What About Those Terrible Crusades?

[zaangalewa]

Typical Muslim apologist when you talk about jihad and terrorist attacks brought on by a belief in the words of the Koran. Well, this five minute piece with an excellent video lays out the truth!

And, as always, it ain't pretty. And it links to previous pieces that explained how Christian kings were simply defending themselves and freeing their people from the relentless religious persecution by Muslims.

Let's see how the Islamists try to debunk this @ Take Five Minutes And Watch The Spread Of Islam Via Jihad Before The Crusades ⋆ Dc Gazette

I'm sure the English kings who went on the Crusades weren't going there to defends themselves from Islam which was thousands of miles away, and this was before planes.

And, you would surely be mistaken.

Would I? No, I don't think so.

Why Medieval People went on Crusades

"There are four main reasons why people in the medieval ages went on crusades: One, people went on Crusades because they wanted to take back Jerusalem by reason that they thought that it was rightfully theirs since it is there where Jesus died. Second, some people did it for honour, revenge or love. Third, the people wanted their sins to be forgiven, to go to heaven or to take back goods from the Holy Lands or because they had committed a crime and were forced by the church to go on a Crusade. And some people just went on Crusades for fun."

The Muslims invaded Europe 300 years before the first crusade.

Yes, and? What does this have to do with the debate?

You think a king in England would go to the other side of Europe to fight Muslims because they had invaded Europe? I don't think so.

The reason was a change in the politics of the Muslims. Since centuries they lived in the South of the former roman empire. This was not the problem. The problem were the Seljuks (a turkish tribe) what had conquered Jerusalem and Mekka. They were Muslims too - so this act was somehow invisible for lots of people - but on the others side were Christians not any longer able to go on the pilgrimage to Jerusalem as it was before - during long hundreds of years. The western world (=the holy empire) lost its power. But the situation was even much more dangerous: Jerusalem - the middle of the world - was now suddenly completly in the hand of the Muslims and Christians had no chance any longer, because who owns the center of the world, owns the world. This caused an unbelievable frustration and the western world startet to change this. And if we take a look today at the will to change this, then we have to say: Today indeed the middle of the world is the western culture and civilisation. We found Aristotle and his interpreter Averroes (Ibn Rush) and other members of the ancient greek culture in lots of books. We started the renaissance. We made gigantic steps in philosophy, mathematics and sciences. - one of this steps leaded us even to the moon. And it's still not over yet. "Enlightenment" is still an active process in the western world. Enlightenment became more and more our form of jihad. Interesting in this context could it be that organisations like "bokom haram" (=books are a sin) would be in this context and view on history only a kind of antijihad. Seems to me the real jihad needs the Holy Spirit.

Where were they all when the Muslims invaded SPAIN? Oh, no where, they left it to the Spanish. And that was a lot closer to England than the religious center of Christianity.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I'm sure the English kings who went on the Crusades weren't going there to defends themselves from Islam which was thousands of miles away, and this was before planes.

And, you would surely be mistaken.

Would I? No, I don't think so.

Why Medieval People went on Crusades

"There are four main reasons why people in the medieval ages went on crusades: One, people went on Crusades because they wanted to take back Jerusalem by reason that they thought that it was rightfully theirs since it is there where Jesus died. Second, some people did it for honour, revenge or love. Third, the people wanted their sins to be forgiven, to go to heaven or to take back goods from the Holy Lands or because they had committed a crime and were forced by the church to go on a Crusade. And some people just went on Crusades for fun."

The Muslims invaded Europe 300 years before the first crusade.

Yes, and? What does this have to do with the debate?

You think a king in England would go to the other side of Europe to fight Muslims because they had invaded Europe? I don't think so.

The reason was a change in the politics of the Muslims. Since centuries they lived in the South of the former roman empire. This was not the problem. The problem were the Seljuks (a turkish tribe) what had conquered Jerusalem and Mekka. They were Muslims too - so this act was somehow invisible for lots of people - but on the others side were Christians not any longer able to go on the pilgrimage to Jerusalem as it was before - during long hundreds of years. The western world (=the holy empire) had lost its power. But the situation was even much more dangerous: Jerusalem - the middle of the world - was now suddenly completly in the hand of the Muslims and Christians had no chance any longer, because who owns the center of the world, owns the world. This caused an unbelievable frustration and the western world startet to change this. And if we take a lok today at the will to change this - then we have to say: Indeed the middle of the world is the western culture and civilisation today. We found Aristotle and his interpreter Averroes (Ibn Rush) and other members of the ancient greek culture in lots of books. We started the renaissance. We made gigantic steps in mathematics and sciences - one of this steps leaded us even to the moon. And it's still not over yet.

Where were they all when the Muslims invaded SPAIN? Oh, no where, they left it to the Spanish. And that was a lot closer to England than the religious center of Christianity.

It was a religious fight. Nothing more to it than that. Muslims threatened the place the Christians wanted. So, people traveled thousands of miles to fight for their God and all that nonsense.

 

[zaangalewa]

And, you would surely be mistaken.

Would I? No, I don't think so.

Why Medieval People went on Crusades

"There are four main reasons why people in the medieval ages went on crusades: One, people went on Crusades because they wanted to take back Jerusalem by reason that they thought that it was rightfully theirs since it is there where Jesus died. Second, some people did it for honour, revenge or love. Third, the people wanted their sins to be forgiven, to go to heaven or to take back goods from the Holy Lands or because they had committed a crime and were forced by the church to go on a Crusade. And some people just went on Crusades for fun."

The Muslims invaded Europe 300 years before the first crusade.

Yes, and? What does this have to do with the debate?

You think a king in England would go to the other side of Europe to fight Muslims because they had invaded Europe? I don't think so.

The reason was a change in the politics of the Muslims. Since centuries they lived in the South of the former roman empire. This was not the problem. The problem were the Seljuks (a turkish tribe) what had conquered Jerusalem and Mekka. They were Muslims too - so this act was somehow invisible for lots of people - but on the others side were Christians not any longer able to go on the pilgrimage to Jerusalem as it was before - during long hundreds of years. The western world (=the holy empire) had lost its power. But the situation was even much more dangerous: Jerusalem - the middle of the world - was now suddenly completly in the hand of the Muslims and Christians had no chance any longer, because who owns the center of the world, owns the world. This caused an unbelievable frustration and the western world startet to change this. And if we take a lok today at the will to change this - then we have to say: Indeed the middle of the world is the western culture and civilisation today. We found Aristotle and his interpreter Averroes (Ibn Rush) and other members of the ancient greek culture in lots of books. We started the renaissance. We made gigantic steps in mathematics and sciences - one of this steps leaded us even to the moon. And it's still not over yet.

Where were they all when the Muslims invaded SPAIN? Oh, no where, they left it to the Spanish. And that was a lot closer to England than the religious center of Christianity.

It was a religious fight. Nothing more to it than that. Muslims threatened the place the Christians wanted. So, people traveled thousands of miles to fight for their God and all that nonsense.

Every fight was a religious fight in this days of history. Old germanic tradition. God gives the victory: So who wins is right. But this did not mean Muslims did not fight together with Christians and/or Musims against other Muslims or Christians did not fight against Christians and so on. Lots of christian knights for example were admirers of their enemy Saladin. To be an enemy made no one to an honorless person. The behavior of the USA to send murderers to Osama Bin Laden had shocked maybe even crusaders.

I guess you are by the way also thinking if you will win your battle of words your god or not-god or anti-god is right. I my case it's a little more complex, because if I should say something what's wrong, then I expect from everyone not to believe what I say. God is the truth - not I. This christian structure to think is also used in sciences for example.

 

[Steven_R]

Typical Muslim apologist when you talk about jihad and terrorist attacks brought on by a belief in the words of the Koran. Well, this five minute piece with an excellent video lays out the truth!

And, as always, it ain't pretty. And it links to previous pieces that explained how Christian kings were simply defending themselves and freeing their people from the relentless religious persecution by Muslims.

Let's see how the Islamists try to debunk this @ Take Five Minutes And Watch The Spread Of Islam Via Jihad Before The Crusades ⋆ Dc Gazette

I'm sure the English kings who went on the Crusades weren't going there to defends themselves from Islam which was thousands of miles away, and this was before planes.

The first Crusade was against European Jews, they never even met any Muslims.

They might have killed some Jews along the way, but the First Crusade definitely met and killed a shitload of Muslims. They took Jerusalem (and massacred the cities population) in July of 1099, established the Kingdom of Jerusalem, took Antioch, Tripoli, and Edessa in the process.

 

[Steven_R]

Hitler and the Nazis were all Roman Catholics.

The story of the 100 years war was the story of Protestants and Catholics leading armies that killed mostly peasants because those peasants rulers belonged to the 'wrong' flavor of Christianity.

There is lots to blame on Catholics of the era but Protestants were not saints either.

You're thinking of the Thirty Years War. The Hundred Years War was over which French dynasty would actually rule France, the Valois who were actually in France or the Plantagenets who were in England.

 

[Syriusly]

Hitler and the Nazis were all Roman Catholics.

The story of the 100 years war was the story of Protestants and Catholics leading armies that killed mostly peasants because those peasants rulers belonged to the 'wrong' flavor of Christianity.

There is lots to blame on Catholics of the era but Protestants were not saints either.

You're thinking of the Thirty Years War. The Hundred Years War was over which French dynasty would actually rule France, the Valois who were actually in France or the Plantagenets who were in England.

Thanks- you are correct- I had the wrong decades long war.

 

[alang1216]

Typical Muslim apologist when you talk about jihad and terrorist attacks brought on by a belief in the words of the Koran. Well, this five minute piece with an excellent video lays out the truth!

And, as always, it ain't pretty. And it links to previous pieces that explained how Christian kings were simply defending themselves and freeing their people from the relentless religious persecution by Muslims.

Let's see how the Islamists try to debunk this @ Take Five Minutes And Watch The Spread Of Islam Via Jihad Before The Crusades ⋆ Dc Gazette

I'm sure the English kings who went on the Crusades weren't going there to defends themselves from Islam which was thousands of miles away, and this was before planes.

The first Crusade was against European Jews, they never even met any Muslims.

They might have killed some Jews along the way, but the First Crusade definitely met and killed a shitload of Muslims. They took Jerusalem (and massacred the cities population) in July of 1099, established the Kingdom of Jerusalem, took Antioch, Tripoli, and Edessa in the process.

You're right of course, I was thinking the First Crusade was only those that never left Europe but it was in fact many different groups under a single umbrella. Thanks.

 

[zaangalewa]

Typical Muslim apologist when you talk about jihad and terrorist attacks brought on by a belief in the words of the Koran. Well, this five minute piece with an excellent video lays out the truth!

And, as always, it ain't pretty. And it links to previous pieces that explained how Christian kings were simply defending themselves and freeing their people from the relentless religious persecution by Muslims.

Let's see how the Islamists try to debunk this @ Take Five Minutes And Watch The Spread Of Islam Via Jihad Before The Crusades ⋆ Dc Gazette

I'm sure the English kings who went on the Crusades weren't going there to defends themselves from Islam which was thousands of miles away, and this was before planes.

The first Crusade was against European Jews, they never even met any Muslims.

They might have killed some Jews along the way,

Lots of Jews were killed in the first Crusade when the Crusaders passed the cities and countries of the holy empire of german nation. It was the begin of this what we call today "Antisemitism".

but the First Crusade definitely met and killed a shitload of Muslims. They took Jerusalem (and massacred the cities population) in July of 1099, established the Kingdom of Jerusalem, took Antioch, Tripoli, and Edessa in the process.

It's said the blood of the Muslims stood ankledeep on the battlefields. After I tried to calculate what this for a well known battlefield meant (if it would had been true) I had to laugh a lot. The crusaders were dragonfishes. By the way: About 800 years later in 1864 lived nearly no Muslims in Jerusalem any longer. Israel and/or Palestine was a very poor area - a forgotten place of the world. But in context with the jewish Zionism the population of the Muslims increased drastically. Additionally I would say in the last 150 years the Muslims eliminated in wide areas of Africa, the Middle East and Asia minor a gigantic number of Christian populations in a way we could call today only "genocides". Still today nearly no one in the world takes notice if Muslims are murdering Christians.