R18 Competes With American V Twin Market / NEW BMW Ride & Review

"It's Frightening!" Former-Muslim Historian Reveals Truth About Islam

BMW R18 Classic - $35,000 German Cruiser for the Distinguished Gentleman!?

LIVE: Netanyahu’s Shocking Threat to Iran | Iran Vs Iran LIVE News | Net...

THE MASS DELUSION OF THE MUSLIM WORLD

Iranian Sleeper Cells in America Exposed

After 46 Years in Exile… Iran’s Crown Prince Is Finally Ready To Take Ov...

Why some in England are speaking openly of the Reconquista

The Truth About Islam: P*dophilia, Violence, and Conquest @ApostateProph...

Son of Iran's last Shah: Regime 'on verge of collapse' and 'scared of it...

کدام صلح پایدار خواهد بود؟

2021 BMW R 18 Classic Review | MC Commute

Persecuted Iranian Christians Break Their Silence

THE BIBLICAL DESTINY OF IRAN 📜 The Truth about Iran Written in the Bible

Scientists Reveal Surprising Genetic Origins of Iranians

Saudi Leader Makes Host Go Quiet with This Chilling Warning about Iran

It's Happening! Iranians call for end of Khamenei, take to streets

IDF Bombs Iran's Fighter Jets, Hits Tehran Airport In Fiery Aerial Attac...

June 4, 2025

Breaking: Israeli Army Issues Evacuation Alert to Iranians in an Urent I...

Israeli military warnings on X for Iranians not visible in Iran • FRANCE...

ISRAEL ATTACKS IRAN - IS IT THE END?

Israel Just Ended Iran [Complete Strategic Checkmate on Every Level]

Why Were Vikings So Much Better At Fighting?

The Colonialism, Imperialism, and Oppression of Islam

The Colonialism, Imperialism, and Oppression of Islam

By Bobby Darvish

While modern academia often paints Western colonialism as the primary force of global oppression, it conveniently ignores the far older and far more brutal legacy of Islamic imperialism. For over 1,400 years, Islam has expanded not through peaceful preaching, but through war, forced conversions, slavery, and institutionalized apartheid under Sharia law. From its inception in the 7th century, the Islamic empire was forged and maintained by violence, and its legacy of tyranny remains visible in nations where Islamic governance or ideology still dominates today.

Islam’s founder, Muhammad, openly declared, “I have been made victorious through terror” (Sahih Bukhari 4:52:220). This was not metaphorical. Within a century of Muhammad’s death, Islamic armies had conquered the Christian Levant, Zoroastrian Persia, Hindu Sindh, and large parts of North Africa. The so-called “Rightly Guided Caliphs” launched genocidal wars against indigenous peoples, destroyed temples, burned libraries, and enforced a humiliating tax called jizya on all non-Muslims, as mandated by Quran 9:29. These non-Muslims, called dhimmis, were allowed to live but only as second-class subjects, forbidden from public worship, bearing arms, building new places of worship, or testifying against Muslims in court.

Islamic imperialism did not stop with the Arabs. The Ottomans, Safavids, and Mughals all inherited and extended this ideology. The Ottoman Turks, for example, enslaved millions through the devshirme system, stealing Christian boys from the Balkans, converting them by force, and turning them into Janissaries, slave soldiers for the Caliph. In 1915, the Ottoman Empire committed the Armenian, Assyrian, and Greek genocides, killing over 1.5 million Armenians alone. The Safavid Empire of Iran forcibly converted millions of Sunni and non-Muslim Iranians to Shiism, slaughtering dissenters in the name of religious purity. In India, Islamic invaders such as Mahmud of Ghazni and Aurangzeb massacred Hindus, demolished temples, and built mosques on top of them to assert Islamic superiority.

Even today, Islamic countries systematically oppress non-Muslims and enforce religious apartheid. In Saudi Arabia, Christianity is illegal, churches are forbidden, and apostates face the death penalty. In Pakistan, blasphemy laws are weaponized to lynch Christians and Ahmadis. In Iran, the Islamic Republic suppresses Baha’is, Christians, Zoroastrians, and even Sunni Muslims through state violence, imprisonment, and execution. While Western nations are condemned for colonialism long since abandoned, the ongoing Islamic imperialism, both historical and present, is largely ignored or even justified by leftist academia and media.

It is time the world recognizes that Islam was and still is a colonialist and imperialist force. Its oppression is not an accident, it is doctrinal. Islam does not separate religion from state. It commands the domination of all others until they submit (Quran 8:39). To deny this is to erase the suffering of millions and enable the continued spread of a totalitarian ideology masquerading as faith.

Citations

 1. Sahih Bukhari 4:52:220 — https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3021

 2. Quran 9:29 — https://quran.com/9/29

 3. Bat Ye’or, The Dhimmi: Jews and Christians Under Islam, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1985

 4. Efraim Karsh, Islamic Imperialism: A History, Yale University Press, 2006

 5. Robert Spencer, The History of Jihad: From Muhammad to ISIS, Bombardier Books, 2018

 6. William T. Cavanaugh, The Myth of Religious Violence, Oxford University Press, 2009

 7. Raymond Ibrahim, Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians, Regnery Publishing, 2013

 8. Benny Morris and Dror Ze’evi, The Thirty-Year Genocide: Turkey’s Destruction of Its Christian Minorities, 1894–1924, Harvard University Press, 2019

 9. William Dalrymple, The Anarchy: The Relentless Rise of the East India Company, Bloomsbury, 2019

 10. Open Doors USA, 2024 World Watch List — https://www.opendoorsusa.org

Proposal for a New Law: Safe Distance Protocol for Dogs and Their Handlers Act

  Proposal for a New Law: Safe Distance Protocol for Dogs and Their Handlers Act

Title:

Safe Distance Protocol for Dogs and Their Handlers Act

Submitted by:

Bobby Darvish

Columbus, Ohio

June 2, 2025

Purpose:

To enhance public safety and animal welfare by mandating that individuals maintain a minimum distance of six feet from dogs and their handlers in public spaces, unless explicitly invited by the handler to approach.

Background:

Ohio law requires dogs to be on a leash no longer than six feet in public areas, ensuring control and safety . Despite these measures, incidents involving dog bites or aggressive reactions often occur when individuals unknowingly invade a dog’s personal space or trigger protective instincts. Ohio operates under a strict liability statute for dog bites, holding owners accountable for injuries caused by their dogs, regardless of prior behavior .

Implementing a safe distance protocol complements existing leash laws by promoting awareness and respect for personal boundaries, thereby reducing the risk of confrontations and injuries.

Proposal:

 1. Safe Distance Requirement:

Individuals must maintain a minimum distance of six feet from any dog and its handler in public spaces unless the handler provides explicit consent to approach.

 2. Signage and Notification:

Dog handlers may use visual indicators such as leashes, vests, or signs stating “Do Not Pet” or “Anxious Dog” to inform others of the need for space. These indicators serve as legal notice under this law.

 3. Educational Campaign:

State and local governments shall distribute educational materials to schools, pet stores, veterinary clinics, and public parks to raise awareness about dog behavior, personal boundaries, and responsible conduct around dogs.

 4. Penalties for Violation:

 • First offense: Verbal or written warning

 • Second offense: $100 fine

 • Third offense or if injury occurs due to proximity violation: Up to $500 fine and potential misdemeanor charge

 5. Exemptions:

 • Licensed animal control personnel performing official duties

 • Emergency responders in urgent situations

 • Controlled environments such as dog parks or licensed training facilities where mutual proximity is expected

Conclusion:

This proposed law aligns with Ohio’s commitment to public safety and responsible pet ownership. By establishing clear boundaries and promoting respectful interactions, it aims to reduce preventable incidents and foster a safer environment for both dogs and community members.

The Hidden Face of Tyranny: Police Corruption and the Abuse of Power

By Bobby Darvish

As a conservative, I believe in law and order, but I also believe in the Constitution and the God given rights of every citizen. Law enforcement exists to serve and protect the people, not to become an unaccountable arm of government overreach. When that balance breaks, when police corruption festers unchecked, it becomes not just a threat to civil society, it becomes a weapon in the hands of the powerful against the people they are sworn to defend.

Corruption in law enforcement is not just a matter of a few bad apples. It is often a systemic failure, protected by unions, covered up by superiors, and enabled by doctrines like qualified immunity that shield misconduct from consequence (Schwartz 2020). Falsifying reports, planting evidence, targeting people based on race, religion, or political beliefs, these are crimes, not mistakes. One of the ugliest forms of this corruption is setting people up for legal ruin through false accusations. For example, provoking someone’s dog to bite or scratch so they can be reported or sued. These kinds of calculated attacks are used against political dissidents, religious minorities, and even everyday citizens who just do not fit the establishment’s mold.

Imagine walking into a police family owned gun store, simply trying to trade in your legally purchased firearms. You are polite, respectful, and law abiding. But the moment you enter, a group of entitled store workers led by a stereotypical Karen with connections to law enforcement begin to treat you with open hostility. They judge you based on your ethnicity, your name, or maybe your dog breed. Then they take it a step further. One of them intentionally provokes your dog, tries to get too close, ignores clear warnings, and then acts shocked when your protective companion reacts. Suddenly, they are threatening to press charges. This is not just discrimination. This is entrapment. It is weaponized lawfare against individuals they do not like.

In such cases, the legal system does offer recourse, though it often requires persistence and legal knowledge to navigate. If a dog bite incident occurs due to provocation by the accuser, the owner may have grounds for legal defense and even counterclaims. Under many state laws, including in Ohio and Utah, provocation is a legal defense against liability in dog bite cases. If it can be proven that the person deliberately agitated or threatened the dog, then civil or criminal charges can be dismissed or turned back onto the instigator. Security footage, witness statements, and veterinary evaluations can all serve as evidence to show the truth. In cases where law enforcement is involved or complicit, filing a complaint with the civilian review board, state attorney general, or even initiating a civil rights lawsuit under Section 1983 of the United States Code may be warranted.

And now, incidents like the recent terrorist act in Colorado committed by a Middle Eastern individual this past weekend threaten to make things even worse. We know how this plays out. Innocent Middle Eastern Americans, many of them Christians or secular exiles like myself, end up paying the price for another man’s evil. Some in law enforcement may use such events to justify racial profiling, harassment, or setting up targets who look like the suspect class. That is un American, and it is exactly what tyrannical regimes do, punish individuals not for their actions, but for their ancestry.

We have already seen what corrupt policing looks like. From the Breonna Taylor case, where officers lied to obtain a search warrant (DOJ 2023), to the infamous Rampart Division scandal, where more than 70 LAPD officers engaged in framing suspects, drug trafficking, and cover ups (PBS Frontline 2001). Conservatives should not make the mistake of thinking this is a liberal issue. If anything, it is a constitutional issue, and we are the ones who claim to stand for the Constitution.

We need real reform that does not come from the Marxist Left trying to dismantle law and order, but from patriots who love justice. That means ending qualified immunity, exposing police unions that cover up crime, and protecting whistleblowers inside the force. It also means standing up for the falsely accused and the deliberately targeted, regardless of their race or background. Justice must be blind, not weaponized.

The Left wants to destroy the police so they can replace them with ideological enforcers. But we must redeem the badge, not abolish it. That starts by rooting out corruption and restoring honor to the uniform through accountability, transparency, and adherence to the law, not manipulation of it.

Citations:

Schwartz, Joanna C. Qualified Immunity and Federalism All the Way Down. Yale Law Journal, 2020. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/.../qualified-immunity-and...

PBS Frontline. LAPD Blues: Rampart Scandal. 2001. https://www.pbs.org/.../frontline/shows/lapd/rampart.html

U.S. Department of Justice. Report on the Investigation of the Louisville Metro Police Department. March 2023. https://www.justice.gov/.../justice-department-releases...

ACLU. Racism, Dog Attacks, and Police Brutality: A Growing Pattern. 2019. https://www.aclu.org/.../racism-dog-attacks-and-police...

Ohio Revised Code § 955.28(B) (Dog bite law and provocation clause)

42 U.S. Code § 1983 (Civil action for deprivation of rights)

DOG BITES IN OHIO (AS AN OWNER) - COUNTERCLAIM FOR PROVOCATION, DISCRIMINATION, AND VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1983

 In Franklin County, Ohio, if you're a dog owner facing allegations stemming from a bite incident, and you believe the bite was provoked, there are specific legal avenues and procedures to consider.

Understanding Ohio's Dog Bite Law

Ohio operates under a strict liability framework for dog bites, meaning that dog owners are generally held liable for injuries their dogs cause, regardless of the dog's prior behavior. However, there are notable exceptions to this rule. According to Ohio Revised Code § 955.28(B), a dog owner may not be liable if the injured person was:

• Committing or attempting to commit a criminal offense other than a minor misdemeanor on the property of the owner.

• Teasing, tormenting, or abusing the dog on the owner's property.Nolo+4Ohio Laws+4Ohio Laws+4GB Law+6Bensinger Legal Services+6Ohio Laws+6

Provocation, defined as teasing, tormenting, or abusing the dog, can serve as a defense against liability.ronweissattorney.com+1Nolo+1

Steps to Assert a Provocation Defense

1. Document the Incident Thoroughly:

   • Gather any available evidence, such as surveillance footage, photographs, or audio recordings, that capture the events leading up to the bite.

   • Collect statements from witnesses who observed the interaction between the alleged victim and your dog.

   • Maintain records of your dog's behavior history, including any training certifications or prior incidents.

2. Report the Incident:

   • Notify the local health department within 24 hours of the bite. In Franklin County, this would be the Franklin County Public Health Department.

   • Ensure your dog undergoes the mandatory 10-day quarantine period to monitor for rabies, as stipulated by Ohio law.Colombo LawOhio Laws+1The Henry Law Firm+1

3. Consult with a Qualified Attorney:

   • Engage an attorney experienced in Ohio dog bite laws to help navigate the legal process and build a defense based on provocation.

   • Your attorney can assist in gathering and presenting evidence, negotiating with opposing parties, and representing you in court if necessary.

4. File a Formal Response:

   • If a lawsuit is filed against you, work with your attorney to submit a formal response to the court, asserting the provocation defense and providing supporting evidence.

Additional Considerations

• Potential Counterclaims: If you believe the alleged victim intentionally provoked your dog, leading to the bite, discuss with your attorney the possibility of filing a counterclaim for damages or other legal remedies.Tittle & Perlmuter+1jamioliver.com+1

• Civil Rights Implications: In cases where you suspect that the incident was orchestrated due to discriminatory motives (e.g., based on race, religion, or other protected characteristics), consult with your attorney about the potential to file a civil rights complaint under federal or state laws.

Conclusion

While Ohio's strict liability statute generally holds dog owners accountable for bites, the law recognizes provocation as a valid defense. By promptly documenting the incident, reporting it to the appropriate authorities, and seeking legal counsel, you can effectively navigate the legal system in Franklin County to assert your rights and defend against unwarranted liability.ronweissattorney.com+1Tittle & Perlmuter+1

You said:

write up a counter lawsut based on provoking my dog by coming too close from behind me the owner and civil rights because the lady helping me seemed like she discriminated against me for being iranian-american based on the terrorism that happened over the weeken din colorado

ChatGPT said:

Here is a sample counter-lawsuit draft you can bring to an attorney licensed in Ohio. It is written in the proper legal format to assert both a provocation defense under Ohio Revised Code § 955.28(B) and a civil rights counterclaim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, incorporating discrimination based on national origin.

---

IN THE FRANKLIN COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CIVIL DIVISION

[Your Full Name]
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant
v.
[Their Full Name]
Defendant/Counter-Claimant

Case No.: [Leave blank for court]
Judge: [Leave blank for court]

---

COUNTERCLAIM AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

NOW COMES Defendant and Counter-Claimant [Your Full Name], appearing pro se or by and through undersigned counsel, and for their Counterclaim against Plaintiff states as follows:

---

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE: PROVOCATION (O.R.C. § 955.28(B))

1. Plaintiff's alleged injuries were proximately caused by their own intentional or negligent actions, specifically by provoking Defendant’s dog in violation of O.R.C. § 955.28(B).

2. Plaintiff approached Defendant and his leashed dog from behind in a sudden and invasive manner, disregarding verbal warnings to maintain distance from an animal identified as anxious and protective.

3. Defendant’s dog responded in a defensive posture as a direct result of this provocation, and not due to any lack of control or negligence on the part of the Defendant.

---

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE: FAILURE TO MITIGATE DAMAGES

4. Plaintiff failed to act reasonably to avoid injury and contributed to the incident by ignoring clearly visible signage and the verbal boundaries established by Defendant.

---

COUNTERCLAIM I: VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1983

5. Defendant incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 4 as if fully stated herein.

6. On or about [Date of Incident], Plaintiff, acting in concert with employees or agents of a business known to be owned or affiliated with local law enforcement, intentionally discriminated against Defendant on the basis of his national origin (Iranian-American).

7. Plaintiff made derogatory or suggestive remarks and demonstrated suspicious and targeted behavior consistent with racial or ethnic profiling, particularly in the context of recent unrelated events involving a Middle Eastern individual in Colorado.

8. Plaintiff’s discriminatory animus influenced their decision to provoke Defendant’s dog and subsequently attempt to initiate false or misleading claims to local authorities in an effort to have Defendant criminally or civilly punished.

9. Plaintiff's actions were done under color of state law or in cooperation with those acting under color of state law, thereby violating Defendant’s rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

10. As a direct and proximate result of these unlawful actions, Defendant has suffered emotional distress, reputational harm, legal expenses, and a violation of his civil rights.

---

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Defendant/Counter-Claimant respectfully requests that this Court:

a. Dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint with prejudice
b. Enter judgment in favor of Defendant on all Counterclaims
c. Award compensatory damages in excess of $25,000
d. Award punitive damages as allowed by law
e. Award costs, legal fees, and other relief as this Court deems just and proper

---

Respectfully submitted,

[Your Full Name]
[Your Address]
[Your City, State, ZIP]
[Your Phone Number]
[Your Email]

Signature: ________________________
Date: ________________________

---

Note: Before filing anything, you should bring this document to a licensed attorney in Franklin County, Ohio for review and legal representation. Filing a false or poorly constructed counterclaim without legal advice can backfire. An attorney can also help you request security footage and subpoena witnesses if necessary.

The Hidden Face of Tyranny: Police Corruption and the Abuse of Power

By Bobby Darvish

As a conservative, I believe in law and order, but I also believe in the Constitution and the God given rights of every citizen. Law enforcement exists to serve and protect the people, not to become an unaccountable arm of government overreach. When that balance breaks, when police corruption festers unchecked, it becomes not just a threat to civil society, it becomes a weapon in the hands of the powerful against the people they are sworn to defend.

Corruption in law enforcement is not just a matter of a few bad apples. It is often a systemic failure, protected by unions, covered up by superiors, and enabled by doctrines like qualified immunity that shield misconduct from consequence (Schwartz 2020). Falsifying reports, planting evidence, targeting people based on race, religion, or political beliefs, these are crimes, not mistakes. One of the ugliest forms of this corruption is setting people up for legal ruin through false accusations. For example, provoking someone’s dog to bite or scratch so they can be reported or sued. These kinds of calculated attacks are used against political dissidents, religious minorities, and even everyday citizens who just do not fit the establishment’s mold.

Imagine walking into a police family owned gun store, simply trying to trade in your legally purchased firearms. You are polite, respectful, and law abiding. But the moment you enter, a group of entitled store workers led by a stereotypical Karen with connections to law enforcement begin to treat you with open hostility. They judge you based on your ethnicity, your name, or maybe your dog breed. Then they take it a step further. One of them intentionally provokes your dog, tries to get too close, ignores clear warnings, and then acts shocked when your protective companion reacts. Suddenly, they are threatening to press charges. This is not just discrimination. This is entrapment. It is weaponized lawfare against individuals they do not like.

In such cases, the legal system does offer recourse, though it often requires persistence and legal knowledge to navigate. If a dog bite incident occurs due to provocation by the accuser, the owner may have grounds for legal defense and even counterclaims. Under many state laws, including in Ohio and Utah, provocation is a legal defense against liability in dog bite cases. If it can be proven that the person deliberately agitated or threatened the dog, then civil or criminal charges can be dismissed or turned back onto the instigator. Security footage, witness statements, and veterinary evaluations can all serve as evidence to show the truth. In cases where law enforcement is involved or complicit, filing a complaint with the civilian review board, state attorney general, or even initiating a civil rights lawsuit under Section 1983 of the United States Code may be warranted.

And now, incidents like the recent terrorist act in Colorado committed by a Middle Eastern individual this past weekend threaten to make things even worse. We know how this plays out. Innocent Middle Eastern Americans, many of them Christians or secular exiles like myself, end up paying the price for another man’s evil. Some in law enforcement may use such events to justify racial profiling, harassment, or setting up targets who look like the suspect class. That is un American, and it is exactly what tyrannical regimes do, punish individuals not for their actions, but for their ancestry.

We have already seen what corrupt policing looks like. From the Breonna Taylor case, where officers lied to obtain a search warrant (DOJ 2023), to the infamous Rampart Division scandal, where more than 70 LAPD officers engaged in framing suspects, drug trafficking, and cover ups (PBS Frontline 2001). Conservatives should not make the mistake of thinking this is a liberal issue. If anything, it is a constitutional issue, and we are the ones who claim to stand for the Constitution.

We need real reform that does not come from the Marxist Left trying to dismantle law and order, but from patriots who love justice. That means ending qualified immunity, exposing police unions that cover up crime, and protecting whistleblowers inside the force. It also means standing up for the falsely accused and the deliberately targeted, regardless of their race or background. Justice must be blind, not weaponized.

The Left wants to destroy the police so they can replace them with ideological enforcers. But we must redeem the badge, not abolish it. That starts by rooting out corruption and restoring honor to the uniform through accountability, transparency, and adherence to the law, not manipulation of it.

Citations:
Schwartz, Joanna C. Qualified Immunity and Federalism All the Way Down. Yale Law Journal, 2020. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/feature/qualified-immunity-and-federalism-all-the-way-down
PBS Frontline. LAPD Blues: Rampart Scandal. 2001. https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/lapd/rampart.html
U.S. Department of Justice. Report on the Investigation of the Louisville Metro Police Department. March 2023. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-releases-report-investigation-louisville-metro-police-department
ACLU. Racism, Dog Attacks, and Police Brutality: A Growing Pattern. 2019. https://www.aclu.org/news/criminal-law-reform/racism-dog-attacks-and-police-brutality-a-growing-pattern
Ohio Revised Code § 955.28(B) (Dog bite law and provocation clause)
42 U.S. Code § 1983 (Civil action for deprivation of rights)

Reynald de Châtillon: Hero and Saint, Not the Villain Islamists and Hollywood Portray

Reynald de Châtillon: Hero and Saint, Not the Villain Islamists and Hollywood Portray
By Bobby Darvish

Reynald de Châtillon, the Crusader prince and Lord of Oultrejordain, is one of the most slandered figures in medieval Christian history. Western academics and Hollywood filmmakers, often swayed by Marxist revisionism or Islamic apologetics, have painted him as a bloodthirsty warlord or reckless bandit. Islamists, in particular, demonize him as the embodiment of Crusader brutality. But strip away the lies, and Reynald emerges not as a villain, but as a hero of Christendom, a man of unbreakable faith, courage, and conviction who stood defiantly against Islamic tyranny at a time when most would have surrendered.

Reynald was born around 1125 and rose to prominence through his marriage to Constance of Antioch. He fought tirelessly to protect Christian territories in the Holy Land, especially from the growing threat of Islamic expansion. Unlike other nobles who often sought compromise with Muslim powers, Reynald understood the existential danger Islam posed to the Christian world. He was one of the few Crusader leaders who realized that Saladin’s calls for "peace" were merely strategic pauses in a long war of religious conquest.

Modern portrayals, especially in films like Kingdom of Heaven (2005), portray Reynald as a savage lunatic obsessed with provoking war. But the truth is that Reynald’s actions were rooted in a righteous desire to defend Christian pilgrims, repel Muslim raiders, and cripple the Islamic forces that threatened Jerusalem and the entire Latin Kingdom. His attacks on Muslim caravans were not reckless. They were strategic, targeting the supply lines and wealth of Saladin's empire. And when Saladin demanded submission or death, Reynald replied with the boldness of a true Christian knight, reportedly saying, “I will not obey the orders of a dog.”

He refused to be a coward, unlike some of his contemporaries who betrayed the Cross for temporary peace. Reynald’s fortresses at Kerak and Montréal served as the last real bulwarks of defense east of the Jordan River. His leadership in the Battle of Hattin may have ended in capture, but his refusal to convert to Islam, even under threat of death, stands as a testimony to his unwavering Christian faith. Unlike King Guy of Lusignan who was spared, Reynald was executed by Saladin himself, not because he was cruel, but because he was courageous, because he would not bow to the Crescent.

Islamists hate Reynald because he exposed their brutality. He saw through their false piety and understood that their ultimate goal was the destruction of Christendom. Hollywood hates him because he was a man of principles who would not bend to modern ideals of religious pluralism or surrender his faith for political correctness. And now, even modern neo Ottoman fascist propaganda like the Turkish state sponsored show Kudüs Fatihi Selahaddin Eyyubi (Episode 58, Final) on TRT1 continues this smear campaign. In such shows, Reynald is once again painted as a cartoon villain, ignoring his courage, his sacrifice, and his resistance to Islamic conquest. These dramatizations are less about history and more about promoting modern Islamist nationalism by vilifying Christian resistance.

But to the faithful, Reynald de Châtillon should be remembered as a martyr, a saint, and a hero of the Cross. His legacy should not be one of shame, but of glory.

Citations

1. Runciman, Steven. A History of the Crusades: Volume II – The Kingdom of Jerusalem and the Frankish East, 1100 to 1187. Cambridge University Press, 1952.

2. Tyerman, Christopher. God's War: A New History of the Crusades. Harvard University Press, 2006.

3. Maalouf, Amin. The Crusades Through Arab Eyes. Al Saqi Books, 1984.

4. Hillenbrand, Carole. The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives. Routledge, 2000.

5. Riley Smith, Jonathan. The Crusades: A History. Bloomsbury Academic, 2014.

6. "Reynald of Châtillon." Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Reynald-of-Chatillon

7. Madden, Thomas F. The Concise History of the Crusades. Rowman and Littlefield, 2013.

8. TRT1. Kudüs Fatihi Selahaddin Eyyubi – 58. Bölüm (Final). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3T3kMaA3c70