian Kosovo Polje [field of the black birds], the Turks under Sultan Murad I defeated Serbia and its Bosnian, Montenegrin, Bulgarian, and other allies in 1389.

The Serbs did not continue fighting, they gave up, and they allowed the CUCKOOS to breed in their NEST. Isn't that called TOLERANCE?
Serbians were tolerant towards TURKS, and look where it got them.

VLAD, on the other hand, would have none of that. He impaled Turk asses all along the way, for all Turks to see, and wonder.

I do believe you and your school fellows still keep wondering, why Turks could never conquer Vallachia, Moldova, Transylvania and the rest of Europe. The answer is Vlad Tepes/The Impaler/Ghiaurul.


I told you so. :twisted: :evil:
User avatar
Vlad
Site Admin
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:44 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Shish-kabob-Forrest » Wed Mar 12, 2008 4:05 am

I repeat he managed to defend his values BUT as a coward.He hit and run away,like todays Iraqi insurgents in Iraq.He had never fought as a gentleman face to face.If you think impaling women (whether Turks or Romanian citizens) is a heroism then its your way to choose.

And he was killed at his FIRST face to face war against Turks near Bucharest in December of 1476.


I wouldn't describe insurgency against the US army cowardly. Boldly engaging the might of the US military head to head is sheer reckless suicide. You try picking a fight against the US army and see if you still find it cowardly. Secondly, in similar comparativeness, I wouldn't describe a prince of a backwood province standing up to the most formidable empire in the world cowardly no matter how you look at it. Making such a stand alone takes some serious guts.

Last but not least, an incomplete list of incidences where Vladislav III killed in combat with his own hands:

* Vladislav II of Wallachia
Vladislav II chalenged Vladislav III to a hand-to-hand, one-on-one duel. Vladislav III won the fight, killing Vladislav II with his bear hands.

* Vladislav III directly engaged in open combat during his rise to power.

* Vladislav III supposedly fought directly in the raid leading to the Timpa Hill massacre.

* Vladislav III directly engaged in combat in the final showdown between him and Daniel III. He personally cut Daniel III's head off when it was over.

* Vladislav III directly engaged in several skirmishes in the first stage of the Ottoman Empire's invasion of Wallachia in 1462.

* Vladislav III personally infiltrated the Ottoman camp and personally killed many Ottoman troops, including the Aga (commander) of the Janissaries during the Wallachia Night Assault.

* Vladislav III MAY have participated and directly fought in the battle of Vaslui

* Vladislav III fought directly in the skirmish at Coltul Bolesti and the last allies to see him alive said that he killed 2 or 3 people with his sword before he was captured.
Blessed is he who shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is his brother's keeper. And I will strike down those who attempt to destroy my brothers and you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.
User avatar
Shish-kabob-Forrest
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:19 pm

Re: Vlad Tepes: I don't mind the cruelty, do you?

Postby Vlad » Sun Feb 02, 2014 11:42 pm

Islamic jurisprudence

Some ambiguity over time seems to be present in various schools of Islamic jurisprudence concerning the permissibility of impalement. For example, the 12th century Hanafi scholar Burhan al-Din al-Marghinani in his highly influential Al-Hidayah discusses only crucifixion of robbers guilty of murder, rather than impalement, and none of the authorities he cites speaks of impalement, either.[9] A tradition concerning the prophet Muhammad shows he disapproved of the punishment of some robbers, who had had their limbs lopped off, their eyes put out, and finally were impaled alive. Muhammad made public a revelation in which crucifixion, and additional amputation at most, was stated as the most severe permissible punishment.[10] The Anglo-Indian judge and politician Abdur Rahim, however, writes the following from the understanding of his day of classical Muslim jurisprudence: "For waging war against God or his prophet, or for highway robbery, the malefactor is to be put to death, either by crucifixion or impalement, or by one hand and one foot being cut off, or he is to be exiled from the country"[11] The emperor Akbar, in his 16th century regulations on the proper conduct of magistrates, says explicitly that the magistrate should not suffer anyone to be impaled.[12] His son, Jahangir, however, had no scruples reinstating the punishment, on the level of mass execution of rebels.[13] - from WIKIPEDIA

How about that?
User avatar
Vlad
Site Admin
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:44 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Vlad Tepes: I don't mind the cruelty, do you?

Postby Vlad » Mon Feb 03, 2014 12:18 am

Rome began as a City, grew into an Empire, Romania, in which the City lost its identity, and which then shrank down, in the end, to another City, that meanwhile had preserved and protected the heritage of the Empire. When we realize how much was preserved, in literature, art, and institutions, at Constantinople from the soi disant "Fall of Rome," it helps us realize how much Mediaeval Romania was, indeed, still the Roman Empire, just as they tell us. In an age when the politically correct absurdly fall all over themselves to say "Beijing" rather than "Peking" or "Mumbai" rather than "Bombay," probably without being able to pronounce "Beijing" or say what language "Mumbai" is from, it is extraordinary to find historians who not only do not call the Mediaeval Roman Empire what it was, but who seem to have even forgotten that "Romania" was actually its name in both Latin and Greek. - From "http://www.friesian.com/romania.htm#second"

No more comments.
User avatar
Vlad
Site Admin
 
Posts: 546
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:44 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Previous

Return to Main

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests